Consensus Report
NMN & NAD+
Split Consensus
out of 5
Based on 29 videos (52 hours analyzed) across 5 experts · Updated 2026-03-19
Stance update (2025): Attia has consistently strengthened his skepticism, moving NMN/NAD from 'unproven' to explicitly categorizing it as 'noise' on his evidence hierarchy.
Expert Positions
The Verdict
This is one of the most divisive topics among our 5 experts. Attia categorizes NAD supplementation as 'noise' on his evidence hierarchy, while Hyman actively advocates for NAD precursors as part of a longevity stack. Huberman personally takes NR and NMN for subjective energy but explicitly not for longevity. Patrick provides the most balanced scientific coverage, noting promising animal data but significant gaps in human evidence.
Where They Disagree
Attia classifies NAD as 'noise' while Hyman's guests recommend high-dose NMN (1000mg) as a core longevity supplement — a fundamental disagreement on the evidence threshold for recommendation.
Patrick notes that NMN and NR break down into nicotinamide, which can inhibit sirtuins — directly contradicting the rationale for taking NAD precursors to boost sirtuin activity.
+ 2 more disagreements in the full report
About This Analysis
This consensus report on NMN & NAD+ is based on 29 videos (52 hours analyzed) from five longevity experts: Andrew Huberman, Peter Attia, Rhonda Patrick, Bryan Johnson, and Mark Hyman. Each expert's position was independently analyzed from their published video content, including lectures, podcast episodes, and Q&A sessions with 1,000+ guest scientists.
The full report includes 8 key findings, dosage and protocol details, expert deep dives with direct video citations and timestamps, risk considerations, and related supplement synergies.
Unlock the Full Report
Get dosages, timing protocols, expert deep dives with video citations, and risks for NMN & NAD+.
Every recommendation traces back to a specific expert, video, and timestamp.
$9/month or $79/year · Cancel anytime