Peptides
AICAR
Also called Acadesine · 5-Aminoimidazole-4-carboxamide ribonucleotide
AICAR is researched by people wanting better endurance or easier fat loss, often as an alternative to Cardarine. Its “exercise in a pill” reputation comes mainly from mouse work; that headline does not establish comparable benefits in human training.
Dosage & duration
A public oral-use log, not a clinical performance protocol.
One reported AICAR use
Reported use · unapproved regimen- Dose
- 25 mg
- How often
- Once daily, oral
- How long
- About three weeks documented; initially planned one month
Unverified product and uncontrolled comparison with previous Cardarine use.
The mouse experiment cannot set a human effective dose or cycle.
The endurance question
A better session needs more than a different feeling
-
The goal
People seek more endurance for running, cycling or conditioning.
-
The evidence gap
The famous exercise-mimetic experiment used mice, not human athletes.
-
The useful distinction
Feeling more energized is different from a measured improvement in performance.
What attracts endurance users
The goal is lasting longer during running, cycling or conditioning without relying on a stimulant feeling. AICAR affects cellular energy-sensing pathways, but feeling different during one session is not a controlled performance result.
Where the famous result came from
The much-cited exercise-mimetic experiment used mice. It does not establish that human AICAR use replaces training, produces a particular percentage improvement or reduces stubborn fat in one area.
AICAR versus ALCAR and Cardarine
ALCAR is acetyl-L-carnitine, a different compound. Cardarine is also different; personal comparisons and alternating bottles do not prove superiority or the safety of using them together. AICAR is not a peptide despite often sharing the same catalogues.
Model details: AICAR · relative timing
Compare timing and buildup for this compound. The values are not blood concentrations or a measure of strength.
Shows a relative timing scenario; absolute blood concentrations are not calibrated.
Timing assumptions and sources
Dixon 1991: harmonic mean terminal phase of 1.4 h after IV infusion. SC absorption remains unknown.
One 1 mg input peaks at 1 relative unit after a single dose. Other amounts scale proportionally; overlapping doses add when accumulation is on. Different compounds use separate relative scales.
- Timing half-life used
- 1.4 hours
- Absorption half-life assumed
- 0.35 hours
- Reference amount for the relative scale
- 1 mg
- Absorption half-life is assumed to be one quarter of the slower timescale (0.35 h); it is not a measured absorption parameter.
- A single 1-unit input has a peak of 1 relative unit; scaling and repeated-dose addition are mathematical assumptions. This normalization is independent of the example dose.
- No matched human SC calibration was recovered.
- The week-long radioactivity tail is not parent-acadesine elimination.
- Vss is not central volume; a monoexponential absolute model cannot be inferred from it.
- Dixon et al. 1991 AICA-riboside safety and PK
Healthy men received 10–100 mg/kg IV and oral doses. Parent plasma concentrations declined biphasically: terminal 1.4 h, clearance 2.5 L/h/kg and Vss 1.6 L/kg. Oral availability was below 5%.
- Dixon et al. 1993 radiolabeled acadesine disposition
Four men received radiolabeled 25 mg/kg IV over 15 min. Intact parent was measurable for 2 h; the roughly week-long radioactivity tail included metabolites. ZMP was in red cells, not plasma.
aicar-relative-timing-2026-10 · version 1
Common questions
Is AICAR the same as acetyl-L-carnitine?
No. ALCAR and AICAR are different compounds.
Can it replace cardio training?
The mouse exercise-mimetic experiment does not establish that claim for people.
Sources Labels, studies and notes behind this guide
Catalog evidence: Human clinical trials. This describes the type of evidence, not a clinical review of every claim.
Summary and fact source checks: 2026-10-07. This records source checking, not medical review of the whole page.
Notes on the quick facts
- Main goal
- Human athletic benefits are not established by the mouse result.
- Common confusion
- Different names, different compounds.
- Exercise replacement
- The headline should not replace a training plan.
- 1. Narkar et al. — exercise mimetics
2008 mouse endurance experiment; not a controlled human athletic trial.
- 2. Dixon et al. 1991 AICA-riboside safety and PK
Healthy men received 10–100 mg/kg IV and oral doses. Parent plasma concentrations declined biphasically: terminal 1.4 h, clearance 2.5 L/h/kg and Vss 1.6 L/kg. Oral availability was below 5%.
- 3. Dixon et al. 1993 radiolabeled acadesine disposition
Four men received radiolabeled 25 mg/kg IV over 15 min. Intact parent was measurable for 2 h; the roughly week-long radioactivity tail included metabolites. ZMP was in red cells, not plasma.
- 4. Narkar et al. 2008 — AMPK and exercise-mimetic experiments
Mouse endurance and metabolic experiments; no demonstrated performance benefit in humans.
- 5. Newman et al. 2012 — RED-CABG
Human randomized IV acadesine cardiac-surgery trial; stopped for futility, neutral primary outcome.
Keep reading
Related compounds and examples
Related compounds
SLU-PP-332
SLU-PP-332 draws interest for fat loss and endurance—the “exercise mimetic” idea. Mouse studies showed exercise-like metabolic changes, but they do not show that it replaces training or produces the same results in people. Human online experiments remain uncontrolled reports.
5-Amino-1MQ
5-Amino-1MQ for fat loss: capsule-dose claims, animal findings and what remains unknown for people.
ACE-031
ACE-031 muscle-growth research: trial doses, myostatin claims and why bigger muscle measures are not enough.