NMN or NAD+ Injections? How Each Works + Which Wins Long Term

Watch the full video on Rumble: https://rumble.com/v7h1cce-nmn-or-nad-injections-how-each-works-which-wins-long-term.html

NMN or NAD+ Injections: Which One Actually Works Long Term

It's my personal opinion, and I may be biased here because we just sent a batch of NMN into production for Anvil Nutrition, my supplement company, is that most of the time your NAD+, pool, as you age, is going to decrease, and that decline is just the normal arc of getting older rather than some disease process, so the real question is only whether you hand your body raw materials to rebuild with or hand it the finished product directly.

NAD+ is a molecule your cells use to move electrons around during energy production. Every time it does that job it gets spent, and it has to be recycled back into usable form before it can work again.

That recycling is where the whole thing lives or dies.

We have some enzymes that happen inside of the cells, especially if we're not exercising, that influence the recycling or process of that NAD+, plus being converted back into NAD to be used after it's transported electrons called NAMPT. Well, there's other systems in your body that compete for that NAD+, NAMPT, one enzyme specifically called CD38, and this basically depletes your NAD+, pool over time because we don't have enough raw material.

Think of NAMPT as the crew rebuilding the road and CD38 as the traffic tearing it up, and while the crew keeps ahead of the damage when you're young, as you age CD38 activity climbs, NAMPT slows, and the gap widens every year.

So you have two ways to close that gap.

What adding a supplement or precursor like NMN does is it's basically giving your body the raw materials that it needs to build more NAD+. You take the precursor, your cells run it through their enzymes, and they decide where it goes and how fast.

The other option is to inject NAD+ directly, skipping the building step entirely, and on paper that seems to track since you're short the molecule, so you put the molecule in.

But in my mind, as far as a cost-effectiveness strategy, as far as giving your body the same raw materials that it would use for the same function as well, the precursors are a much better long-term option.

An NAD+ infusion runs in the hundreds per session and you're sitting in a chair for an hour or more, compared to a capsule you take at breakfast for a fraction of that over a month.

The less obvious part is that NAD+ itself is a large molecule and does not cross cell membranes easily, so a good portion of what goes in gets broken down into smaller pieces outside the cell before anything uses it. Your body then rebuilds it from those pieces, which is the same thing a precursor does, just with more steps and more money.

Here's the honest counterpoint, because this is where most people's actual experience lands.

If you are in a place where your NAD+, pools are significantly depleted, especially from age, metabolic dysfunction, or a combination of the two, it's very likely that when you inject the NAD+, you're gonna feel it right now. People describe it the same way almost every time. A flood of energy, a clearer head, a sense that something switched back on.

Well, obviously, right? You were short something, you gave that thing to your body, it made use of it right now.

That feeling tells you something useful, which is that you were genuinely depleted, but it doesn't tell you that injection is the better strategy. It tells you the deficit was big enough to notice when it closed.

You take NMN for six weeks and nothing announces itself, no sudden wave, no moment you can point to. What shows up instead is that the workouts you used to need two days to recover from now take one, and the mid-afternoon crash stops being a daily event.

If you're generally healthy and playing a long game, start with the precursor, give it eight to twelve weeks, and judge it on recovery and consistent energy rather than on how you feel the first morning.