NAD+ shows up everywhere in longevity marketing, often with promises the science has not earned yet. Here is the honest version. NAD+ is a real and essential coenzyme, the human research is early, and the responsible order is to measure a broad set of markers first and let a physician read the pattern.
What NAD+ is, as a coenzyme (nad+ coenzyme)
NAD+, short for nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide, is a coenzyme your cells use constantly. Its core job is in energy metabolism: it shuttles electrons during the reactions that convert food into the cellular fuel your body runs on. It also takes part in signaling pathways researchers study in the context of cellular repair. Levels are observed to decline with age in various tissues, which is the observation that launched most of the interest. That decline is real. It is also a long step from “a molecule changes with age” to “replacing it changes how you age,” and that step is where careful reading matters.
What the research supports, and what is still early (nad+ research)
The case for NAD+ biology is strong at the bench. In lab and animal models, NAD+ and its precursors influence metabolic and cellular pathways in well-documented ways. The case in humans is where claims tend to outrun evidence. Studies in people have looked mainly at whether oral precursors raise measurable NAD+ levels, and several suggest they can. Whether that translates into the outcomes longevity marketing implies, slower aging or energy you can feel, is not established. Trials are smaller, shorter, and more mixed than the headlines suggest. So the honest framing is two-part: NAD+ is important biology, and NAD+ as an aging intervention in humans is early, unproven, and an area of ongoing research. The same evidence-first lens applies across the peptide menu, covered in peptides, read by the evidence.
you are
Add what fits. A physician reviews every order and arranges your consult and labs at checkout. Browse the shop →
Why aging markers and a baseline read first
There is no single clean “NAD+ level” you watch the way you watch cholesterol, and chasing one number would miss the point anyway. Aging is a pattern, not a marker. What a thorough baseline captures instead is the domains that actually move with metabolic and cellular health: fasting glucose, HbA1c, and fasting insulin for how you handle fuel, a full lipid picture including ApoB, inflammation markers such as high-sensitivity CRP, organ function, and micronutrients like vitamin D and B12. Read together, those tell a physician far more about your trajectory than any single longevity molecule. This is the “labs before molecules” idea: you measure the real pattern first, before anyone discusses whether a protocol fits. A core hormone and health panel exists so a molecule like NAD+ is considered in context, not in isolation. (See the Telos Panel and what a full panel covers.)
What your physician does with this (labs before molecules)
At Telos, the information you provide and the panel you complete are reviewed by a licensed physician through the affiliated medical group. They read your metabolic, lipid, inflammation, and micronutrient markers alongside your history and goals, and decide what, if anything, fits. If NAD+ ever enters the conversation, it does so as a physician-prescribed, compounded therapy, weighed against honest evidence limits, not as a promised outcome. A physician may or may not establish a treatment relationship. Telos is a marketing and advertising company. It does not practice medicine, prescribe, or dispense. Nothing here is medical advice.
