As for practices, Muscletech is about the only company I know that from the start paid for 6 pg "Ad-reports" in the mags then tries (or tried when Cellt-tech first came out) to pass off creatine with sugar and ALA as 1840419% better than regular creatine. 
If it works for you great, but in general there's always a better product out there than the muscletech version.....
Companies have been doing that for years. Perhaps, their ad-reports weren't six pages long, but they've been there as long as I can remember.
Looking back at some of my old magazine from about a decade ago, I see a few examples:
- MET-Rx (the original, with the "Plus" and "Base"; the Performance Series, including MET-Rx w/HMB, etc).
- Hot Stuff
- Designer Protein, which started the whey protein vs. protein blend feuds.
- Larry Scott's Hyper Growth Formula, complete with the story of how the first Mr. Olympia searched for nearly two decades to replicate the formula given to him by old-school nutritionist, Rheo Blair.
- EAS, past and present, especially with the Phosphagen products (Phosphagen, Phosphagen HP, Phosphagen XT, etc.)
- Cybergenics (here's an oldie but a goodie)
MuscleTech's ad-reports may be longer. And, they tend to tack on training articles along with their ads. They show how to big big shoulders, followed by extolling the virtues of combining whey and creatine, to be concluded by pushing its brand of whey (NITRO-TECH) and creatine (CELL-TECH). But, even with that slant, the Canada-based supplement company is simply following the pattern of supplement marketing
