11 votes
Posted 13 March 2015 - 09:16 PM
I'm working as a group fitness instructor (body combat, body pump, cx worx) ... some of this stuff for over 10 years - so feel every change in my workout. C60 makes a difference, like telmisartan and some other.
Niagen, like a huge list of other things make no difference at all.
Posted 13 March 2015 - 09:32 PM
1h running and some talking at the same time: 6:53 min/km at HF 127 min-1
on C60oo
1h running and some talking at the same time: 6:15 min/km at HF 144 min-1
on C60oo and Niagen (500mg ed)
125m up and down in a forest
I was faster with Niagen, but also my HF was higher... so maybe it's just the extra motivation ;-)
You're on the right track (pun intended), but I think the only truly objective measure is your personal best, which isn't beaten very often or affected by placebo. Ideally, a short but intense workout, such as 3 or 5 minutes on the rowing machine with no possibility of outside distractions. Or how many pushups till you're pooped. It's hard to fake doing better than your best.
I think if you want to be scientific about this, and your hypothesis is that NR / Niagen improves aerobic metabolism, then do it using a VO2Max test. It's critical that you find a vendor for that test who will provide you CO2 data. Most do not. Then you can watch at different objective workloads, what is your fat burning capacity, and how quickly you move into glycolysis. A side by side comparison of VO2Max without Niagen and VO2Max with Niagen should pretty quickly establish if there is a big change in performance. You cannot fake how much CO2 your body exhales for a given O2 input and workload. You would get tons of real data from these tests that could be compared.
Subjective data based on your personal assessment of performance is very suspect. Your moods and sense of enthusiasm are largely affected by neurotransmitters and other metabolites that affect your perception and feeling, but that don't objectively change your physiology under stress. You might run faster because you have more adrenalin, but that is about motivation not about aerobic metabolic capacity or potential. The bottom line is your mitochondria either do more work or they do not, and you should stick to knitting and measure mitochondrial output. VO2Max with CO2 is a great way to do that very cheaply.
Edited by pone11, 13 March 2015 - 09:34 PM.
Posted 13 March 2015 - 09:42 PM
"I had a pain in the 5th metatarsal on the outside of my foot" ..................."after a day and a half of walking around the park"
I think the answer is right there, I dont think the NR has anything at all to do with it.
Walking extensively is not the culprit, it's not the first time I've done it. I know my body and what ales me, and when it ales me. I'm 41 yo, I play sand volleyball on the regular, and have never had issues with my feet. I have always exercised in one way or another.
That being said, I keep close tabs on what happens to me when taking new supplements. I was not taking any other supplements save for the NR at that point, so monitoring was fairly easy. I took specific notice when I had a tightening of my tendons in the heel area. The ache in my foot would indicate to me that more irritation has occurred. I am now off NR and the ache has subsided and so has the tightness in my tendons... I really wish it was not the case as I enjoyed the extra energy as I said before.
Posted 14 March 2015 - 01:07 AM
Walking extensively is not the culprit, it's not the first time I've done it. I know my body and what ales me, and when it ales me. I'm 41 yo, I play sand volleyball on the regular, and have never had issues with my feet. I have always exercised in one way or another.
That being said, I keep close tabs on what happens to me when taking new supplements. I was not taking any other supplements save for the NR at that point, so monitoring was fairly easy. I took specific notice when I had a tightening of my tendons in the heel area. The ache in my foot would indicate to me that more irritation has occurred. I am now off NR and the ache has subsided and so has the tightness in my tendons... I really wish it was not the case as I enjoyed the extra energy as I said before.
My Achilles tendons have also been very tight lately, since around when I began consuming NR, but I did not know what was causing it. I will have to discontinue the NR to see if there is any amelioration.
Posted 14 March 2015 - 09:52 AM
I think if you want to be scientific about this, and your hypothesis is that NR / Niagen improves aerobic metabolism, then do it using a VO2Max test. It's critical that you find a vendor for that test who will provide you CO2 data. Most do not. Then you can watch at different objective workloads, what is your fat burning capacity, and how quickly you move into glycolysis. A side by side comparison of VO2Max without Niagen and VO2Max with Niagen should pretty quickly establish if there is a big change in performance. You cannot fake how much CO2 your body exhales for a given O2 input and workload. You would get tons of real data from these tests that could be compared.
