how much creatine did the depression trials use?

roughly 2 to 10 g a day. the 52-woman trial used 5 g a day of creatine monohydrate added to escitalopram for eight weeks; the 100-person trial added creatine to cognitive behavioural therapy for eight weeks. no trial has run longer than that in a psychiatric population, and the fda does not check that a supplement contains what its label says.

does creatine damage the kidneys?

the harvest’s risks record says the practical issue is a misread test, not damage: creatine raises serum creatinine, which can look like worsening kidney function on a routine blood test even when nothing is wrong. anyone with reduced kidney function, or having kidney labs monitored, should tell their clinician they are taking it. the sports-nutrition safety literature is large; the psychiatric trials are small and short, so long-term safety in that use is unmeasured.

is creatine fda approved for depression?

no. creatine monohydrate is sold as a dietary supplement under the 1994 dietary supplement health and education act, has no fda approval for depression or any other condition, undergoes no fda review of safety or effectiveness before sale, and has no prescription form. nothing about its regulatory status implies psychiatric benefit.

can creatine trigger mania?

in one trial reviewed in 2026, 2 of 17 participants developed hypomania or mania, and creatine showed no difference from placebo in bipolar depression. that is one trial and seventeen people, so it is a signal, not a rate; the harvest that built this page names bipolar disorder as a reason to involve a psychiatrist before starting.

Supplement evidence

Creatine

The depression syntheses, and why a raised creatinine reading is not kidney damage.

page first published 2026-09-08 · last updated 2026-10-05

Not an FDA-approved treatmentSold as a dietary supplement5 studies on this page

What Its Legal Status Actually Means

Read this before anything below it. Legal to sell is not the same fact as reviewed, verified, or approved.

Creatine monohydrate is sold in the US as a dietary supplement under DSHEA, marketed overwhelmingly for exercise performance and muscle mass. It has no FDA approval for depression or any other psychiatric or medical condition, no FDA review of safety or effectiveness precedes it going on sale, and there is no prescription creatine product. Creatine is one of the better-characterised supplement ingredients — it is a single well-defined molecule, third-party purity testing is common, and the sports-nutrition safety literature is unusually large — but purity and long-term physical safety are entirely separate questions from whether it treats depression, and nothing about its regulatory status implies psychiatric benefit.

Quoted whole from the 2026-08-18 study harvest. Not summarized, not shortened.

does creatine work for depression? what the trials say

there is no fda label for creatine, because it is sold as a dietary supplement and has never been reviewed for any medical use. the regulatory facts below come from the legal-status paragraph above, written from the regulator’s documents in the 2026-08-18 study harvest; every trial figure is from a study record on this page. every source is linked at the end of this section. last checked 2026-10-05.

creatine is the gym supplement that has lately been sold for mood. the case for it in depression rests on two small trials and two syntheses that, between them, cover every randomised trial ever run in a psychiatric population: 238 people. this section says what its legal status means, what the trials measured and in whom, what they found in both directions, the one laboratory caveat anyone taking it should know, and where the conflicts of interest sit. every number is from a study record on this page, and each source is linked at the end.

this is information to take to a prescriber or pharmacist. nothing here tells anyone to take creatine or to stop, and nothing here is a reason to put off treatment that works.

what its legal status means, and does not mean

creatine monohydrate is sold in the united states as a dietary supplement under the 1994 dietary supplement health and education act, marketed overwhelmingly for exercise performance and muscle. it has no fda approval for depression or any other psychiatric or medical condition, no fda review of safety or effectiveness precedes it going on sale, and there is no prescription creatine product [status].

two things that are true about creatine do not carry over to mood. it is one of the better-characterised supplement ingredients: a single well-defined molecule, with common third-party purity testing and an unusually large sports-nutrition safety literature [status]. purity and long-term physical safety are entirely separate questions from whether it treats depression, and nothing about its regulatory status implies psychiatric benefit [status].

what the trials measured, in whom, and for how long

searching to september 2025, a 2026 systematic review found five randomised trials of creatine in people with a diagnosed mental disorder: 126 people on creatine and 112 on placebo, 238 in total across the entire literature, 26% of them male. four were in major depression and one in bipolar depression; two were at low risk of bias and three had some concerns. no psychiatric condition other than depression has been studied at all [fares-2026].

