MMUSA Inc. - PRESS RELEASE - Creatine Serum vs. Creatine Powder
Trent Klassen
September 16, 2002
MMUSA Responds To Claims
"A Closer Look At MMUSA Creatine Serum vs. Creatine Powder"
Degussa, Inc, a large supplement manufacturer, is currently going to
court in an attempt to force MMUSA to soften its position questioning
the safety of powdered creatine. They also want MMUSA to reveal the
trade secrets behind its highly successful and effective Creatine
Serum.
Here is the MMUSA response to this action:
1) We'd like to point out that Degussa is a manufacturer of creatine
monohydrate powder and views MMUSA as a direct competitor. They are a
10-billion dollar company, and are in business to make sales. In the
past we have had many smaller companies trying to suppress our
concerns about the safety of athletes who take large doses of creatine
monohydrate. This is the first time such a large company has tried to
silence us.
2) Degussa may be suffering from the loss of sales and market share
due to the availability of cheaper Chinese powdered creatine. The
quality of this Chinese creatine is very low. However, the flood of
this cheaper creatine has probably affected Degussa's business
tremendously. Creatine powder from Chinese manufacturers is priced at
$4-$6 a kilo, while creatine powder from Degussa costs between
$14-$19.
3) Degussa has tried, through its research department, to obtain
details on the structure of the molecule in our Creatine Serum. This
fact is supported by a great deal of correspondence between their
chief scientist and ours, Dr. Mostafa Omar. Degussa's chief scientist
stated he was even willing to travel to the USA to meet, and learn
more about our stable liquid creatine. MMUSA refused this offer,
because there is no sense in revealing our proprietary technology to a
possible imitator.
4) We believe Degussa's case may be just an attempt to force MMUSA to
reveal the true structure of its Creatine Serum molecule and other
related trade secrets. Other companies who promote the use of mega
doses of creatine powder tried to do this unsuccessfully. They used
methods of analysis not applicable to reverse engineering our Serum.
Any attempt to use standard HPLC testing on our liquid creatine is
doomed to failure unless the lab doing the testing has been properly
briefed on the characteristics of our creatine, and follows a
specialized methodology. This methodology is only released to an
independent laboratory after they have agreed to our terms of
confidentiality and secrecy.
5) Since we introduced Creatine Serum, many companies who claimed to
be experts have tried and failed to analyze it. They have then
attacked us. We have always refused to respond to this mud slinging
because it is not good business. It can also negatively affect the
whole industry. However, we are now reviewing that stance. But we will
not retreat from our message of concern about the safety of all
athletes who supplement with creatine.
6) The "research" and substantiation utilized to support claims about
the safety and efficacy of creatine monohydrate powder within these
law suits is questionable. It is largely from studies that have been
funded in whole or in part by manufacturers and marketers of creatine
monohydrate. Either that, or it was in fact reprints of information
written by "experts" associated with these companies, who have a
vested interest in the sale of creatine monohydrate.
7) We believe it would have been better for Degussa to look into the
complaints reported and documented by the USFDA, as well as other
clinical studies, rather than harass us. They should be advising their
wholesalers and retailers to make it clear to athletes that mega doses
of creatine powder may cause long-term harm.
8) We believe Degussa is not serving the public well by stating
absolutely that creatine monohydrate is safe. The evidence is far from
complete on the long-term effects of large doses of creatine powder.
We intend to demonstrate these facts to both the court and the public.
We also intend to clearly demonstrate why our Serum is a safer form of
creatine and why it is superior to powdered creatine.
9) MMUSA introduced the first stable liquid creatine sport drink to
the market last year with great success. Degussa announced 3 months
ago that they are coming out with their own form of creatine drink
using the widget method. Their drink is still creatine monohydrate
powder in carbonation. This demonstrates that they were not successful
in producing a stable and water-soluble form of creatine, as we have
in our Alpha ATP sport drink. We believe that this action may be an
attempt on their part to pave the way to introduce an inferior form of
creatine drink after forcing a superior drink out of the market.
Finally, MMUSA has initiated a petition with the FDA and started
collecting signatures requesting that the government look into the
dangers to athletes who take mega doses of creatine powder. We are
also requesting that they look into the claims about long-term safety
made by creatine powder manufacturers like Degussa.
The ultimate winner of any conflict between MMUSA and the powder
manufacturers and their associates are, of course, the athletes. They
will be able to see the facts and the results of these actions, and
freely decide what product and what form is better and safer for them.
We are confident that the evidence about our proprietary technology,
which we will show in court, will surprise and silence Degussa, as
well as all other creatine powder advocates. At the same time, it will
demonstrate to our loyal customers that their choice was an
intelligent one.
We are unequivocally proud of our products, and any attacks on our
integrity will be met with a swift response. We will also keep our
customers updated as this battle proceeds.