StemCellAtlas

NAD IV vs oral supplements

An NAD infusion and an oral NAD precursor are not the same intervention. A 2026 systematic review found no eligible outcome trials of intravenous or intramuscular NAD itself for anti-aging or wellness within its search. Oral NMN and NR had human studies, but clinical benefits were mixed despite NAD-related biochemical changes.

NAD systematic review, 2026

What was covered in the review?

Swipe or scroll sideways to compare all columns.

What was covered in the review?
InterventionWhat the review found
Oral NR / NMNHuman studies with biochemical target engagement; heterogeneous clinical outcomes
IV / IM NAD itselfNo eligible anti-aging/wellness outcome trials in this review
IV NMNOne nonrandomised study; mainly short-term safety and biomarkers
IV NAD pharmacokineticsA pilot discussed as context, not eligible clinical-outcome evidence
NAD systematic review, 2026

“It reaches the bloodstream” is not the final outcome

Pharmacokinetics describes what happens to a compound after administration. It does not, by itself, establish less fatigue, better function or longer life. The review separated a pharmacokinetic pilot from studies meeting its clinical-outcome criteria for this reason.

NAD systematic review, 2026

What “no eligible trials” means here

The authors searched studies from January 2010 through October 2025. Their finding is bounded by those dates and inclusion criteria; it is not a claim that no NAD infusion research exists anywhere. It also cannot establish that a particular commercial infusion is effective or appropriate.

NAD systematic review, 2026
Plain capsules beside an unlabelled amber bottle
Editorial illustration of an oral supplement format.

Use the table and its sources

Download table CSV · Download table JSON · Dataset notes

Related reading

Source-linked editorial synthesis, prepared with AI assistance. This is not a clinician review or a personalised treatment recommendation. Corrections: editorial standards.