the two trials the case is built on are both eight weeks long and both add creatine to another treatment. the first gave 52 south korean women with major depression escitalopram plus either creatine 5 g a day (25 women) or placebo (27) [lyoo-2012]. the second gave 100 adults with depression in an under-resourced region of india cognitive behavioural therapy plus either creatine or placebo [sherpa-2025]. the doses across the depression trials run from roughly 2 to 10 g a day [risks].

what the research says, in both directions

in favour. in the 52-woman trial, the creatine group improved significantly more on the hamilton depression scale from week 2 onward, with the advantage holding at weeks 4 and 8, and dropout (32.0% against 18.5%) and adverse events did not differ [lyoo-2012]. in the 100-person trial, both arms improved and the creatine arm improved more, by a mean 5.12 points on the phq-9, with comparable dropouts and adverse events [sherpa-2025]. pooling eleven randomised trials and 1,093 participants, remission favoured creatine across three trials (odds ratio 3.60) [eckert-2025]. and in a survey of 22,692 us adults, depression was less common in the quarter who ate the most dietary creatine (5.98 per 100) than in the quarter who ate the least (10.23 per 100), an adjusted odds ratio of 0.68 [bakian-2020].

against, or smaller than the badge suggests. the pooled effect on depressive symptoms across those eleven trials was a standardised mean difference of −0.34 (95% confidence interval −0.68 to −0.00), about 2.2 points on the 17-item hamilton scale, below the 3-point minimal important difference, with a confidence interval touching zero, substantial heterogeneity, a grade rating of very low certainty, and bias analyses indicating substantial bias in creatine’s favour; the authors conclude the true effect may be trivial or null [eckert-2025]. the remission odds ratio of 3.6 rests on three trials and is contradicted by the response outcome across two trials pointing the other way, a pattern that usually means too few events rather than a real dissociation [eckert-2025]. the 52-woman trial is single-site, women-only, has never been directly replicated, and a later trial in female adolescents found no difference from placebo [lyoo-2012; fares-2026]. the 100-person trial was powered for feasibility, not efficacy, has no trial registration in its pubmed record, and its own authors’ follow-up correspondence is titled "preliminary evidence should be treated as such" [sherpa-2025]. and the survey is a snapshot of diet and mood at the same moment: dietary creatine comes overwhelmingly from meat and fish, so the association is inseparable from overall diet, income, and the fact that depression changes what people eat [bakian-2020].

who holds an interest. the senior author of the 52-woman trial, who also co-authored the survey, is an inventor on related patent applications assigned to mclean hospital and the university of utah, which is why independence is marked false on both records despite public funding [lyoo-2012; bakian-2020]. the 2026 systematic review, cautious as it is, has a co-author on the scientific advisory board of two creatine manufacturers and another who co-founded a creatine food company [fares-2026]. none of this makes a finding wrong; it is why the finding is weighed, not taken.

the risks the harvest recorded

at the doses used in the depression trials, roughly 2 to 10 g a day, creatine is among the better-tolerated supplements: water retention with a few pounds of weight gain, bloating and gastrointestinal upset, and no meaningfully higher dropout than placebo in randomised trials [risks].

the practical caution is the kidney test. creatine raises serum creatinine, which can look like worsening kidney function on a routine blood test even when nothing is wrong, so anyone with reduced kidney function, or having kidney labs monitored for any reason, should tell their clinician before the result is misread [risks]. in psychiatric use specifically, the 2026 review recorded 2 of 17 participants in one trial developing hypomania or mania, so bipolar disorder is a reason to involve a psychiatrist before starting [risks; fares-2026]. the larger caveat is not safety but evidence: the trials are small, several were in women only, and the pooled effect falls below the threshold for a clinically important change [risks].

questions for a prescriber or pharmacist about creatine

each one comes from a warning or a study above. they are questions, not instructions; the answers depend on a history nobody here has.

