Hype against randomized trials for one topic, computed and dated 30 October 2026. It rates the topic, never a person, and gives no dosing and no sourcing.
The short version
596Kyearly wiki viewsEnglish Wikipedia, to 30 Sep 2026
732randomized-trial paperstyped on PubMed
814views per trial paperlower is better backed
Receipts check outthe verdictby the published rule
Creatine
Receipts check out
814yearly views per trial paper
hype596K views a yearproof732 trial papers
The trial record is deep next to the attention it gets.
English Wikipedia readers opened the Creatine article about 596K times in the year to 30 September 2026. PubMed holds 732 papers typed as randomized trials for it, which is 814 yearly views per trial paper. By the published rule that earns the verdict Receipts check out.
That is a statement about the gap between attention and trial record. It does not say whether Creatine works or whether it is safe for anyone.
How does it compare with the others?
Creatine next to the other fourhype above, proof below, read 30 October 2026
Top chart: attention. Bottom chart: randomized-trial papers typed on PubMed. The highlighted bar is Creatine. A big top bar over a small bottom bar is what the meter reads as hype ahead of the trials.