From yeast in 1906 to clinics in Los Angeles. What it is, what has been tested in people and what we still do not know.
In 1906, two British scientists, Arthur Harden and William John Young, were trying to understand something that seemed simple: why yeast ferments sugar. They found that, to do it, the yeast needed a small substance hidden inside it, which they called 'cozymase'. That discovery helped Harden win the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1929, shared with Hans von Euler-Chelpin, who helped work out its structure.
That substance was NAD⁺. A hundred and twenty years later, the same molecule that made yeast ferment features in longevity podcasts, the routines of elite athletes and the menus of clinics in Los Angeles, London and Dubai.
How much of what is said about it is true? Let us take it step by step.
NAD⁺ (nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide) is present in every cell of your body. It is not a drug, nor strictly speaking a vitamin: it is a coenzyme, a part that cells need in order to work.
Its main job is to help produce energy inside the mitochondria, the cell's 'power station'. NAD⁺ and NADH are two faces of the same molecule: one picks up electrons and the other hands them over, back and forth, constantly, while the cell turns what you eat into energy.
It also takes part in DNA repair and in the activity of sirtuins, proteins linked to the way a cell responds to stress.
Because several studies have found that NAD⁺ levels fall with age. In human tissue, levels in older people were clearly lower than in young adults (Massudi et al., 2012). In a study of 16 volunteers aged 26 to 78, age explained most of the differences in blood NAD⁺ (Clement et al., 2019).
The idea is appealing: if we have less of it as the years go by, perhaps topping it up helps. That is why biohackers, athletes and people interested in ageing well talk about it so much.
But a 2022 review pointed out that this decline has only been confirmed in a limited number of human studies, and that not all tissues behave the same way (Peluso et al., 2022). It is a reasonable hypothesis, not a certainty.
'NAD⁺ makes you younger.'
Not proven. The most striking results on longevity come from animal studies, and what works in a mouse does not always work in a person.
'You feel the energy straight away.'
There are no studies that show this. Some people describe feeling different, but that is not scientific evidence, and every body responds differently.
'Taking it as tablets is the same as taking it by drip.'
Not exactly. By mouth, precursors are usually used: substances the body turns into NAD⁺. In a trial with healthy middle-aged and older adults, one of them, nicotinamide riboside, was well tolerated and raised NAD⁺ in the blood (Martens et al., 2018). Another, NMN, improved muscle insulin sensitivity in a small group of women with prediabetes (Yoshino et al., 2021), a result other researchers ask to be read with caution. The intravenous route has been studied far less.
'By vein, it all goes straight to the cells.'
Not so fast. In the most cited study of intravenous NAD⁺, 8 healthy men received 750 mg in a 6-hour infusion (Grant et al., 2019). During the first part, blood NAD⁺ barely changed, because the body removes and processes it very quickly. Only later did levels rise markedly. There were no adverse effects with the slow infusion. It is a useful study, but it does not measure health outcomes: it does not tell us whether those men had more energy or aged better.
'It is for everyone.'
No. There are situations in which it is not advisable, or in which it has to be weighed with particular care, such as pregnancy and breastfeeding or certain illnesses and treatments.
If, after the assessment, we decide it makes sense for you, this is how the session goes:
Does it hurt? Only the prick of the line, as with a blood test.
How often would it need repeating? Science has not established a schedule. We decide based on your case, and by measuring again.
Can I have it if I am on medication? It depends which. That is why the prior assessment is not a formality: it is the most important part.
Why not just give it to anyone who asks? Because my job is to make sure it makes sense for you, not to sell you a drip.
Anyone who promises you specific results from NAD⁺ is going beyond what the science says.
From a laboratory in 1906 to today's clinics, NAD⁺ has travelled a fascinating path. It is an essential molecule for the energy of our cells, and the research on it is promising. But promising is not the same as proven.
At OASE, NAD⁺ is never the starting point. First I assess you, with your history and your blood tests in front of me, including the REDOX index. Then we decide together whether it makes sense in your case.
This article is signed by Dr. Mariana Goldstücker, colegiada no. 032892127. This page is for information purposes and does not replace a medical consultation. The assessment is an individual professional evaluation; treatments are determined case by case and do not guarantee results. Your data is processed under GDPR (EU) 2016/679 and the Spanish LOPDGDD.