I think my explanation in another thread made the most sense why NMN generated more NAD+ in the kidney while NR generates more NAD+ in all other tissues. We know that Ling Liu’s Dissertation shows that NMN disappears from blood quickly even after IV supplementation. NMN is much less bioavailable than NR in the blood. The proposed reason for this is NMN is stuck in the kidney tissue when blood is filtered at kidney. This concentrated NMN generated more NAD+ in the kidney. This doesn’t mean NMN can get into cells without converting to NR first in kidney cells. Sinclair’s mention of NMN and NR behave differently in different cells is just pumping NMN without any solid evidence. So far there is no data that shows NMN can get into cells while all data shows NR can get into all cells tested. NAD+ can actually get into cells without converting to NR first. The discussion of NR and NMN supplementation starts at page 32.
https://dataspace.pr...0181D_12390.pdf
Another issue with NMN is not all NMN are converted to NR, a lot of NMN are metablized and flushed out in the urine.
Liu's dissertation showed most (or all?) NR and NMN converted to NAM - which is just confirming what ALL other studies said. You said it was garbage.
Then, you quote the part of Liu's dissertation that says NMN is not found in bloodstream - which is the OPPOSITE of all other studies.
Then you make up something about NMN is flushed out in urine. You have said that several times as if it was fact and never answer when I ask where you got that idea from.
You are saying things you know are not true or confirmed.
That is not just cherry picking data - it is flat out purposeful deception.
Edited by able, 02 April 2018 - 06:24 PM.