I am checking the price and it is really affordable, 500g = 13,95 EUR (almost a year supply at 1,5g/day)
What is your dose @DeStrider? I get some joint pain from time to time in my knee that I after your comments on crossing the legs I identified as the cause since I spend almost my entire working schedule with my right knee crossed over my left, and yes, I get from time to time this pain in my right knee that is quite annoying. If this helps that would be great, since I tried working with my legs uncrossed but it is just impossible.
Yes, the knee crossing causes me pain. What I do now is put my feet up on another chair while I work.
I take two a day of the following:
The quantities on the front are for 3 tablets. I take only 2 and it’s good enough for me. So about 1000 mg Glucosamine 800 mg Chondroitin and 670 mg MSM
If crossing your knees elicit knee pain? Then I would take into account that the hip joint quite often refer pain to the knee. A differential diagnostic between the hip joint and the knee is a very relevant step to take.
One way to do this is to force hip joint into maximal internal rotation. And see if that elicit knee pain.
I don’t know exactly what you mean.
When my legs are crossed I have no pain, it feels really comfortable, but later sometimes when walking, running or at yoga I would notice a sharp pain in the right knee. If my legs are uncrossed and when I am not moving right knee has a dull pain like feeling in the background, but on scale 1-10 it is probably 1. When doing yoga I also do many hip rotation exercises, but hip rotation itself would not cause me pain. The only hip/knee exercise I notice pain in my knee it is “lizard” pose, essentially a hip opener but there is a lot of side force on knee joint too.
When I cross my legs at the knee, it does not cause pain. However later on the pain occurs. I traced it down to crossing my legs at the knee. So, sometimes I cross my legs at the ankles. That seems to work as well.
Sorry, @scta123 and @DeStrider, if I brought confusion into this thread. What I try to convey is that it is often fruitful to rule out the hip joint as the cause of knee pain.
A total of 450,207 eligible participants (mean age: 56.2 years; females: 53.3%) were included, of whom 84,895 (18.9%) reported regular glucosamine use at baseline. During a median of 12.5 years follow-up, glucosamine use was significantly associated with an increased risk of overall cancer [HR, 1.04; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.01–1.06], skin cancer (HR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.07–1.15), and prostate cancer (HR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.01–1.13), and with a reduced risk of lung cancer (HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.79–0.97) after adjusting for potential confounders. Statistical interaction was observed for gender, age, and education for the association of glucosamine use with overall cancer risk (all P interaction < 0.027). These results remained unchanged in the sensitivity analyses.
Conclusions:
Regular glucosamine use was associated with lower risk of lung cancer but higher risk of skin cancer, prostate cancer, and overall cancer.
I would like really to look at how they do their statistical analysis. If Glucosoamine usage and cancer are more prevalent in older people adjusting for the effect of age on cancer to calculate the merits of Glocosamine is difficult.
Maybe I am an outlier, but before I started taking rapamycin, I had significant joint pain, especially in my hips and knees. This was mostly at night when I was sleeping. I bought a special pillow to place between my legs, as I am a side sleeper.
When I started taking rapamycin, I was taking high doses to the point it was causing me to have diarrhea. After about two months of high doses, I noticed that I no longer had any hip pains.
At this time I reduced my rapamycin doses to a point that I had no subjective side effects. Several months later my knee pains went away.
Today I am entirely pain-free. This does amaze me and I am thankful because all around me are old people complaining of their aches and pains.
Am I the only one in the forum that have experienced a significant or complete reduction of joint pains after taking rapamycin?
Yes, glucosamine is not a clear case. Glucosamine is good for joint pain, and it reduces ACM mostly due to the correlation with reduced cardiovascular death. So we have a lower ACM, in spite of a somewhat increased correlation with some cancers.
These correlations make me think that glucosamine is recommended for people with joint pain and cardiovascular problems (or a family history of cardiovascular events).
Wow! Surprisingly bad result. I’ve been taking Glucosamine for the cardiovascular and mortality benefits for at least five years ever since that one observational came out.
This was the only thread I found with glucosamine in the title.
It seems quite a few people who do the rejuvenation olympics type of testing are using Novos Core, which has glucosamine in it (1000mg).
Not sure if various companies have tested each individual supplement/product, to compare in results.
It would not surprise me if glucosamine is one of the best rated supplement in certain aging tests being used.
Would be nice to see a list of every medication tested as well.
Not sure if anyone has the best human studies with longevity and supplements. Though it appears that glucosamine has rated very good in some large populated studies.
