I have been running creatine monohydrate for two years and the honest summary is that the effect is smaller than the internet suggests and real.

There is a serious question about whether the studied form matches what is sold, and nobody in a thread can answer it.

Mechanism is not outcome, and a plausible pathway is the most expensive kind of evidence there is.

Loose evidence is not the same as no evidence and people overcorrect in both directions.

The comparison group matters more than the compound when the outcome is something as fuzzy as focus.

Curious whether the popular dose has any basis or is just the convenient one.