Buyer Beware: Independent Tests Reveal Many Creatine Gummies Contain Little to No Creatine

Gummy supplements have surged in popularity, offering a seemingly convenient and tasty alternative to traditional pills and powders. Instead of mixing a chalky drink or swallowing a large capsule, consumers can simply chew on a sweet treat. This appeal has extended to the world of workout supplements, particularly creatine, which has seen its market explode beyond dedicated athletes into the mainstream wellness sphere. However, recent findings suggest that when it comes to creatine, this appealing format may come at a significant cost to efficacy and honesty.

Independent laboratory testing of several popular creatine gummy products sold on major online marketplaces like Amazon has revealed a disturbing trend: a significant number of these products contain almost no creatine, or none at all, despite label claims. This raises serious questions about product quality, manufacturing processes, and the current state of supplement regulation.

Creatine, a naturally occurring compound found in muscle cells, is one of the most researched and effective supplements available. It plays a crucial role in energy production during high-intensity, short-duration activities, making it a staple for weightlifters, sprinters, and other athletes. Its primary benefit lies in its ability to regenerate adenosine triphosphate (ATP), the body's main energy currency, allowing muscles to perform better and for longer during intense bursts of effort. Beyond athletic performance, research continues to explore its potential benefits for cognitive function, aging muscle mass, and even certain neurological conditions. This broad appeal has fueled a remarkable surge in mainstream popularity, with sales skyrocketing, especially among women, who are increasingly incorporating it into their wellness routines.

To capitalize on this growing market and appeal to a wider audience, companies have introduced creatine in various forms, including the increasingly popular gummy format. Jordan Glenn, head of science at supplement industry tracking platform SuppCo, notes that creatine is "really having a moment right now" and is "no longer just a gym bro supplement." The shift towards gummies is a clear attempt to make the supplement more palatable and accessible to this broader consumer base.

The Alarming Test Results

SuppCo, concerned about the quality of these novel formats, commissioned an independent lab to test samples of six popular creatine gummy products purchased on Amazon. The results were stark and concerning. Four of the six products tested contained negligible amounts of creatine, far below what was promised on their labels.

One particularly egregious example was a product from a brand called Happyummmm, which was the highest-ranked creatine supplement on Amazon and boasted an "Amazon's Choice" label. The label claimed that two gummies constituted a 5-gram serving. However, the lab found that two gummies contained a mere 0.005 grams of creatine – less than 0.1 percent of the stated amount. To reach the advertised 5-gram serving, a consumer would need to consume an astonishing 2,000 Happyummmm gummies. For someone following a typical creatine "loading phase," which often involves taking around 20 grams daily for a week to saturate muscle stores, this would mean eating 8,000 gummies per day – a clearly impossible and absurd scenario.

Another brand, DivinusLabs, also showed significant discrepancies. SuppCo's testing found only 0.025 grams of creatine per serving in their gummies, compared to the 5 grams listed on the label. Ilya Sheleg, founder of DivinusLabs' parent company, acknowledged the findings, stating, "We appreciate the role of independent testing in promoting transparency and have shared the information with our manufacturing and quality assurance teams." He added that the company plans to re-test its current batch with other independent labs, suggesting a commitment to addressing the issue.

Even more concerning were the results for two other brands, Ecowise and Vidabotan, which tested at 0 percent creatine. Despite these findings, both brands maintained high ratings on Amazon, with reviews like "Tastes great and actually works!" highlighting the disconnect between consumer perception and actual product content. While Vidabotan could not be reached for comment, Ecowise founder and CEO Vladislav Shabanov expressed disbelief, citing his manufacturer's cGMP (Current Good Manufacturing Practices) certification and regular third-party testing. However, after reviewing SuppCo's testing details, he conceded that quality control issues were possible and stated the company was launching an internal investigation and considering switching manufacturers. "There's always a non-zero chance that manufacturers screwed up," he admitted, indicating a willingness to potentially remove the affected batch from Amazon.

Why Are Creatine Gummies So Problematic?

The challenges in creating effective gummy supplements, particularly with ingredients like creatine, are significant. Unlike simple vitamins or minerals that may be more stable, creatine is sensitive to certain conditions inherent in gummy manufacturing.

