Join Maverick Weekly
Evidence-based advice on healthy skin, aesthetic treatments and healthy ageing delivered straight to your inbox.
NAD+ has become one of the biggest talking points in longevity and wellness.
Mel
NAD+ has become one of the biggest talking points in longevity and wellness.
Supplements, injections and intravenous infusions are now promoted with claims ranging from improved energy and mental clarity to slower ageing.
But NAD+ is also a genuine and important part of human biology.
So where does established science end — and where does the marketing begin?
NAD+ stands for nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide.
It is a molecule found throughout our cells and is involved in fundamental biological processes, including cellular energy metabolism and the activity of enzymes involved in cellular maintenance and repair.
Without NAD+, our cells could not function normally.
That makes NAD+ biologically important.
But an important distinction follows:
Something being essential to human biology does not automatically mean that taking more of it as a supplement will improve health or slow ageing.
Changes in NAD+ metabolism have been observed with ageing and have become an important area of ageing research.
Much of the enthusiasm around increasing NAD+ originated from laboratory and animal studies, where altering NAD+ metabolism has produced some interesting results.
Human biology, however, is considerably more complicated.
Evidence about how NAD+ changes with age across different human tissues is still developing, and findings from animal studies cannot simply be assumed to produce the same clinical effects in people.
Rather than taking NAD+ itself, much research has focused on compounds the body can use in NAD+ metabolism, often referred to as NAD+ precursors.
Human studies of compounds such as nicotinamide riboside (NR) and nicotinamide mononucleotide (NMN) have shown that oral supplementation can alter NAD+-related biomarkers.
That tells us these compounds can have a measurable biological effect.
What is much less certain is whether increasing those biomarkers translates into meaningful improvements in how long or how healthily people live.
Human studies examining outcomes such as metabolic health, physical function and other measures relevant to healthy ageing have produced mixed results.
At present, raising an NAD+-related biomarker should not be confused with proving an anti-ageing or longevity benefit.
This is another area where marketing has moved considerably faster than the clinical evidence.
NAD+ injections and intravenous infusions are promoted by some wellness providers for energy, brain function, recovery and longevity.
However, evidence demonstrating meaningful anti-ageing or wellness benefits from injected or intravenous NAD+ itself is currently very limited.
This is an important example of why biological plausibility and clinical evidence are not the same thing.
Nuchido TIME+ is an oral supplement designed to support the body’s NAD+ metabolism rather than an injectable NAD+ treatment.
I became interested in NAD+ because the underlying biology is fascinating, and it remains an active area of ageing research.
I also think it is important to be transparent about the limitations of the evidence.
Research into NAD+-supporting supplementation is developing, but we do not currently have good evidence that taking an NAD+-support supplement will reverse ageing or make someone live longer.
For people who are interested in this area of emerging longevity science and choose to use a supplement, Nuchido TIME+ remains an option available through Maverick.
It should be viewed as a supplement rather than a substitute for the things with much stronger evidence for healthy ageing — physical activity, maintaining strength and muscle, good nutrition, sleep, not smoking and managing established cardiovascular and metabolic risk factors.
Longevity research is moving quickly, and NAD+ biology is an interesting part of that research.
But the same rule applies here as it does to aesthetic treatments:
A plausible biological mechanism is not the same as a proven clinical benefit.
As better human evidence becomes available, recommendations should change with it.
That is a much more useful approach than assuming that every intervention described as “cellular” or “anti-ageing” must work.
Nuchido TIME+ remains available through the existing purchase link.
Please retain the existing purchase link and: