The Molecules Floor

The floor, not the shelf

Walk into any supplement store and most of what you see is noise. Bright labels, big promises, a whole wall of things that will do almost nothing except lighten your wallet. I want to hand you the opposite of that wall. The floor. The short list of molecules that actually earn a place, what each one really does, and, just as important, where the proof runs out and my own judgment takes over. I'll grade the evidence honestly, and I'll tell you plainly when I'm stepping past it on purpose.

Here's the frame to hold. A supplement supplements. It sits on top of food, it doesn't replace it, and most of the real work happens at the table and in the gym, not in a pill bottle. So the honest version of this pillar is small. Get a few things right, measure a little with cheap and standard labs, point your meals in the right direction, and you are most of the way there. Call it eighty percent. The rest is refinement, and refinement is a later conversation.

One note before we start. None of this is a protocol built for you personally. It's how I think, the ranges I coach inside, and the reasoning underneath them. If you have a real medical condition or you take medication, run any of this past your doctor first. Otherwise these are ordinary over-the-counter basics, and I'm going to treat you like an adult who can read the evidence and make a call.

Creatine, the one with the most behind it

If I could keep only one supplement on this floor, it would be creatine monohydrate, because it has more good human data behind it than anything else in the building. Its core job is simple: paired with resistance training, creatine reliably adds strength and lean mass. That is not a maybe. Across decades of trials, in younger and older adults and in both men and women, the same result keeps turning up. The effect on the raw size of a muscle is honestly small, so I don't want you picturing dramatic new mass. Picture a little more strength, a little more lean tissue, and a body that holds onto muscle better as the years add up. That last part matters more the older you get.

A word to the women reading this, because creatine still gets miscast as a men's-locker-room supplement. You naturally store less creatine than men do, which is part of why you stand to gain at least as much, and the trials in women, including solid recent data in postmenopausal women, show the same strength and lean-mass payoff when it's paired with training. It will not build your bones, so I won't promise you that. But for holding onto strength and muscle as you age, it is one of the best-supported things you can do, and it belongs in your routine as much as anyone's.

Two myths I want dead on arrival. First, creatine does not wreck healthy kidneys. What it does is nudge a lab value called creatinine, which is a byproduct your standard kidney test reads, so a routine panel can look slightly off without anything actually being wrong. If you already have kidney disease, that is a genuine conversation for you and your doctor. For everyone else, the fear is a misread of a number. Second, you do not need to "load" it. The old five-days-of-twenty-grams routine works, but a plain 3 to 5 grams a day gets you to the same place within a few weeks with less stomach upset. So keep it simple: 3 to 5 grams a day, every day, indefinitely.

Now the part where I step past the settled evidence, and I'll flag it as I go. Creatine is starting to look interesting for the brain. The cleanest read of the human trials is a modest memory benefit, and it shows up mostly in older adults, not in already-sharp young people. Overall thinking and executive function don't really move. So the proven brain story is small, and it's mostly about aging memory. I personally run a higher dose, 10 grams a day, on the bet that brain and muscle both benefit and that the higher amount serves the brain better. I'll be straight with you: the dosing trials don't actually show that more creatine buys more memory, and the one study that pushed a big dose at the brain did it as a single dose under sleep deprivation, which is not your daily life. So 10 grams a day for cognition is my judgment, not a proven number. It's cheap, it's exceptionally safe at that dose, and I've decided the upside is worth it. You can sit at 5 grams and be on completely solid ground.

Vitamin D, and the establishment changing its mind

Vitamin D is the most interesting item on this floor right now, because the mainstream just walked back its own advice. For years the message was test everyone and supplement broadly. Then in 2024 the Endocrine Society, the same body that drove much of the original testing boom, put out a new guideline that suggested against routine vitamin D testing in healthy adults and against empirically supplementing most healthy people under seventy-five to prevent disease. They went further and admitted the science doesn't actually define an optimal blood level. That is a real reversal, and I respect them for making it, because the big trials earned it.

Here's what those trials showed. When you take healthy, mostly replete people and give them vitamin D to prevent cancer or heart disease or early death, you get very little. The largest trials came back essentially empty on those headline outcomes. One even saw a small, worrying cancer-death signal when the dose was given as a big monthly bolus rather than a daily amount, which is one reason I coach daily dosing and not mega-doses. So if your story is "I'm generally healthy and I want a pill to keep me from getting cancer," the evidence says vitamin D is not your lever.

