I have been running adequan for about 1 year now. I have done 1 cycle of it followed with 1 injection per month as a maintenance dose. I am currently running another cycle of it now because I injured my supraspinatus tendon. Adequan is supposed to help heal tendons, unlike any other medication available today. NSAIDS only mask the pain whereas adequan actually re aligns and strengthens the biomechanical properties of the tendons during the healing process. Adequan is also supposed to increase the amount of synovial fluids in the joints, and is a chondroprotective agent, meaning that it may prevent the degerneration of cartiladge in joints and slow osteoarthritis.
Adequan is for animals only, but there have been no adverse side effects documented in animals so I think it is fairly safe. Adequan was actually used in humans in the 80's-00's in only Germany under the name arterparon/rumalon. It however, is no longer being produced, primarily because 2 people died of allergic reactions to the drug, and the chondroprotective efficacy was proven ineffective in the scientific studies on the 00's. However, this could have been a tactic by big pharma to prevent an effective joint pain cure-all drug from being on the market, as they would lose profit from keeping people on painkillers permanently. A few years after the ban of the drug, there was a scare of contaminated heparin in the USA where a few people died. The contaminant in the heparin was arteparon, which cross reacts with the heparin and can cause death. So if you take adequan make sure you tell your health care professionals not to ever administer heparin to you EVER. Maybe after a few years since your last adequan dose it might be okay...
Here is just one recent study done:
This study explored the hypothesis that local administration of a polysulphated glycosaminoglycan (PSGAG) in the early phase of healing of a standard collagenase-induced tendon injury in the superficial digital flexor tendon of the rabbit would reduce the degenerative effects of inflammatory mediators and proteases and preserve normal tendon morphology, composition, and biomechanical properties. Histological and ultrastructural changes together with the mechanical properties, dry weight, collagen content, and amount of DNA in healing tissue at the site of the lesion were assessed in treated and untreated animals. In treated lesions 28 days after injury, the normal orientation of tenoblasts and collagen fibrils was well preserved compared with the disorganized scar formation seen in untreated animals. The degree of cellularity was significantly higher in the untreated lesions. At the ultrastructural level the collagen in the healing tissue of the treated animals consisted of a mixture of small diameter, new regenerated fibrils intermingled with well-preserved large diameter, old fibrils, aligned to the long axis of the tendon; in untreated animals small, randomly arranged new fibrils predominated. The diameters of treated tendons had returned to normal, but in untreated animals the injured tendons remained significantly thicker than their controls. The percentage dry weight and collagen contents of treated injured tendons approximated those of control normal tendons, whereas those of untreated tendons were significantly less than those of the control values. The DNA content of injured treated tendons was not significantly different from that of normal contralateral controls, while in the untreated tendons it was significantly higher. There were no significant differences between the normal and the contralateral treated injured tendons in ultimate strength, fatigue strength, stiffness, and maximum absorbed energy. However in the untreated animals, although the tendon diameter was significantly greater, the ultimate strength, fatigue strength, stiffness, and maximum absorbed energy were significantly lower than the contralateral control. These data suggest that polysulphated glycosaminoglycans are effective in restoring the morphological, biochemical, and biomechanical properties of injured soft connective tissues and may be of clinical value in the treatment of acute tendon injury.
There are many more studies that have come to the same conclusion in the recent decade. Quite exciting stuff, as previously, adequan was only really evaluated for its arthritis preventing effects.
The results I have gotten from adequan have been great so far. I find while im running it my joints do not get as inflammed and are much less painful. I can notice increased lubrication, perhaps comparable to that of running a cycle of deca. I find if I administer it after a tendon injury, it will heal much faster and is arguably more functional afterwards.
Feel free to ask me anymore questions, and if someone here is also running it I would like to hear from you as well!
Adequan is for animals only, but there have been no adverse side effects documented in animals so I think it is fairly safe. Adequan was actually used in humans in the 80's-00's in only Germany under the name arterparon/rumalon. It however, is no longer being produced, primarily because 2 people died of allergic reactions to the drug, and the chondroprotective efficacy was proven ineffective in the scientific studies on the 00's. However, this could have been a tactic by big pharma to prevent an effective joint pain cure-all drug from being on the market, as they would lose profit from keeping people on painkillers permanently. A few years after the ban of the drug, there was a scare of contaminated heparin in the USA where a few people died. The contaminant in the heparin was arteparon, which cross reacts with the heparin and can cause death. So if you take adequan make sure you tell your health care professionals not to ever administer heparin to you EVER. Maybe after a few years since your last adequan dose it might be okay...
Here is just one recent study done:
This study explored the hypothesis that local administration of a polysulphated glycosaminoglycan (PSGAG) in the early phase of healing of a standard collagenase-induced tendon injury in the superficial digital flexor tendon of the rabbit would reduce the degenerative effects of inflammatory mediators and proteases and preserve normal tendon morphology, composition, and biomechanical properties. Histological and ultrastructural changes together with the mechanical properties, dry weight, collagen content, and amount of DNA in healing tissue at the site of the lesion were assessed in treated and untreated animals. In treated lesions 28 days after injury, the normal orientation of tenoblasts and collagen fibrils was well preserved compared with the disorganized scar formation seen in untreated animals. The degree of cellularity was significantly higher in the untreated lesions. At the ultrastructural level the collagen in the healing tissue of the treated animals consisted of a mixture of small diameter, new regenerated fibrils intermingled with well-preserved large diameter, old fibrils, aligned to the long axis of the tendon; in untreated animals small, randomly arranged new fibrils predominated. The diameters of treated tendons had returned to normal, but in untreated animals the injured tendons remained significantly thicker than their controls. The percentage dry weight and collagen contents of treated injured tendons approximated those of control normal tendons, whereas those of untreated tendons were significantly less than those of the control values. The DNA content of injured treated tendons was not significantly different from that of normal contralateral controls, while in the untreated tendons it was significantly higher. There were no significant differences between the normal and the contralateral treated injured tendons in ultimate strength, fatigue strength, stiffness, and maximum absorbed energy. However in the untreated animals, although the tendon diameter was significantly greater, the ultimate strength, fatigue strength, stiffness, and maximum absorbed energy were significantly lower than the contralateral control. These data suggest that polysulphated glycosaminoglycans are effective in restoring the morphological, biochemical, and biomechanical properties of injured soft connective tissues and may be of clinical value in the treatment of acute tendon injury.
There are many more studies that have come to the same conclusion in the recent decade. Quite exciting stuff, as previously, adequan was only really evaluated for its arthritis preventing effects.
The results I have gotten from adequan have been great so far. I find while im running it my joints do not get as inflammed and are much less painful. I can notice increased lubrication, perhaps comparable to that of running a cycle of deca. I find if I administer it after a tendon injury, it will heal much faster and is arguably more functional afterwards.
Feel free to ask me anymore questions, and if someone here is also running it I would like to hear from you as well!
