HA and water: 1000 Times Its Weight, Really?

---

The Bottom Line: 

That famous claim about hyaluronic acid (HA) binding 1,000 times its weight in water? Sorry to be the burster of bubbles here.

Sure, HA is a water-binding superstar, but that specific "1,000×" number? That's mostly marketing magic from the cosmetics and materials marketing world, not actual science.

After a year of writing and publishing papers for this Molecular Mover series, something started nagging at me. I really want us to get this right in the fascia research, so I'm putting some skin in the game here.

Did I fall for it?

You bet. I kept citing that "1,000 times its weight" claim. It has impact. Paper after paper referenced it like gospel truth, so I cited them. How does this water-binding affinity appear in the research?

Here's an example trail (no shade intended, we are all in this together):

 A Stecco, et al: "HA is negatively charged and highly hydrophilic, being able to hold water molecules up to 1000-fold of its molecular weight [17, citing Anderegg]."

 Ulf Anderegg: Due to its unique coil structure in aqueous solutions, HA may trap about 1000-fold of its weight in water what makes HA so important for maintaining tissue structure and volume [17, 18, citing Cowman & Matsuoka 2005 (solid primary reference) and J. Necas]... you can find any number of portals into the fallacy. 

Full Disclosure

Following the common misconception, my recent papers refer to HA to binding up to 1000 times its weight in water, citing works by Leirova, Khunmanee, and Mero (full references in the list below).

The figure is indeed commonly cited in the fascia research. But wait. 1000 times its weight? How many elephants is that... Where was the actual study that measured this? The problem began to gnaw at me nightly.

I'd been referencing papers that mentioned the claim with legit references, sure. But when I tried to trace it back to the source, to the actual lab work that proved this specific proportion? Or a fixed verb phrase to qualify the conditions?

Nothing.

So I decided to dig in: Is this number real, or have we all been parroting a brilliant marketing line? Follow my investigation below if you want to get to the bottom of it (and if you've come this far, I promise it's 1000% worth it).

---

 

1. Introduction

The Hype vs. The Science

Walk into any beauty store and you'll see hyaluronic acid (HA) plastered across serums, creams, and masks, all promising to drench your skin in moisture like a molecular hosepipe. Wet dream, indeed.

Fascia fans are all rushing to read the HA research for its hydration legend is real is real (Yu et al., 2024; Carton & Malatesta, 2024; Chylińska & Maciejczyk, 2025; Iaconisi et al., 2023; Valachová et al., 2024; Papakonstantinou et al., 2012).

This molecule is genuinely impressive (mind-blowing, actually) at binding and retaining water, making it essential for tissue hydration, joint lubrication, and basically keeping our bodies from turning into human jerky.

But here's where things get interesting for people who can't get enough of the dynamics that make our bodies work.

That oft-repeated claim that "HA can hold/bind/trap 1,000 times its weight in water" is everywhere in cosmetic marketing and pervasive in the fascia research. It's the kind of number that sounds impressively specific, right?

Like someone in a lab coat measured it precisely under various conditions, and findings were triangulated at various altitudes worldwide over decades.

Except when you actually dig into the primary scientific literature, that exact figure is about as common as a unicorn at a dermatology conference (ie, not very).

What the Research Actually Shows

Instead of that neat, tidy "1,000×" claim, research consistently demonstrates something more nuanced (and more fascinating, see if you agree). First, we have to appreciate that HA's unique molecular structure is absolutely loaded with hydrophilic (water-loving) groups.

Think of it like a molecular velcro for water molecules, forming extensive hydrogen bonds that create highly hydrated gels and networks (Yu et al., 2024; Carton & Malatesta, 2024; Chylińska & Maciejczyk, 2025; Joshi et al., 2024; Tian et al., 2021; Valachová et al., 2024).

The catch? HA's water-binding capacity isn't a fixed number. It's influenced by a whole cocktail of factors: molecular weight, concentration, pH, temperature, and environmental conditions (Yu et al., 2024; Carton & Malatesta, 2024; Chylińska & Maciejczyk, 2025; Joshi et al., 2024; Tian et al., 2021; Valachová et al., 2024).

Some sources mention high theoretical or practical water retention values (like several hundred times its mass), but that precise "1,000×" figure? It's not universally standardized or cited in peer-reviewed biomedical literature (Tian et al., 2021; Valachová et al., 2024). As it turns out, this is because it's essentially BS. And it goes deeper than you think.