What is well supported is narrower and it matters: if you are genuinely deficient, correcting that with a daily, sensible dose supports your bones and lowers the risk of fractures and falls, especially as you age. That is the floor claim, and it is solid.

And here is where I diverge, owned as mine. I coach vitamin D to the high end of your measured range, not merely up out of the deficiency ditch. A lab's "normal" is a reference interval. It tells you where you sit against the population and where disease gets flagged. Normal means not sick. It does not mean optimal, and I coach to optimal. The honest caveat is that the case for pushing a healthy person to the high end rests on association studies, on mechanism, and on my own judgment working with clients and their physicians, not on trials that prove it lowers your odds of dying. So I hold it as my position, not as settled fact, and the way you keep it safe is you measure. Serum vitamin D is a cheap, standard blood test. Don't guess. Test, dose to a sensible daily amount, retest, and land where your number and your physician agree.

I take vitamin K2 alongside it. The logic is that K2 helps steer calcium toward your bones and away from your arteries, the mechanism is sound, and the early human data points the right way. But no large trial has proven K2 prevents a heart attack or a fracture, so I treat it as a low-risk, sensible companion to D, not as a must-have with a mountain of proof behind it.

Magnesium, the one most people are genuinely short on

Magnesium is the rare case where the "most people don't get enough" line is actually true. By the government's own intake data, close to half of Americans take in less magnesium than the estimated requirement from food. So the shortfall is real and common, and that alone makes a modest magnesium supplement a reasonable floor item for a lot of people.

What does it buy you? The best-supported answer is blood pressure. Pooled trials show magnesium nudges blood pressure down, and I want to keep this honest: the effect is small, and it concentrates in people who already run high or who are low in magnesium to begin with. If your pressure and your magnesium are both fine, don't expect much. There's also a modest tie to better blood sugar handling in people at metabolic risk.

I'll tell you where I use it that the evidence doesn't back me: cramps. I take magnesium and my cramps eased, and plenty of people report the same. But when researchers put it to the test, magnesium mostly failed to beat a placebo for the common leg cramps, and there aren't even decent trials for exercise cramps. So I won't pretend the science is on my side there. That one is my own experience and nothing more, and I'd rather tell you that than sell you a claim that doesn't hold.

On testing, a normal serum magnesium is close to useless, because nearly all of your magnesium lives inside cells and in bone, not in the blood you draw. If you want to actually look, RBC magnesium is the cheap and more informative test. On forms, the more soluble ones like citrate and glycinate absorb better than cheap magnesium oxide, and glycinate tends to be gentle on the stomach, which is why I reach for it. You'll also see magnesium L-threonate marketed hard for the brain. The honest read is a promising mechanism sitting on one small, industry-tied study, so I don't put it on the proven floor.

Electrolytes, mostly a food problem in disguise

Electrolytes get sold as a product, but the real story is what's on your plate. Almost nobody hits the recommended potassium intake, and almost everybody sails past the sodium limit, and both of those are food patterns, not a reason to buy a tub of powder. Fix the food first. More potassium from real food, the fruits and vegetables and legumes, is the move, and raising potassium is one of the better-supported ways to take a little pressure off your blood pressure, again mostly in people who run high.

So where do added electrolytes in your water actually earn a place? When you're losing them fast or draining the systems that hold them: heavy sweating and heat, long or hard training, a low-carbohydrate diet, a bout of illness. I use electrolytes in my water, and I'll own that as a preference tuned to how I train and eat, not a rule I'm handing you. If you're mostly sedentary and eating well, you probably don't need them, and I'd rather you put the effort into the potassium-rich food than into the packet.

A multivitamin, as coverage and nothing more

I'll put a multivitamin on the floor, but with the narrowest possible reason, and I want you to hold that reason tightly, because it is easy to oversell. A daily multi does not extend your life. The largest studies, including one that tracked hundreds of thousands of adults, found no mortality benefit at all. So this is not a longevity pill, and anyone who tells you it is hasn't read the data.

One signal keeps it on the floor for me. In a set of good trials in older adults, a daily multivitamin produced a small but real benefit to memory and overall thinking, on the order of looking a couple of years younger on a cognitive test. Small, promising, and honestly not yet confirmed beyond that one research program, so I hold it loosely.

