Creatine and Hair Loss: What the Studies Actually Found
Creatine is frequently blamed for baldness, although research has not established that it causes hair loss. A trial published in 2025 directly assessed hair over twelve weeks and detected no significant difference between creatine and placebo. That is reassuring evidence within the conditions tested, rather than proof that every person, dose or pattern of long-term use carries no possible risk to hair.
Much of the concern comes from an older experiment measuring a hormone called DHT. Understanding its actual findings helps separate a biological change from observed hair loss. If your coverage is decreasing, an assessment is still needed to identify the condition and suitable care, whether that involves medical treatment or, for some people, considering a hair transplant in Turkey.
What link has actually been observed?
Creatine helps supply muscles with energy during short, intense efforts. The body makes it, foods including meat and fish provide it, and it is also sold as a supplement. NIH guidance primarily describes its relevance to certain types of sporting performance. Those findings do not make creatine a hair treatment, but neither do they demonstrate that it harms hair simply because it affects exercise performance.
Antonio and colleagues’ 2021 review distinguishes creatine’s role from the action of anabolic steroids. Creatine contributes to energy metabolism, whereas those substances have a different hormonal action. Being used towards a similar muscle-building goal does not make their effects interchangeable. Equally, knowing the general mechanism of a supplement cannot answer every question about an individual’s response, so the evidence for the outcome of concern still matters.
Hair follicles are structures within the skin that produce the visible fibres. Research tracking muscle performance or a blood marker does not necessarily assess changes in those structures. The discussion therefore needs to distinguish a biological hypothesis, a measured hormonal change and a documented hair outcome. Treating these as equivalent would allow a plausible explanation to stand in for evidence that the suspected problem actually occurred.
Why did the 2009 study raise concerns?
Van der Merwe and colleagues recruited twenty university-aged rugby players for a crossover study comparing creatine with placebo. The protocol used 25 g of creatine daily for seven days, followed by 5 g daily for fourteen days. Researchers measured testosterone and dihydrotestosterone, usually shortened to DHT; these amounts describe the experimental regimen and should not be read as instructions to start or adjust supplementation.
During the creatine period, DHT was 56% above its starting value after the first week and remained 40% above baseline after the next phase. Total testosterone did not change. These percentages describe hormone concentrations, not the chance of becoming bald or the proportion of hair lost. The study abstract reports no hair measurements that could support interpreting those figures as a directly observed cosmetic or clinical outcome.
DHT is involved in androgenetic alopecia, which explains the interest in the finding. However, an effect on susceptible follicles cannot be calculated directly from a change in circulating hormone levels. It would also be inaccurate to say that none of the participants lost any hair: the experiment was not designed to establish that. It raised a hormonal question without measuring the proposed consequences for hair.
What does the 2025 trial add?
Lak and colleagues recruited 45 men aged 18 to 40 who practised resistance training. Following withdrawals, 38 completed follow-up, with final hair assessments available for 37 of them. For twelve weeks, the randomly allocated groups received either 5 g of creatine monohydrate per day without a loading phase, or a maltodextrin placebo, in a double-blind comparison designed to keep participants and assessors unaware of allocation.
Assessment included scalp imaging, mainly at the vertex, and measurements such as hair count, density, follicular units and cumulative hair thickness. Hormones were also measured before and after the intervention. The researchers found no significant difference in change between groups for the hair or hormonal outcomes; some hormone levels changed over time, but those changes were not specific to the participants receiving creatine.
This provides more direct evidence than a DHT measurement alone. However, its boundaries include a small sample, men only, a short observation period and no collection of family history of hair loss. People with a previous transplant or certain hair treatments were excluded. The result therefore cannot automatically be extended to those circumstances, higher doses or prolonged exposure, and it does not resolve every question about individual susceptibility.
The authors reported no specific funding for the work, while acknowledging support from a commercial representative of the supplement brand used. Several also declared advisory roles or other support connected with the supplement industry. Those disclosures belong alongside the findings: they should neither be ignored nor used to dismiss the observations automatically. Longer studies involving different populations would help determine how widely the results apply.
What about family history and women?
A family history of baldness is useful information for a clinical assessment, but the 2025 trial cannot quantify a creatine-related risk within that particular group. It did not classify participants by family history. Claiming that everyone with a predisposition is protected, or that taking the supplement will accelerate their thinning, would therefore go beyond the information collected and turn an unresolved subgroup question into an unjustified certainty.
Women were not included in that hair study. Findings in young resistance-trained men cannot settle an individual question during pregnancy, breastfeeding or an existing illness. In those circumstances, the purpose and precautions of supplementation need appropriate professional consideration, separately from the hair debate. The absence of a signal in a different population cannot replace that assessment or establish suitability for somebody who would not have qualified for the trial.
Online accounts sometimes describe shedding after starting creatine or improvement after stopping. They may prompt someone to seek advice, but they cannot establish how often a problem occurs or separate the supplement from other changes. A controlled study and a personal observation contribute different kinds of information. Taking a concern seriously does not require assuming that its cause is already known, or dismissing it because another person had a different experience.
How should shedding during use be assessed?
