Which supplement works better to increase muscle mass: alpha-linolenic acid or buffered creatine monohydrate?

Ratings at a Glance

Supplement	Effectiveness Rating	Confidence Rating
Alpha-Linolenic Acid
Buffered Creatine Monohydrate

Effectiveness Rating: Alpha-Linolenic Acid vs Buffered Creatine Monohydrate

The effectiveness rating is a measure of the supplements' ability to increase muscle mass. This rating answers the question of whether or not a supplement does what it claims. The evidence backing up buffered creatine monohydrate to increase muscle mass is much better than the evidence backing up alpha-linolenic acid. Buffered Creatine Monohydrate should provide positive results while alpha-linolenic acid will not.

Confidence Rating: Alpha-Linolenic Acid vs Buffered Creatine Monohydrate

Another factor to take into account when comparing supplements is the confidence rating. This rating is a measure of how valid each supplement's effectiveness rating is. Remember, the confidence rating is a measure of how much you can trust the effectiveness rating. This rating is based on how many studies are included in the database on a supplement's claims. Ideally, you want a high effectiveness AND confidence rating.

Both alpha-linolenic acid and buffered creatine monohydrate have low confidence ratings. This means neither supplement has an adequate amount of research to back up this claim. A low confidence rating questions the validity of the effectiveness rating.