Increasing NAD+

[Will Brink]

#46 – Chris Masterjohn, Ph.D.: Navigating the many pathways to health and disease – NAD and sirtuins, methylation, MTHFR and COMT, choline deficiency and NAFLD, TMAO, creatine and more

Great show, A good discussion on NAD, NAD precursors, etc.

Note at 1:27 in the show discussion of papers finding NR was superior to niacinamide for NAD levels in muscle tissue and all important mention of tissue specific kinetic flux.

At 1:28, discussion of the rational as to why taking NR is still the most effective route to increasing tissue NAD levels.

1:29 why taking niacinamide may in fact be a negative "liability" to increasing whole body tissue NAD levels!

They are not supportive of infusions however, but the reasons why are most theoretical vs established.

As I had said in the other thread, it's not as simple as the OP thinks it is, and I recommend everyone interested in the topic listen to this show, paying close attention to the sections above...

What they didn't discuss why tissue levels drop to nadda as we age:

Is it poor conversion of niacinamide to NAD via age related mechanisms?
Increase in degradation of NAD and system can't produce it fast enough?
Simple lack of adequate substrate (niacinamide) in the diet as we age?
Poor absorption of niacinamide and other subtstrates from digestion? (1)
Other?

Finally, they discuss the benefits and importance of creatine for methylation (2:11 of show), something I have been for several decades now and one of various reasons creatine is a general health promoting anti aging supplement vertually anyone will benefit from. I also suspect creatine increases NAD+ levels, but I have not found the data to show that yet.

(1) Note the guest posits only NR appears to get absorbed without conversion to niacinamide or other intermediates.

 

[JPB]

Please listen to the show, it supports my position completely. Will is telling more "true lies" by snipping portions out-of-context. Masterjohn clearly states only trace negligible amounts NR get absorbed past the liver. The liver converts all the precursors to its own NAD pool. If the liver innately senses the need to distribute NAM, it converts the NAD back to NAM. Masterjohn likes NR because he rationalizes it is a better liver substrate for NAM than NAM itself, not because any NR circulates to the tissues. References regarding muscle absorption have to do with a questionable mouse study. The NR was still being distributed as NAM, only the liver was innately determining the timing of the distribution vs. exogenous NAM. Again, oral NR only serves as a substrate for NAM distribution by the liver. NR in the blood is not absorbed by all tissues, most importantly the brain, one of the most important areas for NAD+ consideration. Regarding NAM, the counter argument is a large dose of NAM becomes a liability for the body due to the need to convert it, and some interim suppressive effects on other repair pathways. This comes down to issues of dosage and timing as I have already addressed. Keep dosages at reasonable levels and do not try to keep NAM levels high 24x7. If you have issues with methylation consider adding some methyl donors such as TMG or creatine.

 

[Will Brink]

Please listen to the show, it supports my position completely.

Given what an intellectually dishonest weasel you have shown yourself to be, I gave the specific times on that show people can go hear for themselves what he says. He's very clear NR is the superior choice for increasing whole body NAD+ levels, and explains why. Either you're cognitive dissonance is dripping out you ears, or you're trolling at this point.

 

[JPB]

Resorting to name calling now? Looks like you are losing.

 

[JPB]

How sad we are having this discussion on FB now too. I consider a troll somebody who hides behind a keyboard. I have made my identity known to you now, after your cheap shot on SHR. I am not hiding. Nor does this conversation deserve your level of hostilities and unprofessionalism. I thought revealing myself there would bring some level of civility from yourself which unfortunately has not been the case. Let me tell you what a troll is. Somebody who jumps on somebody else's bandwagon and tries to steal credit. This was my thread which I posted well in advance of yours. For all I know, this thread was your jumping off point. A troll is somebody who says some things behind a keyboard that they would only stupidly say to somebody face-to-face. Get my point? Regardless at this time we are done. I have initiated and led this conversation and posted numerous studies supporting my position, and in fact the Masterjohn show also supports my position. But people can make up their own minds.

 

[Will Brink]

How sad we are having this discussion on FB now too. I consider a troll somebody who hides behind a keyboard. I have made my identity known to you now, after your cheap shot on SHR. I am not hiding. Nor does this conversation deserve your level of hostilities and unprofessionalism. I thought revealing myself there would bring some level of civility from yourself which unfortunately has not been the case. Let me tell you what a troll is. Somebody who jumps on somebody else's bandwagon and tries to steal credit. This was my thread which I posted well in advance of yours. For all I know, this thread was your jumping off point. A troll is somebody who says some things behind a keyboard that they would only stupidly say to somebody face-to-face. Get my point? Regardless at this time we are done. I have initiated and led this conversation and posted numerous studies supporting my position, and in fact the Masterjohn show also supports my position. But people can make up their own minds.

Ah, so now a physical threat? You're a real winner you are. Had to not been a condisending rude jerk from the start, we would have had an interesting discussion on this topic, but that's not how you approached it, and I responded in kind.

 

[Tommy Wall]

I think things are getting a bit too carried away and maybe its better to close this thread.