TB-500 + GHK-Cu for a grumpy hamstring tendon, worth the combo or am I overthinking

Posted by grinder265 in Healing & Recovery - 1 points, 4 comments.

Posted this in recovery since its where it belongs. Got a proximal hamstring tendinopathy thats been hanging around for like 4 months, not getting worse but not really getting better either. Doing all the boring stuff (isometrics, heavy slow eccentrics, cutting back on volume) but im impatient and the tendon still nags me on hills.

Been running TB-500 2x/week at the loading range for a few weeks now and it SEEMS like the tissue feels a bit less angry after longer runs, could be placebo but the flexibility thing people mention is real for me, hamstring just feels less guarded. Not a miracle, just less stiffness.

Want to layer in GHK-Cu since i keep reading its supposed to help with collagen remodeling and tendon stuff. Question is timing. Do people run it same days as the TB-500 or offset it, and does the subq vs intralesional debate matter for a deep tendon like this. Also how long do people usually run GHK-Cu on a tendon issue before they call it, 4 weeks, 8 weeks?

Ngl im not expecting a cure, just trying to give the rehab a nudge while i keep doing the actual work.

Comments

• coastalnina: Interesting combo you're looking at, fwiw i've only used ghk-cu topically in a serum so i can't speak to the timing questions properly. But for me the boring rehab stuff you mentioned is what actually moves the needle on tendons, the peptides might just be helping you stick with it because things feel less stiff 🧬 have you tried biasing the eccentrics more toward long length positions? That seemed to help my achilles way more than the mid-range stuff. For the subq vs local question i'd want to
• freya_f: Honestly the long-length eccentrics question is a good one, and yeah, that's where I've landed too after a lot of trial and error (not just for me, but for the runners I've worked with over the years). For a proximal hamstring I think the bridge or RDL variation with a slow tempo makes a real difference, not the seated machine stuff people default to. On the systemic delivery question, I haven't seen convincing human data either. That part of the conversation bugs me a little, ngl, because so m
• grinder265: The bridge position stuff is interesting, ive been doing single leg RDLs but mostly standing. The seated hip extension that PT had me doing never really hit it right. On the systemic thing though, that was basically my hesitation too. Everyone throws around the wound healing studies but thats not the same as deep tendon tissue in a live person. Maybe the topical/subq route still works for tendons close enough to the surface but proximal hamstring is pretty deep, intralesional obviously requires
• grinder265: Yeah ngl the "boring stuff" doing the heavy lifting is probably true, the peptides just make me tolerate the loading sessions better bc the tendon doesnt feel as guarded the next day. I have been mostly doing mid range nordics though, not really emphasizing the long length positions. How did you actually bias yours, like fully extended knee variations or something else? And yeah the systemic delivery question is fair, i havent seen anything convincing on whether subq ghk-cu even reaches a deep

Community discussion - research and educational context only. Not medical advice.