Subjective data based on your personal assessment of performance is very suspect. Your moods and sense of enthusiasm are largely affected by neurotransmitters and other metabolites that affect your perception and feeling, but that don't objectively change your physiology under stress. You might run faster because you have more adrenalin, but that is about motivation not about aerobic metabolic capacity or potential. The bottom line is your mitochondria either do more work or they do not, and you should stick to knitting and measure mitochondrial output. VO2Max with CO2 is a great way to do that very cheaply.
Great post, I totally agree with every part of that. Having taken six VO2 Max tests in the past the readings are hard to cheat and trying to do a self comparison is near impossible as there are to many variables.
Walking extensively is not the culprit, it's not the first time I've done it. I know my body and what ales me, and when it ales me. I'm 41 yo, I play sand volleyball on the regular, and have never had issues with my feet. I have always exercised in one way or another.
That being said, I keep close tabs on what happens to me when taking new supplements. I was not taking any other supplements save for the NR at that point, so monitoring was fairly easy. I took specific notice when I had a tightening of my tendons in the heel area. The ache in my foot would indicate to me that more irritation has occurred. I am now off NR and the ache has subsided and so has the tightness in my tendons... I really wish it was not the case as I enjoyed the extra energy as I said before.
OK, but I still think the NR is nothing to do with your problem. If it was I'm pretty sure you would be having issues in more than just your feet if it was.......Probably just a coincidence..
I've been taking it for six months and have had no issues whatsoever.
Edited by midas, 14 March 2015 - 09:54 AM.
Posted 14 March 2015 - 11:47 PM
Long time lurker - first time poster on this thread.
Not seeing the direct connection between a metabolic intervention and performance enhancement at maximum thresholds.
Anyone care to propose a mechanism to put reason behind investigations into NR's effect on peak performance?
Posted 15 March 2015 - 12:08 AM
Long time lurker - first time poster on this thread.
Not seeing the direct connection between a metabolic intervention and performance enhancement at maximum thresholds.
Anyone care to propose a mechanism to put reason behind investigations into NR's effect on peak performance?
The way I see it is.......
I think the link is the original hype about NMN (and NR supposedly doing a similar thing) having the efect that it did on the mouse muscle tissue, in as far as it regressed the age of the tissue from a 60 year old to a 20 year old (in human terms) in the mice that it was used on.
If the NR was having an effect on muscle tissue then maybe it would mean the muscles might perform better.
VO2 max levels alter with age so if the NR was having a positive effect on the muscles it might just show on a VO2 max test over a period of time......Just my thoughts, I'm no scientist.
Posted 15 March 2015 - 12:41 AM
Long time lurker - first time poster on this thread.
Not seeing the direct connection between a metabolic intervention and performance enhancement at maximum thresholds.
Anyone care to propose a mechanism to put reason behind investigations into NR's effect on peak performance?
The way I see it is.......
I think the link is the original hype about NMN (and NR supposedly doing a similar thing) having the efect that it did on the mouse muscle tissue, in as far as it regressed the age of the tissue from a 60 year old to a 20 year old (in human terms) in the mice that it was used on.
If the NR was having an effect on muscle tissue then maybe it would mean the muscles might perform better.
VO2 max levels alter with age so if the NR was having a positive effect on the muscles it might just show on a VO2 max test over a period of time......Just my thoughts, I'm no scientis
VO2 max is rate limited by the cardio-pulmonary system, i.e. the delivery of O2, not the need.
There the might be the potential for sub-maximal VO2 performance gains. By how much and at what VO2 level separate from any training adaptations and general variance is difficult to assess. There is no direct influence upper-limit performance.
http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/10647532
Posted 15 March 2015 - 01:03 AM
Long time lurker - first time poster on this thread.
Not seeing the direct connection between a metabolic intervention and performance enhancement at maximum thresholds.
Anyone care to propose a mechanism to put reason behind investigations into NR's effect on peak performance?
The way I see it is.......