The Curse of Passionate Scholarship

It really is a disease to care this much. I went back to Lierova's paper (mentioned previously as one of my go-to citations for the HA-binding-affinity claim). I needed a starting place for where this figure comes from, and as I followed the crumbs, I noticed the changing verbiage:

"HA can retain water up to 1000 times its own weight [18, citing Khunmanee]."

This appears in their introduction section, presented as an established fact with a citation to Khunmanee. Importantly, Lierova et al's paper then continues to acknowledge the ambiguity and complexity by explaining:

• Molecular weight matters: The claim depends heavily on the molecular weight of the HA being measured

• Context-dependent: Large HA molecules at low concentrations (0.1%) can form honeycomb-like networks that DO achieve these ratios

• Variable results: Smaller HA molecules don't hold this much water

• But no mention of the elephant in the room (where the actual 1000x comes from)

When you go to the Khunmanee paper that they reference for the 1000-weight figure, here's what it says:

"Due to its strong hydrophilic character and its high molecular weight in biological tissues that can absorb a large amount of water, up to 1000 times its solid volume, HA exhibits important structural and functional roles in the body [citing Mero]."

Here they're doing the sneaky thing, burying the figure inside a more general claim and providing a reference to the general principle that is then used to justify the figure in one fell swoop. So if we follow the trail of crumbs, we get Khunmanee referencing Mero, who also uses the verb phrase "can absorb":

From Mero:

"HA is a highly hydrophilic polymer that can absorb a large amount of water and expand up to 1000 times its solid volume, forming a loose hydrated network [referencing Laurent & Fraser]."

Here, Mero et al are citing early research from Laurent & Fraser (1992), a pimary source from the early HA literature.

This is where we get the A-HA moment (pardon the pun).

The Laurent & Fraser paper cited by Mero refers to the expanded coil structure of the HA molecule expanded in solution, "...containing approximately 1000-fold more water than polymer" and cites Laurent's own chapter in a book published over 20 years previously:

The chapter referenced here (3) is: Laurent, T. C. (1970) Structure of hyaluronic acid. In Chemistryand Molecular Biology of the Intercellular Matrix (Balazs, E. A., ed) pp. 703-732, Academic, London

The book his chapter appears in, Chemistry and Molecular Biology of the Intercellular Matrix, is a comprehensive three-volume work edited by Endre A. Balazs (the originator of the name "Hyaluronic acid"), provides detailed information on the structure and function of connective tissue components.

I could not find a copy for less than $124. Sigh. If you can track this down, please turn to the Laurent chapter pages 703-732 and leave your thoughts in the comments of this post.

 

The coil can be regarded as a highly hydrated sphere containing approximately 1000-fold more water than polymer. The main part of the water is mechanically immobilized within the coil and not chemically bound to the polysaccharide.

What Laurent is actually saying

He is describing:

• The hydrodynamic domain of an expanded HA coil in solution

• The volume of solvent enclosed within the coil’s radius of gyration (~200 nm)

• Water that is mechanically immobilized / entrained

• Not chemically bound water

This refers to the physical volume occupied by the hydrated random coil (we'll explain what that means using fun analogies later), not to stoichiometric water binding per gram of HA (meaning the precise number of water molecules actually chemically bonded to each HA molecule, not the bulk water just filling the space).

Laurent is making a domain-volume argument, not a chemical binding argument. So you have to remember, Laurent never used the term "binds" (or absorbs, holds, traps, etc) in the earliest quote I could find backing up the modern claim. So let's...

Compare That to the Modern Claim

Hyaluronic acid binds up to 1000 times its weight in water.

That statement implies:

• A mass ratio

• 1 g HA chemically or physically binding 1000 g water

• Often interpreted as hydrogen bonding capacity

• Suggests a direct quantitative binding measurement

That is a very different claim to Laurent talking about "containing" rather than "binding".

Are These Equivalent?

Not even close. And now for the fun analogies (thanks, Claude!).

Think of it this way: Imagine a college football stadium. The steel and concrete structure weighs, say, 50,000 tons. But the volume inside that stadium contains millions of cubic feet of air—way more mass of air than the building itself.

Does that mean the stadium "binds" all that air? That the air is chemically stuck to the seats and beams?

