Does a NAD infusion (IV drip) make sense?

A NAD infusion has been studied far less than oral forms of NAD supplementation. A recent review concludes that robust clinical validation for the IV route is lacking. At present, there is simply too little research to say whether an infusion offers any advantage over a pill or powder.

The only clinical study that looked specifically at IV administration did so in fifteen Parkinson's patients. Seven days of NADH infusion produced a measurable improvement on a symptom scale. However, this study had no control group and was small, so no firm conclusions can be drawn from it. Moreover, it involved a patient group with a specific neurological condition, not healthy people looking to stay young.

Oral NAD supplements have been studied more thoroughly. A randomised trial showed that NAD boosters measurably raise NAD levels in the blood. Whether that also reduces symptoms or slows ageing is a different question. In healthy people, few clinically relevant effects have been demonstrated. In athletes, muscle metabolism and performance are not improved by them. Results in disease are mixed: a randomised trial in 207 ME/CFS patients found less cognitive fatigue with a combination of CoQ10 and NADH, although one of the researchers had financial ties to the manufacturer.

The effect of NAD supplementation is not proportional to the dose. Age, metabolic state and route of administration all play a role, and there are indications that the body reaches a saturation point at some stage. Side effects such as muscle pain, headache and sleep problems are reported but are not considered serious in research. Both oral and IV forms are generally rated as well tolerated.