pooled across every trial, creatine moves depression scores about 2 points on a scale where 3 is the smallest change that matters. is that worth a daily supplement for me?
the main trial added creatine to an ssri in 52 women. if my antidepressant is only partly working, how does creatine compare with the augmentation strategies you would normally use?
the newest trial added it to therapy rather than medication. if i am in therapy, is that a combination worth trying, and how would we tell whether it helped?
i have kidney disease, or my kidney labs are being watched. creatine raises serum creatinine; does anyone reading my results know i am taking it?
i have bipolar disorder or a family history of it. two of 17 people in one trial developed hypomania or mania; does that change the plan?
every randomised trial of creatine in psychiatry adds up to 238 people. is that enough to build a plan on, or enough to justify an experiment we monitor?

questions people ask

does creatine work for depression?: the evidence is small and uncertain. pooling eleven randomised trials (1,093 people), creatine moved depressive symptoms by about 2.2 points on the 17-item hamilton scale, below the 3-point minimal important difference, with a confidence interval touching zero and a grade rating of very low certainty; the authors say the true effect may be trivial or null. two small add-on trials (52 women on escitalopram; 100 adults in cbt) were positive, neither has been replicated, and a trial in female adolescents found no difference from placebo.
how much creatine did the depression trials use?: roughly 2 to 10 g a day. the 52-woman trial used 5 g a day of creatine monohydrate added to escitalopram for eight weeks; the 100-person trial added creatine to cognitive behavioural therapy for eight weeks. no trial has run longer than that in a psychiatric population, and the fda does not check that a supplement contains what its label says.
does creatine damage the kidneys?: the harvest’s risks record says the practical issue is a misread test, not damage: creatine raises serum creatinine, which can look like worsening kidney function on a routine blood test even when nothing is wrong. anyone with reduced kidney function, or having kidney labs monitored, should tell their clinician they are taking it. the sports-nutrition safety literature is large; the psychiatric trials are small and short, so long-term safety in that use is unmeasured.
is creatine fda approved for depression?: no. creatine monohydrate is sold as a dietary supplement under the 1994 dietary supplement health and education act, has no fda approval for depression or any other condition, undergoes no fda review of safety or effectiveness before sale, and has no prescription form. nothing about its regulatory status implies psychiatric benefit.
can creatine trigger mania?: in one trial reviewed in 2026, 2 of 17 participants developed hypomania or mania, and creatine showed no difference from placebo in bipolar depression. that is one trial and seventeen people, so it is a signal, not a rate; the harvest that built this page names bipolar disorder as a reason to involve a psychiatrist before starting.

sources for this section

the library rows link to our one-page summary of each study, with the original paper, its funding and our evidence grade on that page.

What the Research Shows

5 records from the 2026-08-18 harvest, each checked against PubMed and Europe PMC on that date. How a study was designed, how many people were in it, and who paid for it are printed above what it found, because those three facts decide how much the finding is worth.

