.001 for creatine levels isn't surprising; that's a lot of creatine. I'd explain the cognitive tests with the practice effect, because it is unlikely that creatine had such a massive effect and we only discover it now.
I hear about tech bros taking creatine these days with the tone of voice that they use to talk about microdosing. So I can’t imagine it having zero effect.
What I worry about more is that it has more to do with fixing a deficiency. That being deficient in creatine causes a cognitive loss more than supplementing causes a boost.
As someone who's microdosed (though mostly normal-dosed and occasionally megadosed) in the distant past, the whole microdosing fad was equal parts entertaining and baffling. Anecdotal, but from all people I know that has taken psychedelics, only one doesn't find it to be a waste.
Maybe a better analogy would have been the Balmer curve. I wasn’t trying to imply psychedelics are unhelpful, just that we should be careful of suggesting coding productivity gains while on them.
Also IMO, the Balmer peak is a stronger effect than creatine.
What I worry about more is that it has more to do with fixing a deficiency. That being deficient in creatine causes a cognitive loss more than supplementing causes a boost.