• Heat Sensitivity: Most gummy production methods involve heating ingredients to create the gelatinous texture. Creatine can degrade when exposed to high temperatures.
• pH Levels: Gummy candies often contain citric acid or other acids to provide flavor and texture, resulting in a low pH environment. Creatine is less stable in acidic conditions and can break down into creatinine, a waste product.
• Even Distribution: Ensuring a uniform distribution of the active ingredient throughout thousands or millions of small, chewy pieces is technically challenging. Manufacturers must perfect processes to avoid 'hot spots' or areas with little to no active compound.

Kamal Patel, cofounder of the nutrient and supplement database Examine.com, explains that making a good creatine gummy is "a lot harder" than formulating a powder product. He notes that the moisture, heat, and low pH typical of gummy production can cause creatine to "degrade faster than it would when just manufactured as a dry, unflavored powder."

SuppCo's tests corroborated this degradation issue. The gummies that did contain some creatine also showed elevated levels of creatinine, confirming that a portion of the creatine had broken down during manufacturing or storage. This issue was not observed in tests of popular powdered creatine products.

A Pattern of Failed Tests

SuppCo's findings are not isolated incidents. Testing competing brands of gummies has become something of a tradition within the supplement industry, often revealing similar issues.

• Last year, supplement manufacturer NOW Foods tested a dozen popular creatine gummy brands and found that 5 out of 12 samples failed, containing very little or no active ingredients.
• Earlier this year, fitness influencer James Smith documented in a YouTube video his own testing of gummies from a company called Ovrload, with which he had a prior business dispute. His tests also showed failed results.
• Another British supplement company conducted a similar third-party test on Ovrload gummies, also finding them deficient, which led the company to pause sales. (Ovrload has since indicated plans to resume sales with increased transparency).

These repeated findings across different testers and brands underscore the systemic challenges in producing reliable creatine gummies. As Ecowise's founder Vladislav Shabanov put it, "Gummies might not be the best way to take creatine... There's so much potential for human error."

The Regulatory Maze: Why This Happens

The fundamental reason why mislabeled supplements, including creatine gummies, can proliferate on the market lies in the distinct regulatory framework for dietary supplements in the United States compared to pharmaceuticals. Unlike drugs, which must undergo rigorous testing and receive FDA approval *before* they can be sold, dietary supplements do not require pre-market approval from the FDA.

Instead, the responsibility falls squarely on the manufacturers and distributors to ensure their products are safe and effective and that their labels are accurate. While companies introducing a "new dietary ingredient" must submit a notification to the FDA, this requirement doesn't apply to products using established ingredients like creatine, even if they are in a novel format like gummies.

This system means that the FDA has limited visibility into what new supplement products are entering the market and what they contain. As Cara Welch, director of the FDA's Office of Dietary Supplement Programs, stated in 2024, "Because of this, we are often at a disadvantage to identify unsafe or otherwise unlawful supplements."

This loose regulatory environment has unfortunately fostered a market where mislabeling is rampant. Beyond simply lacking the advertised ingredients, some products sold as supplements have been found to contain undeclared pharmaceutical ingredients, including generic versions of drugs like Viagra or even steroids, posing serious health risks to unsuspecting consumers.

While some retailers and marketplaces have implemented their own requirements for sellers, these are not always sufficient or consistently enforced. Amazon, for instance, states that it requires dietary supplement sellers to submit third-party testing results to verify label claims and freedom from contaminants. However, in the case of the four creatine gummy products that failed SuppCo's tests, Amazon spokesperson Juliana Karber stated that "three have valid test reports verifying their compliance with relevant standards and that they contain the advertised amount of creatine." This suggests either the testing standards accepted by Amazon are insufficient, the reports were falsified, or the specific batches tested by SuppCo were different from those tested for Amazon's compliance checks. Amazon has indicated it will conduct its own tests and remove non-compliant products, but the initial discrepancy is troubling.

The political climate also plays a role. Robert F. Kennedy Jr., prior to his confirmation as Health and Human Services head, reportedly stated that the administration would seek to undo the FDA's "aggressive suppression" of supplements, suggesting a potential move towards even less oversight, which could further exacerbate these issues.

