RESEARCH DIGEST / WHO KEEPS THE RECEIPTS
About NAD Safe
An independent editorial project that screenshots the NAD+ hype and staples the studies to it. Not a clinic. Not a vendor. A reading of the literature.
What this site is
NAD Safe 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. NAD+ is one of the most hyped, most influencer-saturated topics on the consumer internet — a wall of overlapping benefit-claim screenshots, miracle-infusion marketing and conflicting takes. We adopt that loud, screenshotted register on purpose, and then subvert it: every shouted claim gets pinned next to a receipt — the study that supports it, contradicts it, or simply does not exist.
Why "safe" is in the name
The word "safe" here is editorial, not clinical. It does not mean we offer a safe product, a safe protocol or a safe place to be treated — we offer none of those things. It means the site does the safety-minded reading: separating what randomized human trials actually confirmed (blood NAD+ rises with oral precursors) from what stays preliminary (hard clinical outcomes), holding oral precursors apart from compounded IV NAD+ (which carries a documented Class I endotoxin recall), and reporting the contested NMN regulatory status as the marketplace dispute it is rather than a "ban." "Safe" is the highlighter on the abstract, not a clinic sign over a door. There is no door.
How we handle claims and citations
Every quantitative statement on this site — a dose, a percentage, a duration, a recall — maps to a numbered citation traceable to PubMed, a journal DOI, or an official source. When the evidence is rodent or in-vitro, we label it preclinical. When the evidence is mixed, we say it is mixed. When something has not been shown in humans, we say that too, plainly. We do not give dosing instructions, we do not recommend products, and we do not link readers to anywhere to buy anything. If a claim cannot be sourced, it does not go on the wall. The point is due diligence done out loud: we screenshot the studies so the reading is checkable, not just assertable.