Of course not. The air just fills the space. It's there because the structure creates a domain, a volume. Most of that air would blow away in a strong wind.

That's exactly what Laurent was describing with HA.

When a single hyaluronic acid molecule dissolves in water, it doesn't stay crumpled up like a ball of yarn. It expands into a loose, floppy coil... random tangle that can stretch across hundreds of nanometers. Picture a flaccid Slinky floating in a swimming pool, taking up way more space than the metal itself.

Laurent's "1000-fold more water than polymer" means:

The spatial domain occupied by that expanded coil contains a volume of water whose mass is roughly 1000× the mass of the HA chain.

To understand this, we need to visualize what happens when an HA molecule dissolves in water.

HA is a long polymer chain. Think of it like a necklace made of hundreds of sugar-based beads strung together. Each bead carries a negative electrical charge (from carboxyl groups). When you drop this chain into water, those negative charges do what opposite charges always do: they repel each other.

Instead of curling up into a tight ball, the molecule spreads out to get those charges as far apart as possible.

Figure 2: HMW HA Random Coil

The result is what chemists call a random coil: a loose, floppy tangle with no particular shape. Picture a ball of yarn that's been pulled apart but not straightened. It's not a neat spiral; it's a chaotic, expanded mess.

This random coil occupies a roughly spherical domain in space, a fuzzy cloud about 200 nanometers in radius (for high-molecular-weight HA). That's the "coil domain."

Now here's the key: water fills this entire domain. Not because it's chemically stuck to the HA molecule, but simply because there's space to fill. Laurent called this water "mechanically immobilized": it's trapped in the geometry of the coil, like air in a stadium or water caught in a tangled fishing net. The polymer creates the space; the water just occupies it.

That's the geometric principle Laurent identified:

"The main part of the water is mechanically immobilized within the coil and not chemically bound."

What Modern Science Shows

Here's where it gets interesting. When researchers actually measure how much water is truly bound to HA, they're using techniques like:

• Differential scanning calorimetry (DSC), which tracks how water freezes and melts

• Molecular dynamics (MD) simulations, which count water molecules near charged groups

• Nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR), which measures how tightly water is held

They find something very different.

Truly bound water (the water that's hydrogen-bonded to HA's carboxyl groups and won't evaporate easily) is only about 2 grams of water per gram of HA (Kučerík et al., 2011).

Not 1000 grams. Two grams.

Everything beyond that? It's bulk solvent, free agents, a whole lotta watta. It fills the coil domain, sure. Its movement might be slightly restricted (like air in a crowded stadium moves differently than air in an open field). But under centrifugation, dialysis, or evaporation, most of it behaves like regular water.

Recent work makes this crystal clear:

• One HA chain can create a "structured water domain" extending hundreds of nanometers outward, containing ~13 billion water molecules (Dedic et al., 2021). But the chain itself only displaces ~20,000 water molecules. That's a domain effect, not binding.

• Molecular Dynamics (MD, computer modeling) simulations show only a few water molecules are tightly associated with each charged site on the polymer (Susaki & Matsumoto, 2022).

• Thermal studies confirm: as you dry HA, free water evaporates easily until you hit about 2 g/g. Below that, evaporation gets much harder because now you're breaking actual HA–water bonds (Kučerík et al., 2011). Like blowing a pile of powdered sugar off your donut, only the stuff that is actually stuck to the donut is left.

   

Which of these possible shapes looks like it could trap the most water:

Figure 1. Possible Polyelectrolyte Condensation Modes for Hyaluronan (after Cowman et al, 2005). ^{The expanded, highly hydrated random coil is represented at far left under High MW as a loosely looping, uncondensed chain. This conformation reflects the typical behaviour of high–molecular weight hyaluronan in physiological solution, where electrostatic repulsion along the negatively charged backbone promotes an extended, high–excluded-volume structure. The “pearl necklace (random)” and “cylinder (random)” forms retain locally random statistics but show partial condensation. In contrast, helical rods, folded rods, hairpins, toroids, globules, fibers, and stacks represent progressively more ordered or collapsed states.}

The schematic illustrates that hyaluronan is not structurally fixed but exists along a continuum of conformations determined by molecular weight, ionic strength, pH, concentration, and mechanical constraint.

Because conformation governs hydration volume, charge distribution, osmotic pressure, diffusion properties, and receptor accessibility, shifts between expanded random coil and condensed states have functional consequences for extracellular matrix mechanics and signalling.