What Can Consumers Do?

Given the current regulatory landscape and the documented issues with product quality, particularly in complex formats like gummies, consumers must exercise caution and take proactive steps to ensure they are buying legitimate products.

Pieter Cohen, an associate professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School who studies supplements, is skeptical of gummy formats in general due to the higher risk of quality issues. "I don't recommend taking supplements or medications in a gummy format," he advises, "because the chance that the quality will be poor, though it will vary from gummy to gummy, is much greater than with capsules." Cohen's own research has highlighted mislabeling issues in other popular gummy supplements, such as melatonin, where gummies were often found to contain significantly *more* of the active ingredient than labeled, posing different but equally concerning risks.

The best safeguard consumers currently have is to look for products that have been certified by independent, non-profit third-party organizations. These organizations test supplements to verify that they contain the ingredients listed on the label in the declared amounts and are free from harmful levels of contaminants like heavy metals, pesticides, and microbes.

Two highly respected certification bodies in the United States are:

• US Pharmacopeia (USP): The USP Verified Mark indicates that a supplement meets USP's stringent standards for identity, potency, purity, and performance.
• NSF International (NSF): NSF certification ensures that a product has been tested by a trusted third party and meets strict standards for public health protection. NSF also offers a specific certification for sports supplements (NSF Certified for Sport) which screens for hundreds of substances banned by major athletic organizations.

While certification adds a layer of cost for manufacturers and may increase the product price for consumers, it provides a crucial level of assurance that the product contains what the label says it does. Until regulatory laws are changed to provide stronger oversight, relying on these independent certifications is the most reliable way for American consumers to navigate the often murky world of dietary supplements.

As Dr. Cohen concludes, "As American consumers, right now, we have no idea if the supplement we've purchased is accurately labeled or not. Some are, many aren't. So we've got to work around this until the laws are changed."

Industry Reactions and the Path Forward

The supplement industry is vast and varied, with many reputable companies committed to quality and transparency. However, the low barrier to entry and limited regulation also allow unscrupulous or simply incompetent manufacturers to operate, particularly in booming market segments like gummies.

The responses from the companies whose products failed SuppCo's tests varied. DivinusLabs expressed willingness to re-test. Ecowise, initially surprised, acknowledged the possibility of manufacturing errors and is investigating. Happyummmm and Vidabotan could not be reached, highlighting another challenge for consumers – lack of accessible contact information for some online sellers.

Amazon's response, while stating they require testing and are investigating, also revealed that some products that failed independent tests had previously provided Amazon with "valid test reports." This discrepancy underscores the need for more robust verification processes, potentially involving random spot checks by marketplaces themselves or relying *only* on certifications from highly reputable third parties.

The repeated findings of mislabeled creatine gummies serve as a wake-up call for both consumers and regulators. For consumers, it's a reminder that appealing formats and high online ratings don't guarantee product quality. Diligence in checking for third-party certifications is essential.

For regulators, these findings highlight the urgent need to reconsider the current hands-off approach to supplement oversight. While the industry includes many responsible players, the potential for consumer deception and even harm is significant when products can be sold without pre-market verification of their contents and claims. Stricter manufacturing standards, mandatory third-party testing for all products, and increased FDA authority to proactively monitor the market could help ensure that consumers get what they pay for and that the benefits of supplements like creatine are not undermined by a lack of quality control in popular formats.

Ultimately, the story of the creatine gummies is a microcosm of the larger challenges in the supplement industry. The promise of health and performance benefits drives massive sales, but without adequate checks and balances, that promise can easily turn into disappointment and wasted money when the candy-coated convenience hides an empty core.

The appeal of a gummy is undeniable, but for those serious about reaping the proven benefits of creatine, sticking to traditional, third-party certified powders might be the most reliable path forward until the quality control issues in the gummy market are consistently resolved and regulatory oversight is strengthened. The current situation means that many consumers buying these trendy treats are essentially paying for expensive candy with little to no active ingredient, missing out entirely on the performance and health advantages they expect.