REFERENCE / COLOPHON
About This NAD+ Reference
An independent editorial project documenting the published research on NAD+ and its precursors. Not a clinic, not a vendor, not a prescriber.
What this site is
NAD Telehealth is an independent editorial project that publishes summaries of the peer-reviewed research literature on NAD+ and its precursors NMN and NR. 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, organized in a documentation style so each pathway, parameter, and dose-range reads as a documented, cited entry rather than a sales pitch.
About the name
The word "telehealth" in the domain is editorial framing, not a service claim. It signals the register we work in — a calm, patient-facing reference a careful reader or a clinician might consult — not a promise of consultation, prescription, or care. There is no telehealth platform here, no intake form for treatment, no prescribing pathway, and no "approved NAD+ drug" to access. NAD+ is a dietary supplement and an endogenous coenzyme, not a prescription medicine, and nothing on this site should be read as offering one.
How we handle the evidence
We document what specific studies measured, and we keep two distinctions strict. First, NAD+ versus its precursors: oral "NAD+" products are almost always NMN or NR, because NAD+ itself is poorly absorbed, so we never describe an oral-precursor trial as "taking NAD+." Second, route: an oral capsule dose, an IV infusion, and a compounded injection carry very different evidence weights, and every figure on the site is tagged with the route it came from. Where the human evidence is strong — raising blood NAD+ with precursors — we say so. Where it is limited — hard clinical endpoints, IV efficacy — we say that too, and we cite the reviews that say it.
Why the documentation format
We chose a documentation style on purpose. NAD+ is one of the most conflated topics in consumer wellness: the same word, "NAD+," gets attached to a swallowed precursor capsule, a near-instant IV drip, a transdermal patch, and a sweeping anti-aging promise, even though those are very different claims resting on very different evidence. A reference format — pathways laid out as entries, doses tagged by route, findings tagged by species, gaps flagged rather than hidden — is the honest way to present a literature that is genuinely strong in some places (blood NAD+ rises reliably with oral precursors) and genuinely thin in others (hard clinical endpoints, IV efficacy). The point is to let a careful reader, or a clinician fielding a patient's question, see exactly what was measured and where the line between evidence and marketing falls.
What we do not do
We do not recommend doses, name or endorse any commercial supplement brand, or tell anyone to take anything. We do not sell, link to vendors, or run an online store. We do not present NAD+ as a treatment, a cure, or a prescription, and we do not claim it reverses aging or any disease. Where a brand name appears at all, it is inside the verbatim title of a cited study, never as an endorsement. Decisions about supplements or any therapy belong between a person and a qualified healthcare professional who knows their history — this site is a reading reference, full stop.