Thus, hyaluronan’s biological activity can't be understood solely in terms of molecular weight; it depends on its electrostatically regulated conformational state within a dynamic ionic environment.

Why the Confusion Happened

So What Does "1000× Its Weight" Really Mean?

When Laurent or modern researchers say the "mass of water within the coil domain ≈ 1000× the mass of polymer," they mean:

Geometrically: All the water sitting inside the polymer's excluded volume.

Functionally: Water whose movement is somewhat restricted (slower diffusion, altered structure), but which is not strongly bound and would mostly behave like bulk solvent if you tried to remove it.

It's the difference between:

• "This stadium contains 1000× more air than building material" (a volume statement)

• "This building binds 1000× its weight in air" (implies the air is stuck to it)

The first is true. The second is misleading.

---

The 1000× marketing claim likely evolved by:

1. Someone read Laurent's "1000-fold more water than polymer"

2. Dropped the "within the coil domain" context

3. Rephrased it as "binds 1000 times its weight"

4. Lost the distinction between excluded volume and chemical binding

This is a textbook case of:
Polymer physics → oversimplified → marketing gold

And to be fair, it sounds amazing. "Holds 1000 times its weight in water!" is a hell of a tagline. But it's not what the science actually shows in the test tube, let alone what's going on in your actual body.

The Bottom Line

These two claims are not the same thing:

What's actually true:

• HA does create a huge hydrated domain (the stadium effect)

• Only a tiny fraction of that water is tightly bound (~2 g/g)

• The rest is bulk water filling the space the polymer occupies

• This is still impressive! It's why HA is great for hydration

• But it's not the same as "binding 1000× its weight"

The BIGGEST Takeaway for Fascia Enthusiasts

The In Vitro vs. In Vivo Problem: Where Does All That Water Go?

So the claim isn't completely wrong... it's just been stripped of all the nuance that makes it scientifically accurate.

And here's where things get really interesting for those of us thinking about fascia and living tissue: the "1000×" claim describes what happens to isolated HA in a test tube, not even what happens in your body.

Let me explain what I mean.

What the Lab Studies Actually Show

When researchers study HA's water-holding capacity, they're typically working with purified HA dissolved in buffer solution (in vitro conditions). In this artificial setup, you can do experiments that reveal how different types of water interact with the polymer:

If you centrifuge the solution (spin it at high speed), most of the water in that "1000× domain" separates out. The HA pellets at the bottom, and the bulk water stays in the supernatant. Only the tightly hydrogen-bonded water (~2 g/g) stays with the polymer.

If you dialyze it (put the HA solution in a membrane bag and let it sit in pure water), water molecules freely diffuse across the membrane until concentrations equalize. The HA is too big to escape, but the "1000× water" isn't trapped; it behaves like regular solvent.

If you evaporate the water under controlled conditions (like in differential scanning calorimetry), you can watch different water populations leave at different temperatures: bulk water first, then mechanically immobilized water, and finally (at much higher temperatures) the actual HA-bound water.

These experiments reveal something great-big-huge (in the words of Joanne Avison). That is, in a test tube, there are three distinct categories of water around HA:

1. Truly bound water (~2 g/g): hydrogen-bonded to carboxyl groups

2. Mechanically immobilized water: trapped in the coil geometry but not chemically attached

3. Bulk solvent: free water that just happens to be in the same space

And here's the key point: most of that "1000×" water is category 3 (bulk solvent, free floating water molecules). It's not stuck to the HA molecule in any meaningful way. Powdered sugar piled up on your donut. It's just filling the volume that the expanded coil occupies. Whoa. Are you freaking out yet?

But Wait. What About Living Tissue?

Now here's where it gets confusing, especially if you work with fascia or study the extracellular matrix. You've probably been taught (correctly!) that there is no "bulk solvent" water in living tissue. Every water molecule in the body is influenced by something: proteins, glycosaminoglycans, cell membranes, ions, the architecture of the ECM itself.

So how do we reconcile this?

The answer is that the three-category model (bound/immobilized/bulk) only makes sense in vitro (outside the body). It's a useful framework for understanding isolated polymer behavior in a test tube. But in living tissue, those categories collapse into something completely different.