The real reason I use the word coverage is this: most of us have gaps in our diet, and a multi demonstrably raises intake of the vitamins and minerals people commonly fall short on. That is a fair, modest job for it to do. But filling a gap on a lab panel is not the same as living better, and the cleaner fix is always food. So here's how I actually coach it. A multivitamin is a bridge. You take it for coverage while we look at your real diet, find the true gaps, and close them at the table. Once your meals are doing the job, most people don't need it. It is insurance for an imperfect diet, not a permanent fixture, and never a substitute for eating well.

Two things that live at the table first

Two more belong here, but with an asterisk, because they are food first and a supplement only if you're falling short.

Protein is the first. I've made the case elsewhere for hitting a real daily protein target, and I won't repeat the whole thing here. The point for this floor is narrow: if you struggle to reach your number with food, a protein shake is a perfectly good tool. The evidence says protein supplementation helps you build and keep strength and lean mass when you're training, but it works by getting you to your total for the day, not by any magic in the powder. Past the point where your total is covered, more powder does nothing. So treat a shake as a convenient way to hit your target on a busy day, not as a special substance. Older adults especially tend to need more protein than the textbook minimum to hold off muscle loss, which is exactly when a shake earns its keep.

Fiber is the second, and the honest framing is the same. The strongest data we have is for eating fiber, not swallowing it. People who eat the most fiber, roughly twenty-five to thirty grams a day, have meaningfully lower rates of heart disease and early death in the big population studies. That evidence is about food, whole foods full of fiber, and most people fall well short, closer to fifteen grams a day than thirty. So the first answer is always more fiber-rich food. That said, a fiber supplement like psyllium is a reasonable gap-filler, and it has its own decent trials showing it lowers LDL and ApoB, which is a lever I care about. Just don't let a spoon of powder stand in for a diet built on real food. It's a patch, not the plan.

The whole floor, in one breath

Here's the floor, honestly. Creatine, 3 to 5 grams a day, for strength and lean mass, with a real but modest brain story that I push a little further on my own judgment. Vitamin D, dosed daily and measured, to correct a genuine shortfall and, in my coaching, to reach the high end of your range, with K2 alongside. Magnesium, because most people are short and it helps your blood pressure a little. The electrolytes you actually miss, mostly handled by food. A multivitamin as short-term coverage while we fix your diet. And protein and fiber handled at the table first, supplemented only to hit your number.

Do a little cheap measuring, a serum vitamin D and an RBC magnesium are a fine start, get your meals pointed the right way, and take the few things that earn it. That is most of the way there. The deeper work, correcting the specific things a fuller lab panel turns up, is its own conversation, and I've put that in Correct What You Can Measure. And the shiny, unproven molecules everyone is excited about are a different conversation still, the one where I tell you what I'm watching and why I haven't bought in. This floor is the part that's earned. Stand on it first.

Evidence

Highest evidence grade in this article: A · Proven

Each claim below is graded on its own; a high grade for one does not carry to the others.

• Creatine for strength and lean mass with resistance training: A · Proven
• Creatine for strength and lean mass in women, including postmenopausal women: B · Strong (bone density unchanged in the trials)
• Creatine safety (no kidney harm in healthy people; loading not required): B · Strong
• Creatine for memory in older adults: C · Moderate
• Higher-dose creatine (10 g/day) for cognition: D · Emerging (my coaching position, beyond what the dosing trials show)
• Vitamin D supplementation in replete adults for cancer, cardiovascular disease, or mortality: A · Proven (the large trials are null)
• Correcting genuine vitamin D deficiency for bone health, fractures, and falls: B · Strong
• The 2024 Endocrine Society vitamin D guideline position (graded by the evidence beneath it): B · Strong
• Coaching vitamin D to the high end of the measured range: C · Moderate (observational plus mechanism; my position, not trial-proven)
• Vitamin K2 (MK-7) for arterial and bone endpoints: C · Moderate (surrogate endpoints, emerging)
• Magnesium for blood pressure: B · Strong (mainly in hypertensive or low-magnesium people)
• Magnesium for blood sugar handling: C · Moderate (people at metabolic risk)
• Magnesium for muscle cramps: the pooled trials do not support a meaningful benefit; my use is personal experience, not evidence
• Higher potassium intake for blood pressure: B · Strong (mainly in people with high blood pressure)
• Multivitamin for mortality: C · Moderate (no benefit; the evidence is observational and null)
• Multivitamin for cognition in older adults: C · Moderate (one trial program, small effect, not yet replicated)
• Multivitamin for filling dietary micronutrient gaps: C · Moderate (raises intake and blood levels, a surrogate, not a health outcome)
• Protein supplementation with resistance training for strength and lean mass: B · Strong
• Higher protein for older adults against muscle loss: C · Moderate (consensus guidance)
• Dietary fiber for cardiovascular disease and mortality: C · Moderate (large, but observational)
• Psyllium fiber supplement for LDL and ApoB: B · Strong (randomized trials, on the lipid markers)
• The doses and ranges here are how I coach with clients and the physicians they work with. Where I go past the proven number, I've said so and owned it as mine.

