NAD+

Direct NAD+ administration sits in an honest tension: the underlying biology is excellent, and the human evidence for the drips, injections and sprays being sold is not. NAD+ is essential, declines with age, and restores healthspan markers in animals, but the leap to infusing it into people has been tested mainly in a six-person metabolite pilot rather than in controlled outcome trials (Grant 2019). Independent reviewers reach the same verdict and point to precursors as the better-supported route (Rajman 2018). That is why the score of lands in the middle: real mechanism, high reversibility and tolerable short infusions, set against a steep price, uncharacterized long-term safety and a cheaper oral alternative with actual trial data. Nothing here supports NAD+ as a proven cure for addiction, dementia or aging, and nothing supports buying it from unregulated supply.

✅ Best for: Adults who understand they are paying for a mechanistic bet rather than proven therapy and want it supervised in a clinic; people drawn to the NAD+ story who would be equally served, at far lower cost and with better evidence, by discussing oral precursors with a clinician; and anyone who will track their own energy and clarity honestly against the possibility of a placebo effect.

❌ Avoid if: You are being sold NAD+ as a proven treatment for addiction, neurodegeneration or aging; you would be substituting it for evidence-based medical care; you are considering compounded product from an unlicensed or unverified source; you are sensitive to infusion-reaction symptoms and cannot tolerate a slow drip; or the cost would displace spending on interventions with real human outcome data.