# About Online NAD: An Independent Editorial Digest of the NAD+ Research

> Online NAD is an independent editorial project publishing summaries of the peer-reviewed NAD+ research literature. Not a clinic, not a vendor — editorial commentary on published science.

An independent editorial digest of the published NAD+ research — written to be read, not to sell.

## Who we are

Online NAD is an independent editorial project that publishes plain-English summaries of the peer-reviewed research literature on NAD+ and its precursors. We are not a clinic. We do not employ clinicians and we do not provide medical advice. We do not manufacture, sell, or distribute any product. Our work is editorial commentary on publicly available science.

The name carries the word "online," and we want to be exact about what that means here: it is a publishing register — a vivid, contemporary reading of the literature — not a storefront. You cannot buy anything on this site. There is no cart, no pricing, no clinic behind the page. "Online" describes how we publish, not anything we sell.

## What we do

We read the published NAD+ record — randomized trials of oral precursors, the pharmacokinetics of intravenous infusion, the small parenteral studies, the mechanistic and review literature — and we restate what each study measured, in language a non-specialist can follow, with every quantitative claim cited to its source. When the evidence is strong, such as oral NR and NMN raising blood NAD+ in controlled trials, we say so plainly. When it is thin, such as the controlled efficacy of IV NAD+, we mark the gap rather than fill it.

We keep one distinction exact throughout: NAD+ itself is not the same as its precursors. Most oral products are NMN or NR, and we never describe an oral-precursor trial as "taking NAD+." That precision is the point of the digest.

## About the name and our editorial position

Some readers will arrive expecting a shop or a service, because "NAD" online usually means one. This is not that. The site occupies an editorial position relative to the literature — a reader and summarizer of the published science — not a clinical or commercial one. We do not offer treatment, consultation, infusion, injection, or prescription services, and we are not affiliated with any clinic, pharmacy, or product brand.

Where the research is preliminary or contested — the unsettled regulatory status of NMN, the dual role of NAD+ in cancer biology, the weak controlled evidence for IV use — we report the controversy as it stands in the literature, attributed and unembellished. Our aim is a digest a curious reader can trust precisely because it neither sells nor scolds.

---

A terrazzo-bright reading of the NAD+ literature — the coenzyme scattered apart from the NMN and NR precursors that rebuild it, the oral trials that moved blood NAD+ set in their own panels from the rapidly-cleared IV drip and the recalled compounded injectable, each claim stamped to its study and each gap left in plain view; no clinic behind the confetti and nothing here infused, injected, dosed, or sold.