In your fascia, for example:

• Water isn't "bulk solvent" because it's constrained by the dense network of collagen fibers, proteoglycans, and other ECM components

• It's not freely diffusible the way it would be in a beaker

• The HA isn't floating in isolation, hello...it's cross-linked, entangled with other molecules, and part of a structured tissue architecture

• Cells are actively regulating water movement through aquaporins and ion gradients

• There's vasculature, lymphatics, and interstitial pressure all influencing water distribution

In other words, the "1000× water" phenomenon that Laurent described is fundamentally an in vitro observation about isolated polymer physics. It tells us something interesting about how HA behaves when you dissolve it in a test tube. Important for eyeballs and serum.

But it doesn't translate to how HA functions in living tissue, where the entire context is different, where we are constantly turning over hydration, trading charge via ions.

Why This Matters for the Marketing Claim

This is why the distinction between Laurent's original description and the modern marketing claim is so important. When a skincare product says "HA binds 1000× its weight in water," they're taking a laboratory observation about isolated polymer behavior and repurposing it as if it directly applies to skin hydration.

But skin hydration involves:

• Living cells (keratinocytes, fibroblasts)

• A structured dermis with collagen and elastin networks

• Active water transport mechanisms

• Barrier function of the stratum corneum

• Vasculature supplying water from below

• Natural moisturizing factors in the epidermis

• Sebum and lipid barriers

Topically applied HA doesn't just sit on your skin like it would in a test tube. It interacts with this entire complex, stochastic system. The "1000×" number (even if it were accurate for binding rather than volume) describes something that happens under in vitro conditions that don't exist in living tissue.

So when we say "the claim has been stripped of nuance," this is part of what we mean: it's a lab phenomenon being marketed as if it's a direct measure of biological function. The original Laurent description was careful to specify the conditions and mechanisms. The modern claim implies a universal property that applies everywhere, including your face, but that is far from the case.

For those of us interested in fascia and tissue mechanics, this distinction is crucial. The water in your fascial planes isn't "bulk solvent" that could be centrifuged away (!); it's an integral part of a living, dynamic tissue system.

HA contributes to that system's properties, absolutely. But not in the simple "sponge holding water" way the marketing suggests.

Let's be precise about the proportions here, because the numbers tell the real story:

• Truly bound water (hydrogen-bonded to HA's carboxyl groups): ~2 g/g

• Mechanically immobilized water (filling the excluded volume of the coil domain): ~998 g/g

Do the math: that means only ~0.2% of the "1000× water" is actually chemically bound to the HA molecule. The other 99.8% is geometrically trapped in the space the coil occupies, but it's not stuck there by molecular forces. In a test tube, you could centrifuge most of it away.

In living tissue, though, that water isn't "free" either; it's constrained by the entire extracellular matrix architecture.

This is where things get really interesting for fascia practitioners. That mechanically immobilized water (the 99.8%) might overlap with what Gerald Pollack calls "exclusion zone" (EZ) water: structured water layers that form near hydrophilic surfaces and behave differently from bulk water.

Pollack's work suggests water near biological interfaces (like the surfaces of proteins and polysaccharides) takes on a gel-like, ordered structure with unique properties.

Could the water filling HA's coil domain be this kind of structured water rather than simple bulk solvent?

That's a fascinating question, but it's a separate phenomenon that deserves its own deep dive. For now, what matters is recognizing that the "1000×" claim conflates chemical binding (~2 g/g) with geometric space-filling (~1000 g/g), and neither of these in vitro measurements directly translates to how HA functions in living, constrained tissue.

The polymer physics is real. The hydrated domain is real. The tissue-level effects are real. But the path from "1000× more water than polymer in the coil domain" to "your skin/fascia will hold 1000× more water" involves a lot of biological complexity that gets lost in the tagline.

References

Anderegg, Ulf, Jan C. Simon, and Marco Averbeck. 'More than Just a Filler – the Role of Hyaluronan for Skin Homeostasis'. Experimental Dermatology 23, no. 5 (2014): 295–303. https://doi.org/10.1111/exd.12370.

Bayer, I. (2020). Hyaluronic Acid and Controlled Release: A Review. Molecules, 25. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules25112649 

Borchers, Scott, and Michael Pirrung. The Fallacy of Hyaluronic Acid Binding a Thousand Times Its Weight In Water. 18 July 2023. https://doi.org/10.26434/chemrxiv-2023-r728q.