Study 1 · 2012
- Randomized trial
- 52 participants
- Top-tier journal
- Independently funded
- Preregistered
- Declared conflicts of interest
strong77/100
Well-supported by good-quality research.
Read this first: The disclosure statement records that the senior author, Dr Renshaw, "is also an inventor on related patent applications assigned to McLean Hospital and the University of Utah" — an intellectual-property interest in the intervention being tested, which is why independence is marked false here even though the funding is public. The trial was women-only, single-country, and n=52; a later trial in female adolescents found no difference from placebo.
52 South Korean women with major depression all received escitalopram and were randomised to add creatine 5 g/day (n=25) or placebo (n=27) for eight weeks. The creatine group improved significantly more on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale from week 2 onward, with the advantage maintained at weeks 4 and 8; dropout (32.0% versus 18.5%) and total adverse events (36 versus 45) did not differ. This is the trial the whole creatine-for-depression case is built on, and it enrolled 52 women at one site and has never been directly replicated.
Lyoo IK, Yoon S, Kim TS, Hwang J, Kim JE, Won W, Bae S, Renshaw PF. (2012). A randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled trial of oral creatine monohydrate augmentation for enhanced response to a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor in women with major depressive disorder. American Journal of Psychiatry. PMID 22864465.
How this record was checked
PubMed record 22864465 fetched via NCBI efetch 2026-08-18; title, all eight authors, journal (Am J Psychiatry 2012;169(9):937-945), year, DOI, N=52 (25 creatine, 27 placebo), the 5 g/day dose, and the 8-week design confirmed from the abstract. PMC full text PMC4624319 read 2026-08-18: funded by a NARSAD independent investigator award, Korean government programmes (2011K000273, KRF-2008-220-E00021), the VA MIRECC, and NIH grants DA-015116, DA-031247, DA-024070 and MH-058681, with "The sponsors of the study had no role" — hence INDEPENDENT; the same page carries the author disclosure quoted above (hence conflicts true, independent false) and a ClinicalTrials.gov registration (hence preregistered true).
Study 2 · 2025
- Randomized trial
- 100 participants
- Reputable journal
- Independently funded
- Declared conflicts of interest
strong80/100
Well-supported by good-quality research.
Read this first: A 5-point PHQ-9 difference is large for a supplement, which is itself a reason for caution in a 100-person pilot that was explicitly powered for feasibility rather than efficacy and was conducted at a single site in a setting where access to other care is limited. No trial registration appears in the PubMed record, so the primary outcome cannot be checked against a pre-specified protocol. It has not been replicated.
100 adults with depression in an under-resourced region of India (mean age 30.4, mean baseline PHQ-9 17.6, half women) were randomised to creatine plus cognitive behavioural therapy or placebo plus CBT for eight weeks. Both arms improved; the creatine arm improved more, by a mean difference of 5.12 points on the PHQ-9. Dropouts and adverse events were comparable between arms. The authors describe it as a pilot, feasibility and hypothesis-generating trial and call for longer and larger studies — their own published follow-up correspondence is titled "Preliminary evidence should be treated as such."
Sherpa NN, De Giorgi R, Ostinelli EG, Choudhury A, Dolma T, Dorjee S. (2025). Efficacy and safety profile of oral creatine monohydrate in add-on to cognitive-behavioural therapy in depression: An 8-week pilot, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled feasibility and exploratory trial in an under-resourced area. European Neuropsychopharmacology. PMID 39488067.
How this record was checked
PubMed record 39488067 fetched via NCBI efetch 2026-08-18; title, all six authors, journal (Eur Neuropsychopharmacol 2025;90:28-35), year, DOI, N=100 (50 per arm), mean age 30.4, mean baseline PHQ-9 17.6, and the -5.12 mean difference confirmed from the abstract, which also carries "The authors declare none" (hence conflicts true). Europe PMC core record fetched 2026-08-18 lists a single funder, the Universal Human Rights and Social Development Association (UHRSDA), a non-commercial NGO and not a creatine manufacturer, hence funding INDEPENDENT. No registration identifier appears in the record, so preregistered is false.
Study 3 · 2025
- Meta-analysis of randomized trials
- 1,093 participants
- Reputable journal
- Funding not established
strong73/100
Well-supported by good-quality research.
Read this first: The remission odds ratio of 3.6 looks dramatic but rests on three trials and is contradicted by the response outcome from two trials pointing the other way — a pattern that usually means too few events, not a real dissociation. The reviewers' own bias analyses point the same direction. No funding or competing-interests statement could be read (the Cambridge Core page returned only the abstract), so both are recorded conservatively.
Pooling eleven randomised trials and 1,093 participants, creatine's effect on depressive symptoms was SMD -0.34 (95% CI -0.68 to -0.00) — about 2.2 points on the 17-item Hamilton scale, below the 3.0-point minimal important difference, with a confidence interval touching zero, substantial heterogeneity (I-squared 71.3%), and a GRADE rating of very low certainty. Remission favoured creatine across three trials (OR 3.60, 95% CI 1.76 to 7.56) but treatment response across two did not (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.28 to 1.88). Trim-and-fill and subgroup analyses indicated substantial bias favouring creatine, and the authors conclude the true effect may be trivial or null.