Maybe there is something that can counter the cancer issue(s) mentioned in the thread.
Current evidence suggests that glucosamine use is associated with lower all-cause mortality and reduced cancer risk in large observational cohorts, but causality remains unproven, and Mendelian randomization (MR) analyses challenge these associations.
Evidence on All-Cause Mortality
**UK Biobank prospective cohort (495,077 participants, median follow-up 8.9 years):**Regular glucosamine use was linked to 15% lower all-cause mortality (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.82–0.89), with reductions in CVD, cancer, respiratory, and digestive mortality 1 (Level I evidence, prospective cohort).
US NHANES cohort (38,021 participants, 1999–2014): After full adjustment, no significant association between glucosamine use and all-cause or cancer mortality was found (HR 1.02, 95% CI 0.86–1.21) 2 (Level I evidence, prospective cohort).
Other cohorts (e.g., European Journal of Epidemiology, 2012): Reported mortality benefit, but these are also observational and prone to selection bias 3 II.
Evidence on Cancer
UK Biobank cancer mortality cohort (453,645 participants, median follow-up 12.1 years): Glucosamine use was associated with lower overall cancer mortality (HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.90–1.00), and significantly reduced kidney, lung, and rectal cancer mortality 4(Level I evidence, prospective cohort).
Lung cancer–specific cohort (439,393 participants): Regular glucosamine use was linked to 16% lower lung cancer incidence (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.75–0.92) and 12% lower lung cancer mortality (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.81–0.96)5 (Level I evidence, prospective cohort).
**Meta-analysis (13 studies, 1.69M participants, 55,045 cancers):**Glucosamine/chondroitin use was associated with reduced colorectal cancer risk (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.87–0.94) and lung cancer risk (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.79–0.89)6 (Level I evidence, meta-analysis).
Causality Concerns
Mendelian randomization (MR) studies (2024): Found no protective causal effect of glucosamine; in fact, genetically proxied use was linked to increased risk of certain cancers (e.g., melanoma, colon, lung adenocarcinoma) and benign tumors 7(Level I evidence, MR study).
Pharmacoepidemiology review: Suggests observed mortality/cancer benefits in cohorts may be due to selection bias and healthier user effect 8 III.
Summary Table
Outcome
Key Findings
Clinical Evidence
All-cause mortality
HR 0.85 (95% CI 0.82–0.89) reduction in UK Biobank 1
Large prospective cohort, Level I
Cancer mortality (overall)
HR 0.95 (95% CI 0.90–1.00) 4
UK Biobank, Level I
Lung cancer
↓ incidence (HR 0.84) and mortality (HR 0.88) 5
UK Biobank, Level I
Colorectal cancer
OR 0.91 (95% CI 0.87–0.94) 6
Meta-analysis, Level I
Mendelian randomization
No causal protective effect; ↑ risk for some cancers 7
MR, Level I
Bias concerns
Possible selection bias in observational studies 8
Review, Level III
Conclusion:
Glucosamine use is consistently associated with lower all-cause mortality and reduced risk of lung and colorectal cancers in large observational cohorts. However, genetic causal analyses do not support a protective effect and even suggest increased risk for some cancers. At present, glucosamine cannot be recommended for mortality or cancer prevention, and its use should remain limited to approved indications (e.g., osteoarthritis). Further randomized long-term trials are needed.
Right on, that was a nice write up!
IIRC you have not done any of those aging tests (Rejuvenation Olympics).
Though it would be cool to see your results. I’d bet you would rank very good.
Your stack seems to have most of the same supps that Novo’s use in their formulas, plus a lot of other stuff.
Here is another study with glucosamine doing well.
Also, Brad Stanfield submitted a glucosamine proposal to the ITP and they accepted it, so that’s good. I’m sure it’ll be a long wait for those results but at least it’s being studied further.
Very cool! That is probably new (2025) about the glucosamine, as ITP has not updated there supported Interventions page on pubmed since Dec 2024.
Will be interesting to know one day if to see if glucosamine tests out any better on it’s own vs a combination of products together as is commonly sold in stores such as: glucosamine/chondroitin, and sometimes with other stuff added such as msm, or some herbal extracts etc.
Another N=1 here: have been taking glucosamine/chondroitin for decades. On the rare occasions when I didn’t take it for a few days I could feel the pain in my knees returning, especially when descending stairs. So, I know it is having a positive effect. This, together with magnesium (both mag glycinate in pill form and magnesium foam that I put on my legs every night) are my most valuable players.