Describe the sequence of events to your clinician: when supplementation began, when you first noticed a change, the areas involved and other recent developments. Explain whether you are seeing more shed hairs, reduced coverage or broken strands. These observations help direct an examination without providing a diagnosis on their own. Two nearby dates may be relevant, but the assessment needs to consider the wider circumstances rather than rely on timing alone.
The hair cycle explains why a visible change can occur some time after an event. NHS guidance lists illness, stress, weight loss and iron deficiency among possible causes of temporary loss. A substantial dietary change during a period of training is therefore useful information to mention, without deciding in advance that either exercise or creatine accounts for everything you are noticing.
Further investigations depend on the clinical findings. Iron deficiency and hair loss may be relevant in some circumstances, but that possibility does not justify taking iron without assessment. The purpose of an appointment is to decide which explanations deserve investigation. Starting several supplements together can instead make it harder to understand subsequent tolerance or changes, while leaving the original reason for the thinning unresolved.
Should you stop or add a hair treatment?
The available studies do not support prescribing a universal stop to prevent baldness, or telling everyone to continue regardless of symptoms. If the change concerns you, discuss the supplement’s actual sporting value and whether an interruption makes sense with a professional. Stopping is not, by itself, a diagnostic test: later improvement or deterioration can have several explanations, and stopping does not promise that hair will regrow.
Do not add a hair-loss medicine simply to counteract a presumed effect of creatine. Treatments for alopecia should address a diagnosis, with potential benefits, limitations and adverse effects considered together. A hormonal hypothesis alone is not a reason for preventive medication. Similarly, supplement cycles, breaks or dose adjustments suggested in online discussions should not be treated as established protocols for protecting hair or avoiding a condition that has not been diagnosed.
Keep the exact product name, full ingredient list and a record of the quantities actually taken. Research on creatine monohydrate alone does not describe every blend sold for bodybuilding or training. Showing the label to a clinician or pharmacist allows them to consider the complete combination of substances and any medicines you use, rather than concentrating the discussion on a single ingredient named on the front of the tub.
Does creatine change a transplant plan?
The 2025 trial excluded people who had undergone a hair transplant, so it provides no rule about graft survival or when to restart a supplement after surgery. Decisions around an operation need to follow the treating team’s instructions. Declare all products during preparation and ask whether any changes are required, instead of using a sports supplement regimen as though it were evidence about postoperative care or the healing of a recipient area.
Before considering an operation, the type of hair loss and the possible role of surgery need to be established. Recent unexplained shedding does not become an indication for transplantation merely because a supplement is suspected. The guide to hair transplantation describes the stages involved; a medical examination is still needed to assess donor resources and determine which goals are realistic in the particular case.
Expected improvement should be discussed separately from the question about creatine. Surgical restoration cannot address every cause of loss and does not remove the need to monitor existing hair. Ask how change will be assessed and which alternatives fit your situation. A study of a supplement can inform one concern, but it cannot decide whether an operation is appropriate, what coverage it can achieve or what future treatment might be needed.
Assessing your hair before a stay in Istanbul
An initial consultation can describe the pattern of loss and, when necessary, investigate a cause that should be addressed before pursuing care abroad. Prepare details of supplements, medicines, family history and any previous investigations. Photographs may add useful context, but they cannot always distinguish the causes or replace examining the scalp. Having those questions considered first makes a later discussion about restoration more specific and useful.
For people whose circumstances justify exploring surgery, Body Expert coordinates a pathway to partner clinics in Turkey. Practical details of that pathway are available on the hair transplant in Istanbul page, alongside information to discuss with the team. Medical suitability remains a decision for the professionals assessing you; using a supplement is not enough, on its own, to accept or rule out a candidate.
You should be able to understand the proposed diagnosis, the improvement reasonably expected and the follow-up arrangements. If recent shedding remains unexplained, that uncertainty deserves attention before booking an operation. Evidence about creatine helps put a particular worry in perspective, while an assessment of your own hair guides the next decisions. Keeping both elements in view allows you to discuss options without assuming either that the supplement caused the problem or that surgery is inevitable.
Sources
Lak, M., Forbes, S. C., Ashtary-Larky, D., Dadkhahfar, S., Robati, R. M., Nezakati, F., Khajevandi, M., Naseri, S., Gerafiani, A., Haghighat, N., Antonio, J., & Tinsley, G. M. (2025). Does creatine cause hair loss? A 12-week randomized controlled trial. Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition, 22(Suppl. 1), 2495229. Article.
van der Merwe, J., Brooks, N. E., & Myburgh, K. H. (2009). Three weeks of creatine monohydrate supplementation affects dihydrotestosterone to testosterone ratio in college-aged rugby players. Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine, 19(5), 399–404. Abstract.
Antonio, J., Candow, D. G., Forbes, S. C., Gualano, B., Jagim, A. R., Kreider, R. B., Rawson, E. S., Smith-Ryan, A. E., VanDusseldorp, T. A., Willoughby, D. S., & Ziegenfuss, T. N. (2021). Common questions and misconceptions about creatine supplementation: What does the scientific evidence really show? Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition, 18, 13. Article.
National Institutes of Health, Office of Dietary Supplements. (n.d.). Dietary supplements for exercise and athletic performance: Fact sheet for health professionals. Creatine section.
National Health Service. (2024, January 24). Hair loss. Patient information.