I could use a little help understanding what it is you see in this study. I don’t see any spectacular results, and nothing that suggests anything new about oral bioavailabilty.
I know there is some discussion that NR is digested in the stomach, but afaik, the main concern about oral NR/NMN supplements are, very little make it out of the liver, without first conversion to NAM (According to Liu study).
The research in this thread is all about the effect on Liver only. I don't see how that impacts the thinking on NR availability outside of the liver.
I do think NR is more effective than NAM, and point out that another study HERE implies NR reaching outside the liver and having much more benefit for heart injury than NAM. I just am missing what is important about this particular study
Also I don’t see what you mean about “NAM takes down SIRT1”. I know they repeat
a somewhat deceptive and partially debunked claim about NAM being a Sirt1 inhibitor, but is there something in this study about NAM that I missed?
They also throw out a claim about NMN which I believe is quite incorrect, as well as not really relevant.
“NMN also increased NAD+ levels, which could be a useful intervention related to metabolic disorders [27], but it isn’t found in dietary constituents”
This is clearly disputed here:
“Finally, we found that NMN was indeed contained in some daily natural food sources (Table 1). For example, vegetables such as edamame (immature soybeans), broccoli, cucumber, and cabbage contained 0.25–1.88 mg of NMN per 100g”
Edited by able, 07 August 2018 - 06:41 PM.