Your topics. New publications.

A compact browser notification when there’s something new. At most once a day — no account needed.

What interests you?

Optional and switchable off here at any time. We save your selected topics and device subscription; no email address is required. Privacy

Search the harborEN/DEAccount
NAD⁺ & NMN
Video summary

Niagen scientist describes NR vs NMN and label-testing claims

In this video description, a Niagen Bioscience scientist says NR enters cells directly while NMN must be broken down first, and that testing found most NAD products missed label claims. [1]

Automatic summary · not editorially reviewed

The key findings

  1. The description says NR enters the cell directly, while NMN must be broken down first. [1]

  2. The description says taking NAD directly does not meaningfully raise NAD levels. [1]

  3. The description says company testing found 65% of NAD products do not meet label claims. [1]

The source at a glance

Study type / format
Video description of a sponsored interview episode
Population / context
Adults aged 40–60 in the cited clinical data; NAD supplement products in the testing claims
Summary based on
Creator description
Original publication
May 17, 2026

Niagen scientist on NR versus NMN uptake

The description presents Aron Erickson, vice president of research and development at Niagen Bioscience, who has worked there for 12 years on the nicotinamide riboside ingredient Niagen. He is said to explain why NR and NMN act differently in cells: NR enters the cell directly, while NMN has to be broken down first. The description also says taking NAD directly does not meaningfully raise NAD levels. These are the creator's and company's statements, not independent findings reported here.

Supporting source [1]

Company testing of NAD products against labels

According to the description, two out of three NAD supplements on the market deliver less than 90% of what their labels state, and TRU Niagen's competitive testing found that 65% of NAD products do not meet label claims. The description also mentions clinical data showing NR raises NAD levels by 50–100% in adults aged 40–60. No study design, sample size or full results are given for these figures, so they cannot be checked from the description alone.

Supporting source [1]

Sponsorship and certification context of the episode

The description says the post is sponsored as part of the TESTED by SuppCo program, in which brands pay to participate. SuppCo describes itself as independent: it buys supplements anonymously in normal retail and tests identity and potency against label claims, and only products meeting at least 95% of claims earn certification. The description also lists 60+ patents, 300+ research partnerships and a new USP monograph for nicotinamide riboside, all attributed to the company.

Supporting source [1]

How to interpret this

Only the video description was reviewed; the video and transcript were not reviewed. Figures, clinical data and company claims come from the description and cannot be verified from it. The post is sponsored.

Based on the creator’s description; the full video and transcript were not analyzed.

Source & supporting passages

[1]
Read the quoted passagesIn the language of the original source
  1. Finding 1 ↑

    NR enters the cell directly but NMN
  2. Finding 2 ↑

    taking NAD directly doesn't meaningfully raise
  3. Finding 3 ↑

    65% of NAD products don't meet label

AI-assisted summary with linked source passages. No independent editorial or clinical review.

Our editorial method

Discussion

Community discussions

0 topics

Member contributions. Share sources, disclose commercial interests, and avoid personal medical or dosing advice.

Loading…