The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
But even if you exercise and have the healthiest diet, you're still going to have lower NAD levels by the time, you know, you're in the latter half of your life. So that's why these supplements are thought to help because they'll boost up those older levels of NAD to where they were when you were young.
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
So it could be that NAD levels go down because their consumption goes up right so there's there's as we age there's more DNA damage there's more consumption the certuins need more of it and it goes up and then of course the question would become is the current level of NAD that we have rate limiting to that reaction if not then all the extra NAD in the world should have no benefit because you're just adding more substrate to a reaction where it's not needed.