Fitness Coach Exposes Creatine Gummies for Containing Almost No Creatine

Fitness coach James Smith has ignited a major controversy in the supplement industry, revealing widespread deception in the rapidly growing creatine gummy market. After conducting independent lab tests on multiple popular brands, Smith claims that many of these products contain only a fraction, or none, of the creatine they promise.

Smith spent over $300 per sample to send sealed creatine gummy products to independent laboratories for analysis. The results were damning: leading brands consistently failed to deliver the creatine amounts listed on their labels.

Overload, one of the most prominent brands, advertised its Cherry Cola gummies as containing 4.5 grams of creatine. Testing revealed only 0.0849 grams—less than 2% of the stated amount. A similar product from the same brand claimed 1.5 grams per gummy, but delivered only 0.849 grams. Smith also found that the physical size of the gummies didn’t match package claims: the actual weight was 2.8 grams, not the listed 3–4 grams.

The pattern extended across the industry. Push Gummies, widely promoted on social media, showed 0.102 grams of creatine in their strawberry flavor and 0.122 grams in apple—despite both claiming 5 grams per gummy. Gains Nutrition’s blue raspberry flavor contained barely 1% of its claimed amount. Supplement Brand and Unique Physique also showed negligible creatine content.

Some results were even more absurd: Non Nutrition’s test on a sour watermelon gummy revealed just 0.76 milligrams of creatine—0.05% of the 1,500 mg claimed.

“There’s little to zero, quite literally not even enough to say there’s a trace of creatine in there,”

Smith said in his exposé.

Smith’s investigation began after he considered investing in Overload. He was initially impressed by their sales numbers and even flew the founder out on a private jet to discuss a potential deal. His offer was initially accepted—but things changed when he began due diligence.

Once Smith initiated lab testing, the deal was abruptly called off. He now alleges that Overload continues to use his promotional videos without permission, despite legal demands to cease.

According to Smith, the financial exploitation is staggering. Gummies cost up to 10 times more than traditional creatine powder. Based on the “kindest” test results—showing 6% of the promised dosage—consumers would need to consume 20 gummies per day to reach the minimal effective dose of 5 grams. That could cost upwards of £500 per month, compared to just £5 using powdered creatine.

“Paying ten times the price of creatine to get a thousandth of the amount—that’s not just a bad deal, that sounds illegal,”

Smith said.

Push Gummies tried to deflect criticism by claiming that standard lab testing methods don’t work on pectin-based gummies. But Smith dismissed this defense, pointing out that other pectin-based products like Wellboost, No Nutrition, and MyVitamins passed testing with high accuracy—delivering 111%, 95%, and 86% of their claimed creatine respectively.

“Either the people selling these gummies know that there’s no creatine in them—which is terrible—or they don’t know, which is just as bad,”

Smith argued.

Beyond the product-specific allegations, Smith’s findings highlight a broader problem in the supplement industry: the lack of independent testing and oversight. High Street retailers, he noted, rarely conduct third-party verification before putting products on shelves, leaving customers vulnerable to misleading or outright false claims.

While Smith acknowledged that Overload’s founder is young and likely didn’t set out to scam anyone, he criticized the industry’s dependence on overseas manufacturing.

“Chinese factories could just be selling sweets disguised as supplements,”

he said. Still, he emphasized that companies pouring money into advertising campaigns have an obligation to ensure their products work.

Smith’s investigation serves as a stark warning: the convenience of creatine gummies may come at a high price—both financially and in terms of efficacy. For now, the safest and most cost-effective choice remains traditional creatine monohydrate powder, which continues to offer verified results at a fraction of the cost.