We use cookies to help improve your experience of our website and cookies have already been set. To find out more or for advice on removing these cookies, read our Privacy and Cookies Policy.

By closing this message or continuing to use our website, you consent to our use of cookies in accordance with our Cookies Policy.

Glucosamine sulphate vs Glucosamine hydrochloride

Friday January 31, 2014 at 8:20am
Glucosamine sulphate vs Glucosamine hydrochloride

Glucosamine supplements are used for joint support and to treat ailments such as arthritis - their use is well documented.

There are two types of glucosamine available - sulphate and hydrochloride. Is one better than the other?

The delivery vehicle

Sulphate and hydrocholride are just the delivery vehicle in which we absorb it - the glucosamine element is the active ingredient we are looking for.


  • Glucosamine sulphate needs to be stabilised with sodium chloride (salt) or potassium chloride
  • Can contain up to 30% salt if stabalised with sodium chloride
  • Glucosamine 2KCL does not contain salt
  • Sourced from shellfish
  • Typically contains around 75% glucosamine


  • A more concentrated form of glucosamine than sulphate
  • Far lower in salt than sulphate
  • More naturally stable than sulphate 
  • Doesn't require added salt
  • Doesn't require preservatives
  • Sourced from vegetables
  • Typically contains around 83% glucosamine

Is one better than the other?

Glucosamine sulphate is the 'original' form and most research has been done on this because historically it has been more available. Glucosamine hydrocholride is relatively new but trials have shown it to be equally effective. As long as the glucosamine is bioavaliable the body doesn't care how it gets it.


There aren't any comments for this post yet. Why not be the first to comment?
* Denotes Required Field

Leave a Comment

Human Validation Check  

What is 13 - 11?