Adamax: What It Is, Evidence and Dosage
Adamax, marketed as a stronger Semax analogue: vendors cannot agree on its chemical structure, no published research exists, and dosing figures are unverified.
The short version
Adamax is sold online as a longer-acting, stronger version of the nootropic peptide Semax. Two of its sellers describe two different molecules under the same name. "Adamax" has no PubChem entry or verifiable CAS number, and I found no published research on it in any language.
- Adamax is marketed as Semax with an added adamantane group, but sellers disagree on its chemical structure.
- No PubChem entry or verified CAS registry number exists for "Adamax".
- I found no published research on Adamax: no human, animal or lab studies.
- Its parent, Semax, has a thin, mostly Russian-language clinical literature; Adamax has none of its own.
Adamax at a glance
- What it is
- A marketed name for a Semax-derived peptide; its exact chemical identity is not consistently documented across suppliers
- Main use
- Sold as a nootropic, marketed as a longer-acting, more potent successor to Semax, aimed at the same cognitive-enhancement buyers.
- Also called
- Adamax Peptide
- Evidence
- No meaningful evidence
- US status
- Unapproved drug
- Australia
- Not on the ARTG
- Half-life
- Not established in humans
- Dose
- No consistent protocol in circulation Dosing page
Dosing: why no dose can be stated.
Adamax is sold as a stronger, longer-lasting Semax. The first problem is identity, not evidence: two vendors I checked describe two different molecules under the same name.
No published studies of adequate quality to draw on. A PubMed search for 'Adamax' returns no results in any language. It has no PubChem entry and no CAS registry number I could verify. Two vendor sources describe two structurally different molecules under the same name, so there is no agreed identity to study, let alone a study.
What is Adamax, chemically?
Marketing usually describes Adamax as Semax’s core sequence with an added adamantane group. The group is meant to make it last longer in the blood and cross into the brain more easily. One nootropic-vendor site gives that story with a figure: an adamantane-modified Semax analogue, molecular weight 984.1 g/mol.
A chemical-manufacturing vendor selling the substance itself lists something else. Its sequence is Ac-Met-Glu-His-Phe-Pro-Gly-Pro-Ala-Gly-OH, formula C44H61N11O13S. That is the Semax backbone plus two extra amino acids (alanine and glycine), with no adamantane group at all.
These are two different molecules. The listed formula of the second could not contain an adamantane cage. Neither PubChem nor any CAS registry I could check lists “Adamax” with a resolved structure, so there is no independent way to tell which description, if either, matches a given vial.
Adamax benefits: what the research shows
The sellers’ rationale makes sense on paper: an adamantane group should make Semax more stable in the blood and better at reaching the brain. Nothing published has tested it. A PubMed search for “Adamax” returns no results, in any language.
Its parent, Semax, has a body of mostly Russian-language clinical research. Adamax has no data of its own showing that it behaves like Semax, reaches the brain, or does anything in a living animal.
Adamax dosage
No dose can be responsibly stated. Only one vendor source I checked gives dosing figures, and the two sources disagree on which molecule is being dosed. Full explanation: Adamax dosage.
Adamax side effects
I found no side-effect data from a trial, a published case report or a regulator’s safety review. That is not a safety finding. It means nothing has been studied or reported for a substance whose sellers can’t agree on what it is.
Is Adamax legal?
US legal status - Unapproved drug
Not approved by the FDA for any use. Marketing it for human use in the US is unlawful, regardless of how it is labelled.
AU legal status - Not on the ARTG
Not on the Australian Register of Therapeutic Goods, so the TGA has not assessed it for safety, quality or effectiveness. Goods that are not on the ARTG cannot lawfully be supplied or advertised in Australia except through a specific pathway - the Special Access Scheme, an Authorised Prescriber, a clinical trial, or personal importation.
Regulators reach their own conclusions on their own timelines. Where these two disagree, the difference is the point - not an error.
- Not FDA-approved for anything, and not listed in DailyMed.
- Not in PubChem, with no CAS registry number I could verify. That is unusual even for unapproved research peptides, most of which at least have an agreed chemical identity.
- Sold only through research-chemical and nootropic vendors, with no regulator reviewing it.
Related reading
How Adamax compares
Brain, mood and sleep. Doses for unapproved compounds are common practice, not trial-established. All brain, mood and sleep peptides →
| Compound | Main use | Evidence | Usual dose | US status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Semax | Sold as a nootropic for focus, memory and mood. Used clinically within Russian medicine. | Limited human data | 100-600 mcg, once daily for a fixed telehealth-prescribed protocol, up to twice daily in a wider clinic-published range | Research use only |
| Selank | Sold as a nootropic for focus, memory and mood. Used clinically within Russian medicine. | Limited human data | 250-900 mcg, 1-3 times daily, spaced through waking hours; the published Russian GAD clinical-trial protocol used a fixed 3 times daily schedule (900 mcg per dose, 2.7 mg/day total) for a 14-day course | Research use only |
| Adamax | Sold as a nootropic, marketed as a longer-acting, more potent successor to Semax, aimed at the same cognitive-enhancement buyers. | No meaningful evidence | No consistent protocol | Unapproved drug |
| Cerebrolysin | A prescription drug in Russia, China, several Eastern European and other markets for acute ischaemic stroke, traumatic brain injury and vascular dementia. Also sold outside those markets, including to US buyers, as an unregulated "research" or grey-market vial for self-injection, which is not how it is used where it is actually approved. | Limited human data | No consistent protocol | Unapproved drug |
| PE-22-28 | Studied only in mice as a candidate fast-acting antidepressant. Never tested in a single published human trial, and sold to consumers as an unregulated research-chemical mood/depression product. | Animal / lab only | No consistent protocol | Unapproved drug |
| Dihexa | Sold online as a research chemical for cognition and memory. FDA has not identified any human exposure data on drug products containing dihexa acetate by any route. | Animal / lab only | 10-100 mg, 1 to 3 times a week, not daily; sources describe starting around 10-20 mg and titrating up to 50-100 mg as tolerated | Research use only |
| DSIP | Sold for sleep. Named in the 1970s after a proposed role in promoting delta-wave sleep. | Limited human data | 100-500 mcg, once nightly, 30-60 minutes before intended sleep onset; anywhere from 5-14 nights a month to nightly use depending on the protocol | Research use only |
Where to buy Adamax for research
Each vendor is checked against my vendor checklist.
1.Next Level PharmFeatured
10 mg vial
- No FDA warning letter found
- Names its testing lab
- Batch COAs published
- Takes card payment
2.BioEdge Research Labs
10 mg vial
- No FDA warning letter found
- Names its testing lab
- Batch COAs published
Common questions
What is Adamax?
A name research-chemical and nootropic vendors use for a peptide sold as a modified, longer-acting Semax. Two sellers I checked describe two incompatible molecules under that name. So I treat its identity as unverified rather than repeating either claim as fact.
What is the usual Adamax dose?
No dose can be responsibly stated. Only one vendor source I checked gives dosing figures, nothing independent backs them, and the two sources don't agree on what molecule is being dosed. The dosing page explains more.
What are the side effects of Adamax?
None are documented in any source I could verify. With no published research, there are no trial or case-report safety data. That is missing information, not evidence of safety.