ExcelMale
Menu
Home
What's new
Latest activity
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Videos
Lab Tests
Doctor Finder
Buy Books
About Us
Men’s Health Coaching
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
General Health & Fitness
Nutrition and Supplements
NAD, Hype Or Miracle Molecule?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="JPB" data-source="post: 144850" data-attributes="member: 2659"><p>I am not personally advocating apigenin or quercetin as NAD+ agents, there are indeed absorption issues and other effects, but I thought since you were arguing the importance of addressing conversion issues, then you may consider my posting as informative. But you are committed to taking a contrary perspective vs myself.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Which does not matter one iota since no NR or NMN makes it past the liver before being converted to NAM.</p><p></p><p>You continue arguing about superiority of NR or NMN when I have clearly cited research demonstrating none of it makes it past the liver before being converted to NAM. Which implies cleary that downstream conversion of NAM is what leads to increases in NAD+. Intermediaries are NMN and NR. If NR or NMN made it past the liver this discussion might make sense, but since delivering these agents at therapeutic levels orally or otherwise (ie. sublingually) would be at a cost factor up to 10x of NAM, NAM is still the most practical approach.</p><p></p><p>This debate illustrates why I did not want to jump down the research article rabbit hole. The interpretation of research is commonly manipulated and/or misapplied based on the educational shortcomings or interpretational objectives of those involved.</p><p></p><p>What is needed is head-to-head studies comparing the molecules affects on NAD+. And comparisons on equivalent dose. Since NAM is a factor of 10 or so less expensive, and NMN and NR are converted to NAM in the liver (making them nothing more than very expensive forms of NAM) I stand by my recommendations. Because of the vested interests of the major players involved and their influence, the head-to-head comparisons have not been made. There is little money to be made with NAM.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="JPB, post: 144850, member: 2659"] I am not personally advocating apigenin or quercetin as NAD+ agents, there are indeed absorption issues and other effects, but I thought since you were arguing the importance of addressing conversion issues, then you may consider my posting as informative. But you are committed to taking a contrary perspective vs myself. Which does not matter one iota since no NR or NMN makes it past the liver before being converted to NAM. You continue arguing about superiority of NR or NMN when I have clearly cited research demonstrating none of it makes it past the liver before being converted to NAM. Which implies cleary that downstream conversion of NAM is what leads to increases in NAD+. Intermediaries are NMN and NR. If NR or NMN made it past the liver this discussion might make sense, but since delivering these agents at therapeutic levels orally or otherwise (ie. sublingually) would be at a cost factor up to 10x of NAM, NAM is still the most practical approach. This debate illustrates why I did not want to jump down the research article rabbit hole. The interpretation of research is commonly manipulated and/or misapplied based on the educational shortcomings or interpretational objectives of those involved. What is needed is head-to-head studies comparing the molecules affects on NAD+. And comparisons on equivalent dose. Since NAM is a factor of 10 or so less expensive, and NMN and NR are converted to NAM in the liver (making them nothing more than very expensive forms of NAM) I stand by my recommendations. Because of the vested interests of the major players involved and their influence, the head-to-head comparisons have not been made. There is little money to be made with NAM. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Share this page
Facebook
Twitter
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Sponsors
Forums
General Health & Fitness
Nutrition and Supplements
NAD, Hype Or Miracle Molecule?
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top