Sources

• Kreider RB, Kalman DS, Antonio J, Ziegenfuss TN, Wildman R, Collins R, Candow DG, Kleiner SM, Almada AL, Lopez HL. International Society of Sports Nutrition position stand: safety and efficacy of creatine supplementation in exercise, sport, and medicine. J Int Soc Sports Nutr. 2017;14:18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12970-017-0173-z
• Burke R, Piñero A, Coleman M, Mohan A, Sapuppo M, Augustin F, Aragon AA, Candow DG, Forbes SC, Swinton P, Schoenfeld BJ. The effects of creatine supplementation combined with resistance training on regional measures of muscle hypertrophy: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Nutrients. 2023;15(9):2116. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu15092116
• Chilibeck PD, Kaviani M, Candow DG, Zello GA. Effect of creatine supplementation during resistance training on lean tissue mass and muscular strength in older adults: a meta-analysis. Open Access J Sports Med. 2017;8:213-226. https://doi.org/10.2147/OAJSM.S123529
• Naddafha S, Antonio J, Kreider RB, Stout JR. Creatine monohydrate for lean mass, strength, and bone density in postmenopausal women: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Int Soc Sports Nutr. 2026;23(1):2668435. https://doi.org/10.1080/15502783.2026.2668435
• Antonio J, Candow DG, Forbes SC, Gualano B, Jagim AR, Kreider RB, Rawson ES, Smith-Ryan AE, VanDusseldorp TA, Willoughby DS, Ziegenfuss TN. Common questions and misconceptions about creatine supplementation: what does the scientific evidence really show? J Int Soc Sports Nutr. 2021;18(1):13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12970-021-00412-w
• Prokopidis K, Giannos P, Triantafyllidis KK, Kechagias KS, Forbes SC, Candow DG. Effects of creatine supplementation on memory in healthy individuals: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Nutr Rev. 2023;81(4):416-427. https://doi.org/10.1093/nutrit/nuac064
• Demay MB, Pittas AG, Bikle DD, Diab DL, Kiely ME, Lazaretti-Castro M, Lips P, Mitchell DM, Murad MH, Powers S, Rao SD, Scragg R, Tayek JA, Valent AM, Walsh JME, McCartney CR. Vitamin D for the prevention of disease: an Endocrine Society clinical practice guideline. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2024;109(8):1907-1947. https://doi.org/10.1210/clinem/dgae290
• Manson JE, Cook NR, Lee IM, Christen W, Bassuk SS, Mora S, Gibson H, Gordon D, Copeland T, D'Agostino D, Friedenberg G, Ridge C, Bubes V, Giovannucci EL, Willett WC, Buring JE. Vitamin D supplements and prevention of cancer and cardiovascular disease. N Engl J Med. 2019;380(1):33-44. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1809944
• Neale RE, Baxter C, Romero BD, McLeod DSA, English DR, Armstrong BK, Ebeling PR, Hartel G, Kimlin MG, O'Connell R, van der Pols JC, Venn AJ, Webb PM, Whiteman DC, Waterhouse M. The D-Health Trial: a randomised controlled trial of the effect of vitamin D on mortality. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2022;10(2):120-128. [https://doi.org/10.1016/S2213-8587(21](https://doi.org/10.1016/S2213-8587(21))00345-4
• Bischoff-Ferrari HA. Should vitamin D administration for fracture prevention be continued? A discussion of recent meta-analysis findings. Z Gerontol Geriatr. 2019;52(5):428-432. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00391-019-01573-9
• Knapen MHJ, Braam LAJLM, Drummen NE, Bekers O, Hoeks APG, Vermeer C. Menaquinone-7 supplementation improves arterial stiffness in healthy postmenopausal women. A double-blind randomised clinical trial. Thromb Haemost. 2015;113(5):1135-1144. https://doi.org/10.1160/TH14-08-0675
• NIH Office of Dietary Supplements. Magnesium: fact sheet for health professionals. https://ods.od.nih.gov/factsheets/Magnesium-HealthProfessional/