Carton, F., & Malatesta, M. (2024). Nanotechnological Research for Regenerative Medicine: The Role of Hyaluronic Acid. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 25. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms25073975 

Chylińska, N., & Maciejczyk, M. (2025). Hyaluronic Acid and Skin: Its Role in Aging and Wound-Healing Processes. Gels, 11. https://doi.org/10.3390/gels11040281 

Cowman, Mary K., and Shiro Matsuoka. 'Experimental Approaches to Hyaluronan Structure'. Conformations of Oligo- and Poly-Saccharides 340, no. 5 (2005): 791–809. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carres.2005.01.022.

Cowman, Mary K., Chiara Spagnoli, Dina Kudasheva, et al. ‘Extended, Relaxed, and Condensed Conformations of Hyaluronan Observed by Atomic Force Microscopy’. Biophysical Journal 88, no. 1 (2005): 590–602. https://doi.org/10.1529/biophysj.104.049361.

'Hyaluronan1 - Laurent - 1992 - The FASEB Journal - Wiley Online Library'. Accessed 13 February 2026. https://faseb.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1096/fasebj.6.7.1563592.

Iaconisi, G., Gallo, N., Caforio, L., Ricci, V., Fiermonte, G., Della Tommasa, S., Bernetti, A., Dolce, V., Farì, G., & Capobianco, L. (2023). Clinical and Biochemical Implications of Hyaluronic Acid in Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation: A Comprehensive Review. Journal of Personalized Medicine, 13. https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm13121647 

Joshi, R., Sutariya, S., & Salunke, P. (2024). Effect of Different Molecular Weight Hyaluronic Acids on Skim Milk Functional Properties. Foods, 13. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods13050690 

Joshi, R., Sutariya, S., & Salunke, P. (2025). Impact of Hyaluronic Acid with different molecular weights on the functional properties of Processed Cheese Products with Varying Moisture Levels. Applied Food Research. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.afres.2025.100994 

Khunmanee, Sureerat, Younghyen Jeong, and Hansoo Park. 'Crosslinking Method of Hyaluronic-Based Hydrogel for Biomedical Applications'. Journal of Tissue Engineering 8 (January 2017): 2041731417726464. https://doi.org/10.1177/2041731417726464.

Laurent, T. C. (1970) Structure of hyaluronic acid. In Chemistryand Molecular Biology of the Intercellular Matrix (Balazs, E. A., ed) pp. 703-732, Academic London.

Lee, H., Lee, I., Choi, Y., Lee, Y., & Lee, K. (2025). Branched Hyaluronic Acid for Reduced Viscosity and Enhanced Moisturization. Materials, 18. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma18214882 

Lee, H., Lee, K., Kim, M., Kwon, Y., Yun, J., Choi, J., & Youn, H. (2025). Synergistic moisturizing effect of a cellulose nanofibril/hyaluronic acid/poly-γ-glutamic acid blend system. Cellulose, 32, 4781 - 4796. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10570-025-06535-6 

Li, L., Zhao, B., Feng, Z., Wang, D., Yuan, T., Song, G., Kim, S., & Gong, J. (2024). Role and influence mechanism of different concentration of hyaluronic acid on physicochemical and organoleptic properties of yogurt.. Journal of dairy science. https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2024-25687 

Lierova, Anna, Jitka Kasparova, Alzbeta Filipova, et al. 'Hyaluronic Acid: Known for Almost a Century, but Still in Vogue'. Pharmaceutics 14, no. 4 (2022): 838. https://doi.org/10.3390/pharmaceutics14040838.

Luo, Z., Wang, Y., Li, J., Wang, J., Yu, Y., & Zhao, Y. (2023). Tailoring Hyaluronic Acid Hydrogels for Biomedical Applications. Advanced Functional Materials, 33. https://doi.org/10.1002/adfm.202306554 

Majewski, G., Rodan, K., Fields, K., & Falla, T. (2018). Characterization of bound water in skin hydrators prepared with and without a 3D3P interpenetrating polymer network. Skin Research and Technology, 25, 150 - 157. https://doi.org/10.1111/srt.12624 

Papakonstantinou, E., Roth, M., & Karakiulakis, G. (2012). Hyaluronic acid: A key molecule in skin aging. Dermato-endocrinology, 4, 253 - 258. https://doi.org/10.4161/derm.21923 

