James Smith Calls Out Creatine Gummy Brands After New Test Results Emerge
Fitness dark knight James Smith has blown the lid off the creatine gummy scandal with a fresh batch of test results.
The online star turned entrepreneur has accused a whole host of big-name players of selling “sweets” as supplements and making “falsified claims” to customers about their efficacy.
In his latest YouTube video, Smith produced data that he alleges show Gains Nutrition, Unique Physique, Push and Supplmnt all falling short of what’s on the label.
The 36-year-old first threw the issue into the spotlight when he outed Ovrload for peddling duds at the beginning of the year.
The brand, founded by Johnny Lye, has since apologised, switched suppliers and relaunched with stringent testing protocols.
Lye said he had been let down by a previous manufacturer that cut corners and, despite some batches being genuine, has pledged to refund or send replacements to customers who received defective gummies.
Not long after his initial exposé, Smith said he had evidence of more “very popular brands” conducting the same malpractice.
That investigation, which dropped today, was delayed by 66 days as he needed to seek legal advice on the matter.
“Making videos like this comes with legal repercussions,” he said. “I’ve been sued, threatened with legal action — it comes with the territory of calling out BS.
“So I thought I’d just remind some of the businesses that I’ll be mentioning in this video: if you wish to take me to court, fine. I’ll be bringing the Eurofins test with me, and I’ve got stockpiles of your products which I’ll happily bring to court as well.
“Any of you that threaten me with legal or cease and desists, they’re probably going to find their way to my Instagram story pretty fast. So, let the games begin.”
Creatine Gummy Scandal: Who Was Called Out
Smith picked up where he left off, twice testing Ovrload’s last batch of the Cherry Cola Crealyte Gummies. Both times, he found there to be “little to no creatine” at all.
Ovrload isn’t currently selling the flavour through its website. Instead, Sour Green Apple and Peach Iced Tea varieties were introduced as part of the relaunch with a fresh manufacturer.
However, the gummies are still listed through independent sellers on sites like eBay.
In new data, Smith said he found a similar trend with Gains Nutrition, Unique Physique, Supplmnt and Push.
He alleges Gains Nutrition’s Blue Raspberry flavour contained “barely 1%” of what was purported, with results showing 0.0473g of the advertised 4.5g dose.
Smith went on to claim that Unique Physique’s Strawberry creatine gummy showed “less than 2%” of the expected creatine, while Supplmnt’s Blueberry variety had just 0.12g of the promised 5g.
Supplmnt, which sold over £250,000 worth of stock on Amazon in the 30 days prior to Smith filming the video, has a link to its own verified Eurofins report on its website.
The certificate, dated April this year, showed the Blueberry flavour contained 4.32g of creatine. While still short of the full 5g dose, this represents a significant improvement on the levels Smith allegedly found during his investigation.
Supplmnt has since responded with a full statement on the matter.
Unique Physique had also posted huge numbers, with £104,000 in revenue over the same period.
The results of all the tests Smith conducted with Eurofins are available via his YouTube channel.
“Now there is some positive news,” he added. “There are some companies that are legitimate. That do have the right amount of creatine in their gummies.”
WellBoost exceeded the advertised creatine content in their gummies during Smith’s testing, while Myvitamins and Known Nutrition — the brand that first called out Ovrload — were not far off being bang on.
There was a small difference between the amount claimed and the amount detected, Smith said, which he explained could be due to testing inaccuracies and creatine breaking down into the waste product creatinine.
Create’s Blue Raspberry flavour fell short with 3.25g of creatine where 4.5g was expected, according to Smith.
“Create claim here each gummy contains 1.5g of creatine,” he continued. “Hmm, nearly, just over 1g per gummy. But it’s better than everyone else.”
The Push Creatine Gummy Controversy
In the wake of Smith’s last video on the creatine gummy scandal, Push — which operates chiefly in the UK, New Zealand and Australia — released a statement on testing.
It said testing was a “top priority”, and that it checks every batch for both creatine and banned substances.
“For creatine content, we test with the world-leading facility Eurofins,” the post continued.
“Eurofins has developed the modified USP Creatine Monograph test specifically for pectin-based gummies.
“Every batch of Push Gummies has consistently met, or slightly exceeded the intended creatine dose.
“We’re fully transparent with our results and publish each batch’s report on the testing page of our website.
“It’s important to note that standard creatine tests were originally developed for powders and biological tissues.
“These methods aren’t suitable for pectin-based gummies and may inaccurately show no creatine present.”
On that statement, Smith said: “I think and assume that you are trying to deflect allegations here and I’ll explain why.
“First of all, a few of the reports that you put on your website have redacted QR codes. As we saw from the previous video, these forms, when you share them, must be shown in their entirety for them to be valid.
“Not only that, you’re saying that you use a certain way of testing because other tests are inaccurate. But several of the other brands I tested also use pectin, the same thing that you’re saying interferes with the detection of creatine.
“If the testing method is inconsistent, why is it that other brands — with pectin-based gummies the same as your own — showed very clearly and evidently there was creatine in the gummies?
“Why is it that when creatine is in another brand’s pectin gummy we can detect it using our method of testing, but when we tested yours we can’t?”
Smith says he’s using HPLC testing, while others conducting tests that he’s liaised with are using UPLC.
“Now I will admit, between our testing and their testing, we both identify relatively small discrepancies in the amount of creatine detected in each gummy,” he continued.
“But it’s clear as day, and consistent across all the data we have, that we can determine very easily whether or not there is creatine inside a gummy, or there isn’t.
“Even if this method of detecting creatine was inaccurate, how do you explain that other pectin gummies show up very clearly, very close to the amount they purport, why yours wouldn’t show any?
“And why consistently across data, it is very apparent there is less than 2% of creatine in a gummy, or nearly 100%. I would agree that between different testing methods, the exact amount of creatine would vary.
“But I completely disagree that a creatine gummy with the right amount of creatine in it would show as none detected.
“So Push Gummies, if you’re watching this, I ask you to publicly explain that to me and everyone else that’s buying your product.”
Smith says his partner, family, and friends have all bought Push gummies after being “slammed” with paid ads.
A 30-day supply costs £29 in the UK on a one-time purchase, or $59 in Australia. The brand claims a three-gummy serving contains 5g of creatine monohydrate — widely recognised as the gold standard daily dose for optimal results.
However, Smith alleges his tests show the Strawberry flavour turned up as less than 2.3% of that claim, while the Apple flavour had less than 2.5%, describing them as “the most expensive sweets” he’s ever had.
Push and Gains Nutrition have also been contacted for comment. No contact details could be found for Unique Physique.
What’s Next In The Creatine Gummy Scandal?
Smith had said there was much more to this creatine gummy scandal than first met the eye. His initial exposé led to Ovrload launching a full-scale rebrand.
This latest round of allegations could lead to some very messy public back and forth, with several brands now under the microscope.
One thing’s clear: Smith is confident he’s got the receipts and is more than willing to take this battle to the courtroom. This is not the last you’ll hear of Gummy Gate.
“Now there’s an issue here,” he concluded. “You either know, or you don’t know, and I’m not sure which scenario is worse.
“Because you either knowingly are selling sweets with insane markups, or you don’t know, and you’ve not done the due diligence necessary on your manufacturers.”