• Argeros Z, Xu X, Bhandari B, Harris K, Touyz RM, Schutte AE. Magnesium supplementation and blood pressure: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Hypertension. 2025;82(11):1844-1856. https://doi.org/10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.125.25129
• Zhao B, Deng H, Li B, Chen L, Zou F, Hu L, Wei Y, Zhang W. Association of magnesium consumption with type 2 diabetes and glucose metabolism: a systematic review and pooled study with trial sequential analysis. Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2020;36(3):e3243. https://doi.org/10.1002/dmrr.3243
• Garrison SR, Korownyk CS, Kolber MR, Allan GM, Musini VM, Sekhon RK, Dugré N. Magnesium for skeletal muscle cramps. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020;9(9):CD009402. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD009402.pub3
• Cogswell ME, Zhang Z, Carriquiry AL, Gunn JP, Kuklina EV, Saydah SH, Yang Q, Moshfegh AJ. Sodium and potassium intakes among US adults: NHANES 2003-2008. Am J Clin Nutr. 2012;96(3):647-657. https://doi.org/10.3945/ajcn.112.034413
• Aburto NJ, Hanson S, Gutierrez H, Hooper L, Elliott P, Cappuccio FP. Effect of increased potassium intake on cardiovascular risk factors and disease: systematic review and meta-analyses. BMJ. 2013;346:f1378. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.f1378
• Loftfield E, O'Connell CP, Abnet CC, Graubard BI, Liao LM, Beane Freeman LE, Hofmann JN, Freedman ND, Sinha R. Multivitamin use and mortality risk in 3 prospective US cohorts. JAMA Netw Open. 2024;7(6):e2418729. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.18729
• Vyas CM, Manson JE, Sesso HD, Cook NR, Rist PM, Weinberg A, Moorthy MV, Baker LD, Espeland MA, Yeung LK, Brickman AM, Okereke OI. Effect of multivitamin-mineral supplementation versus placebo on cognitive function: results from the clinic subcohort of the COcoa Supplement and Multivitamin Outcomes Study (COSMOS) randomized clinical trial and meta-analysis of 3 cognitive studies within COSMOS. Am J Clin Nutr. 2024;119(3):692-701. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajcnut.2023.12.011
• Morton RW, Murphy KT, McKellar SR, Schoenfeld BJ, Henselmans M, Helms E, Aragon AA, Devries MC, Banfield L, Krieger JW, Phillips SM. A systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression of the effect of protein supplementation on resistance training-induced gains in muscle mass and strength in healthy adults. Br J Sports Med. 2018;52(6):376-384. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2017-097608
• Bauer J, Biolo G, Cederholm T, Cesari M, Cruz-Jentoft AJ, Morley JE, Phillips S, Sieber C, Stehle P, Teta D, Visvanathan R, Volpi E, Boirie Y. Evidence-based recommendations for optimal dietary protein intake in older people: a position paper from the PROT-AGE Study Group. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2013;14(8):542-559. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamda.2013.05.021
• Reynolds A, Mann J, Cummings J, Winter N, Mete E, Te Morenga L. Carbohydrate quality and human health: a series of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Lancet. 2019;393(10170):434-445. [https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18](https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(18))31809-9
• Jovanovski E, Yashpal S, Komishon A, Zurbau A, Blanco Mejia S, Ho HVT, Li D, Sievenpiper J, Duvnjak L, Vuksan V. Effect of psyllium (Plantago ovata) fiber on LDL cholesterol and alternative lipid targets, non-HDL cholesterol and apolipoprotein B: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Am J Clin Nutr. 2018;108(5):922-932. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcn/nqy115
• US Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. Fiber intake of the U.S. population: What We Eat in America, NHANES 2009-2010. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK589559/