Pröhl, A., Batinic, M., Alkildani, S., Hahn, M., Radenković, M., Najman, S., Jung, O., & Barbeck, M. (2021). In Vivo Analysis of the Biocompatibility and Bone Healing Capacity of a Novel Bone Grafting Material Combined with Hyaluronic Acid. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 22. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms22094818 

Shetty, S., Mehta, R., & Choudhury, R. (2025). Simultaneous determination of sodium hyaluronate and gluconolactone in cosmetic products. International Journal of Cosmetic Science, 47, 1004 - 996. https://doi.org/10.1111/ics.13091 

Shi, C., Lv, X., Peng, J., Zhu, J., Tang, F., & Hu, L. (2024). Methylated Biochemical Fulvic Acid-Derived Hydrogels with Improved Swelling Behavior and Water Retention Capacity. Materials, 17. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma17061448 

Singh, A., Li, P., Beachley, V., McDonnell, P., & Elisseeff, J. (2015). A hyaluronic acid-binding contact lens with enhanced water retention.. Contact lens & anterior eye : the journal of the British Contact Lens Association, 38 2, 79-84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clae.2014.09.002 

Stecco, Antonio, Mary Cowman, Nina Pirri, Preeti Raghavan, and Carmelo Pirri. 'Densification: Hyaluronan Aggregation in Different Human Organs'. Bioengineering 9, no. 4 (2022): 159. https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering9040159.

Sutariya, S., & Salunke, P. (2023). Effect of Hyaluronic Acid and Kappa-Carrageenan on Milk Properties: Rheology, Protein Stability, Foaming, Water-Holding, and Emulsification Properties. Foods, 12. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods12050913 

Takigami, S., Takigami, M., & Phillips, G. (1993). Hydration characteristics of the cross-linked hyaluronan derivative hylan. Carbohydrate Polymers, 22, 153-160. https://doi.org/10.1016/0144-8617(93)90136-r 

Tian, W., Dong, Q., Lin, B., Yang, X., Zhang, H., Lian, L., Nie, L., Guo, X., Huang, S., & Zang, H. (2021). Reveal the Relationship Between Hyaluronic Acid and Water Using Aquaphotomics. Asian Journal of Complementary and Alternative Medicine. https://doi.org/10.53043/2347-3894.acam90006 

Valachová, K., Hassan, M., & Šoltés, L. (2024). Hyaluronan: Sources, Structure, Features and Applications. Molecules, 29. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules29030739 

Vasudevan, S., Chattaraj, S., Enrico, A., & Pasqualini, F. (2025). Molecular Dynamics Simulation of Structural Assembly and Hydration of Hyaluronic Acid in Salt Aqueous Buffer. Langmuir, 41, 3852 - 3864. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.langmuir.4c03966 

Wang, S., Neo, B., & Betts, R. (2021). Glycosaminoglycans: Sweet as Sugar Targets for Topical Skin Anti-Aging. Clinical, Cosmetic and Investigational Dermatology, 14, 1227 - 1246. https://doi.org/10.2147/ccid.s328671 

Wu, G., Kam, J., & Bloom, J. (2023). Hyaluronic Acid Basics and Rheology.. Clinics in plastic surgery, 50 3, 391-398. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cps.2022.12.004 

Xi, Y. (2025). Natural Moisturizing Materials and their Nanoparticles. Highlights in Science, Engineering and Technology. https://doi.org/10.54097/t8s7yp96 

Yu, M., Guo, X., Zhang, K., Kang, X., Zhang, S., & Qian, L. (2024). Hyaluronic Acid Unveiled: Exploring the Nanomechanics and Water Retention Properties at the Single-Molecule Level.. Langmuir : the ACS journal of surfaces and colloids. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.langmuir.3c02961 

Zając, M., Zhou, L., Mika, M., Yang, Z., Wang, J., Tao, Y., & Zhang, W. (2025). Hyaluronic Acid Interactions with Pork Myofibrillar Proteins in Emulsion Gel-Type Systems. Molecules, 30. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules30102230 

Zeng, D., Iurzhenko, M., & Demchenko, V. (2025). Effect of Hyaluronic Acid Concentration on Hydration Behavior in PVA/HA Hydrogels using Molecular Dynamics Simulation. 2025 IEEE 15th International Conference Nanomaterials: Applications & Properties (NAP), NRA12-1-NRA12-8. https://doi.org/10.1109/nap68437.2025.11216211