InstalabInstalabLoading...
Instalab ResearchNAD+ (nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide) is a molecule your cells need for three critical jobs: producing energy, repairing damaged DNA, and keeping cells alive under stress. It's not a vitamin or a supplement ingredient your body borrows from outside. It's something every cell in your body already makes and uses constantly.
The reason it's become a hot topic is simple: NAD+ levels drop as you age. That decline tracks closely with many hallmarks of aging and has been linked to problems ranging from neurodegeneration to metabolic disease. The logic behind NAD+ therapies is straightforward: if falling levels contribute to aging and disease, raising them back up might help. In theory, that makes sense. The question is whether the specific way clinics are raising it (IV drips) is supported by the evidence.
In animals, the answer is a pretty clear yes. Raising NAD+ levels with precursor molecules (the building blocks your body uses to make NAD+, like NR and NMN) has improved outcomes across a wide range of conditions in rodent studies:
In some animal models, NAD+ boosting has even extended lifespan by roughly 5 to 30 percent and delayed frailty. Long-term NMN treatment in mice reduced frailty and improved metabolic health without increasing cancer risk.
These results are genuinely encouraging. But it's important to be honest about what they are: animal data. Mice are not people, and the doses, delivery methods, and conditions in these studies often don't translate directly to what happens in a wellness clinic.
Human research on NAD+ boosting exists, but it's limited and mostly involves oral supplements rather than injections.
The most relevant safety data comes from a randomized, double-blind trial testing oral NR (nicotinamide riboside) at 3,000 mg per day for four weeks in people with Parkinson's disease. The supplement was well tolerated with no moderate or severe adverse events, and it produced roughly a fivefold increase in blood NAD+ metabolites. Chronic NR supplementation has also been shown to be well tolerated in healthy middle-aged and older adults, effectively raising NAD+ levels.
Beyond safety, early human findings suggest small improvements in blood pressure, arterial stiffness, and lipid levels. In one specific clinical setting, NAD+ augmentation showed potential for protecting against acute kidney injury in high-risk hospitalized patients.
But no human trial has shown that NAD+ boosting extends lifespan or definitively increases long-term healthspan. The honest assessment from multiple research reviews is that while NAD+ precursors look promising, we still don't know the optimal dose, the best delivery route (oral versus injectable), or the long-term safety profile.
This is the key question for anyone considering an expensive IV session, and the research gives a surprisingly clear answer: we don't know, and there's no evidence that injections are superior.
The animal studies that produced impressive results used intraperitoneal injections (into the abdominal cavity) or specialized nanoparticle delivery systems, not the standard IV formulations used in wellness clinics. These are fundamentally different delivery methods. You can't assume results from a nanoparticle-delivered NAD+ treatment in mice will apply to an IV drip in a human.
Meanwhile, oral precursors like NR and NMN have been shown in human trials to safely and reliably raise NAD+ levels in blood and tissues. The research simply hasn't demonstrated any advantage of IV delivery over oral supplementation for general wellness or anti-aging purposes.
Direct IV NAD+ pharmacokinetics (how the molecule moves through your body, how quickly it's used, how much actually reaches your cells) and long-term safety in healthy humans are largely unknown. Researchers have explicitly called for more rigorous trials before broad clinical use.
If longevity is your goal, the research paints a nuanced picture. NAD+ is a legitimate and promising area of aging biology. The animal data supporting its role in healthspan and lifespan extension is strong. But the leap from "promising biological target" to "go get an IV drip" is enormous.
No human trial has demonstrated that any form of NAD+ supplementation, oral or injected, extends human lifespan. The functional improvements seen so far in people are modest: small cardiovascular benefits, metabolic tweaks. These are worth paying attention to, but they're not the dramatic anti-aging effects that marketing materials often imply.
Multiple expert reviews, including proceedings from a National Institute on Aging workshop, have concluded that NAD+ boosters show potential but require further research before wider use and that safety must be more thoroughly established.
If you're intrigued by NAD+ research, here's what the evidence actually supports right now.
The interventions with the strongest evidence for longevity and healthspan are still the familiar ones: regular exercise, a balanced diet, adequate sleep, maintaining healthy blood pressure and weight, and not smoking. These have far more robust support than any NAD+ intervention.
If you want to explore NAD+ boosting, the current evidence points toward well-studied oral precursors (NR or NMN) at doses used in clinical trials, taken under medical supervision. These have demonstrated safety data, reliably raise NAD+ levels, and cost a fraction of what IV sessions run.
NAD+ injections should be viewed as experimental for anti-aging or general wellness until robust human outcome data emerge. The fact that a clinic offers them doesn't mean the science supports them for that use. Before spending hundreds per session, it's worth having an honest conversation with your doctor about what the research does and doesn't show, and whether your money might be better spent on approaches with stronger evidence behind them.