Eckert I, Lima J, Dariva AA. (2025). Creatine supplementation for treating symptoms of depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis. British Journal of Nutrition. PMID 41189312.
How this record was checked
PubMed record 41189312 fetched via NCBI efetch 2026-08-18; title, all three authors, journal (Br J Nutr 2025;134(11):947-959), year, DOI, 11 trials, N=1,093 participants, SMD -0.34 (95% CI -0.68 to -0.00), I-squared 71.3%, the remission and response odds ratios, and the GRADE very-low rating confirmed from the abstract. Europe PMC core record checked 2026-08-18: no PMC full text, no grant list, no funding statement. The Cambridge Core article page was fetched 2026-08-18 and returned abstract and references only — no financial-support, competing-interests, or PROSPERO line was readable — so funding is UNKNOWN, conflicts false, and preregistered false rather than guessed.
Study 4 · 2020
- Cross-sectional study
- 22,692 participants
- Reputable journal
- Independently funded
- Declared conflicts of interest
moderate58/100
Reasonable evidence with real limitations.
Read this first: Cross-sectional design: this cannot establish that creatine intake reduces depression risk, and reverse causation is at least as plausible as the causal reading. The paper states the authors have no conflict of interest, but co-author Dr Renshaw is disclosed elsewhere in this literature (in the 2012 AJP creatine trial above) as an inventor on related patent applications, which is why independence is marked false here.
Among 22,692 adults in the 2005-2012 NHANES surveys, depression prevalence was 10.23 per 100 people in the lowest quartile of dietary creatine intake versus 5.98 per 100 in the highest (P<0.001), with an adjusted odds ratio of 0.68 (95% CI 0.52 to 0.88) after controlling for income, race, sex, age, education, BMI, healthcare access, smoking, physical activity, and psychiatric medication use. This is a snapshot of diet and mood measured at the same moment: dietary creatine comes overwhelmingly from meat and fish, so the association is inseparable from overall diet, income, and the well-documented fact that depression itself changes what people eat.
Bakian AV, Huber RS, Scholl L, Renshaw PF, Kondo D. (2020). Dietary creatine intake and depression risk among U.S. adults. Translational Psychiatry. PMID 32066709.
How this record was checked
PubMed record 32066709 fetched via NCBI efetch 2026-08-18; title, all five authors, journal (Transl Psychiatry 2020;10(1):52), year, DOI, N=22,692 NHANES participants aged 20 and over, the 2005-2012 survey window, the 10.23 versus 5.98 per 100 prevalence figures, and the adjusted OR 0.68 (95% CI 0.52-0.88) confirmed from the abstract, which also carries "The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest" (hence conflicts true). Europe PMC core record fetched 2026-08-18 lists NIMH grant R33 MH096858, hence funding INDEPENDENT.
Study 5 · 2026
- Systematic review of randomized trials
- 238 participants
- Reputable journal
- No funding reported
- Declared conflicts of interest
strong74/100
Well-supported by good-quality research.
Read this first: The declaration of conflicting interests records that co-author Dr Candow "serves on the Scientific Advisory Board for Alzchem and Create (companies that manufacture creatine)" and has received industry creatine research funding and product donations, and that Dr Ostojic "is the co-founder of KRE-ALL, a company which develops food products enriched with creatine" — commercial ties to the intervention being reviewed, which is why independence is marked false despite the review itself being unfunded and its conclusions being cautious. No PROSPERO registration was found on the published page.
Searching to September 2025, the reviewers found only five randomised trials of creatine in people with a diagnosed mental disorder — 126 on creatine and 112 on placebo, 238 people in total across the entire literature, and 26% male. Four concerned major depression and one bipolar depression; two were low risk of bias and three had some concerns. Creatine combined with escitalopram outperformed SSRI plus placebo in one trial and creatine plus CBT outperformed CBT plus placebo in another, but it showed no difference from placebo in female adolescents or in bipolar depression. Two of 17 participants in one trial developed hypomania or mania. No psychiatric condition other than depression has been studied at all.
Jeryous Fares B, Zhou C, Fabiano N, Wong S, Stubbs B, Shorr R, Puder D, Candow DG, Ostojic SM, Solmi M. (2026). The Effect of Creatine Monohydrate on Mental Disorders: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry. PMID 41558805.
How this record was checked
PubMed record 41558805 fetched via NCBI efetch 2026-08-18; title, all ten authors, journal (Can J Psychiatry 2026, online ahead of print 20 January 2026), DOI, the five-RCT/six-article count, N=126 creatine and 112 placebo, mean age 36, 26% male, the per-condition results, and the 2-of-17 hypomania/mania figure confirmed from the abstract. PMC full text PMC12823350 read 2026-08-18: "Funding: The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article" (hence funding NONE) and a full "Declaration of Conflicting Interest" section (hence conflicts true) containing the Alzchem, Create, and KRE-ALL disclosures quoted above.

