Scientific Disclaimer

NADFaq is a synthesis of peer-reviewed NAD+ research. The limits of that synthesis are worth stating plainly.

Synthesis, not primary research

Every empirical claim on this site is traceable to peer-reviewed primary literature. NADFaq does not run trials, analyze raw data, or make novel empirical claims. The value is in organizing and translating existing research — not in generating it.

Mechanism is not outcome

NAD+ biology is mechanistically rich. That does not mean every mechanism has been demonstrated to produce a measurable human benefit. When a mechanism is described (for example, “NAD+ fuels PARP-mediated DNA repair”), that is separate from a claim that NAD+ supplementation prevents cancer in humans. The two are kept distinct.

Rodent data is not human data

A large fraction of NAD+ longevity research is conducted in mice. Many of those results have not replicated in humans. Preclinical-only findings are flagged explicitly. Do not assume a mouse result translates.

Correlation is not causation

Epidemiological studies of NAD+ levels and health outcomes describe associations, not causal relationships. Observational data is labeled as such every time it is cited.

Individual variation

Published pharmacokinetic data reports population averages. Individual response to any precursor varies considerably — by genotype, age, baseline status, diet, and co-medication. The literature reports central tendency, not your personal response.

Science is not final

NAD+ research is actively developing. Consensus shifts. New papers overturn old ones. Pages here are updated on a rolling basis, but at any moment some claim on the site may be out of date relative to the latest research. Treat every reference as a snapshot.

This site is not medical advice

See the medical disclaimer for details. In short: reference material is for education, not treatment.