The Risks

Nobody checks this purchase the way a prescription is checked. No prescriber reviews it against the rest of what you take, no pharmacist screens the interaction, and no regulator confirms the dose in the capsule before it is sold. That is why this section sits here at full length rather than as a footnote.

What the paragraph below covers:

Psychosis and mania
Weight gain
Stomach and gut

At the doses used in the depression trials (roughly 2-10 g/day) creatine is among the better-tolerated supplements. The common effects are water retention with a few pounds of weight gain, bloating, and gastrointestinal upset, and randomised trials have not shown meaningfully more dropout on creatine than placebo. The practical caution is kidney disease: creatine raises serum creatinine, which can look like worsening kidney function on a routine blood test even when nothing is wrong, so anyone with reduced kidney function, or who is having kidney labs monitored for any reason, should tell their clinician they are taking it before the result is misread. In psychiatric use specifically, the 2026 systematic review of creatine RCTs in mental disorders recorded 2 of 17 participants in one trial experiencing hypomania or mania, so bipolar disorder is a reason to involve a psychiatrist before starting. The larger honest caveat is not safety but evidence: the trials are small, several were conducted only in women, and the pooled effect on depressive symptoms falls below the threshold for a clinically important change.

What Is Not Known

The boundaries of the section above, in the harvest’s own words. What it excluded, why, and where it looked and found nothing. An absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, and it is not evidence of benefit either.

What Was Left Out, and Why

Quoted from the harvest, where these notes sat above the study list rather than after it. Where a note says “below” it means the studies in the section above.

The 2025 correspondence exchange in European Neuropsychopharmacology about creatine and exercise for depression (Fabiano & Stubbs, PMID 40056509; Sherpa & De Giorgi, PMID 40220579; De Giorgi et al., PMID 39879837) was fetched and verified but excluded as study records: these are letters, not studies. The authors' own warning in one of them — "Preliminary evidence should be treated as such" — is reflected in the notes below.
Animal and rodent creatine-antidepressant work is out of scope.
Individual creatine RCTs other than the two listed are excluded; they are pooled inside the two 2025-2026 evidence syntheses included here, which between them cover every randomised trial of creatine in a psychiatric population.

The Retraction Check

PubMed efetch records for all five PMIDs inspected 2026-08-18 for "Retraction in" flags; none present, and no errata or expressions of concern.

Questions for a Prescriber or Pharmacist

This page does not tell anyone to take Creatine or to avoid it. It is not able to: it does not know what else you take, what you have tried, or what you are treating. These are the questions each study above raises, written to be asked out loud.

The main creatine trial studied 52 women adding it to an SSRI — if I'm already on an antidepressant that's only partly working, how does creatine compare to the augmentation strategies you'd normally use?
The newest creatine trial added it to therapy rather than to medication — if I'm in therapy, is that a combination worth trying, and how would we tell whether it helped?
Pooled across every trial, creatine moves depression scores about 2 points on a scale where 3 points is the smallest change that matters — is that worth taking a daily supplement for?
People who eat more meat and fish report less depression in survey data — is there any reason to think a creatine capsule does the same thing a different diet does?
Every randomised trial of creatine in psychiatry put together comes to 238 people — is that enough evidence to build a treatment plan on, or is it enough to justify an experiment we monitor?

And the one to ask at the counter, whatever the answers above turn out to be: given everything I am already taking, what would you want to know about Creatine before I put it in the same body?

Open Creatine in veisund

The app has the resources behind this page and people working through the same questions.What you post there goes to people, not to a model. If someone answers, it is a person who has been there. The one automated message is a crisis-resource reply.

Where This Page Comes From

Transcribed from the study-harvest-2026-08-18 record for creatine, built into this page by scripts/supplement-ingest.mjs on 2026-09-07. Nothing here is fetched at page load, and nothing here was written by a model without a citation behind it.

Source file	study-harvest/2026-08-18/creatine.yaml
Source repo	REPTechnologies/avalo-backend
SHA-256	a8109a69940a27ad25074b0874338fcf69941640977997d70d5d87b4fa30d512
Also searched as	creatine monohydrate, CrM, Creapure, creatine HCl, creatine ethyl ester

The Other Substances

Do any supplements actually work? asks the question across all of them. The full library has the medication records, the funding investigations, and the glossary.