I think the link is the original hype about NMN (and NR supposedly doing a similar thing) having the efect that it did on the mouse muscle tissue, in as far as it regressed the age of the tissue from a 60 year old to a 20 year old (in human terms) in the mice that it was used on.
If the NR was having an effect on muscle tissue then maybe it would mean the muscles might perform better.
VO2 max levels alter with age so if the NR was having a positive effect on the muscles it might just show on a VO2 max test over a period of time......Just my thoughts, I'm no scientis
VO2 max is rate limited by the cardio-pulmonary system, i.e. the delivery of O2, not the need.
There the might be the potential for sub-maximal VO2 performance gains. By how much and at what VO2 level separate from any training adaptations and general variance is difficult to assess. There is no direct influence upper-limit performance.
http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/10647532
I'm only going from the results of the six Vo2 tests I did a few years ago for a medical condition, and they were spread out over a five month period. With no change in the condition and no change in the medication they were pretty much exactly the same over the six readouts. At the time what I was lead to believe by the research physician that was doing the tests was, that any change in muscle or lung capabilities would show in the tests. This was the reason for doing them...
I'm just figuring that if the NR had a positive change on the muscle ability due to remodelling then it should show they were using oxygen more efficiently.........Like I said, I'm no scientist, I'm just applying some of my own logic there...
Posted 15 March 2015 - 01:04 AM
Long time lurker - first time poster on this thread.
Not seeing the direct connection between a metabolic intervention and performance enhancement at maximum thresholds.
Anyone care to propose a mechanism to put reason behind investigations into NR's effect on peak performance?
The way I see it is.......
I think the link is the original hype about NMN (and NR supposedly doing a similar thing) having the efect that it did on the mouse muscle tissue, in as far as it regressed the age of the tissue from a 60 year old to a 20 year old (in human terms) in the mice that it was used on.
If the NR was having an effect on muscle tissue then maybe it would mean the muscles might perform better.
VO2 max levels alter with age so if the NR was having a positive effect on the muscles it might just show on a VO2 max test over a period of time......Just my thoughts, I'm no scientis
VO2 max is rate limited by the cardio-pulmonary system, i.e. the delivery of O2, not the need.
There the might be the potential for sub-maximal VO2 performance gains. By how much and at what VO2 level separate from any training adaptations and general variance is difficult to assess. There is no direct influence upper-limit performance.
http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/10647532
VO2Max is rate-limited by the heart only for a few cases:
1) You are an endurance-trained athlete with perfect mitochondrial function. In that case you reach a maximum mechanical capacity of your heart, and your mitochondria are still performing aerobically. It would be a great problem to have, frankly, and most of us are not built like Lance Armstrong!
2) You are a person with a severe cardiomyopathy. In this case the heart is damaged in some way and simply cannot keep up with your mitochondria.
For everyone else - which is probably 70%+ of us - the rate limiting factor is your mitochondria's capacity to do work. For the vast majority of us, we get LOTS of oxygen delivered into the mitochondria, and the fact is the mitochondria reach a point where they cannot use any extra oxygen because the electron transport chain is at its full capacity.
To prove this to yourself, you need to go find a few actual VO2Max printouts, and what they will clearly show is that you reach VO2Max *before* you reach maximum oxygen intake. In other words, the body goes into full-on glycolysis at workload of X watts, and at subsequent workloads of X+Y1 and X+Y2 your are breathing in more and more oxygen, but the CO2 / O2 ratio goes higher and higher. The only explanation for that is that the additional O2 was never used in aerobic metabolism, and the higher CO2 / O2 ratio represents the body supplying the added energy in the form of glycolysis.
A great way to further convince yourself of this is to study a person with a mitochondrial injury or chronic fatigue syndrome that has a metabolic origin. Such people can easily sustain heartrates of 160+ beats per minute without any stress on the heart. But they go into full-on glycolysis at 95 to 120 beats per minute.
The other thing that is nice about VO2Max is it clearly shows you how your body transitions to glycolysis. When you burn fat in aerobic metabolism the ratio of CO2 to O2 is 70%. When you burn glucose in aerobic metabolism that ratio goes to 1:1. When you go into glycolysis there is a surge of CO2, and the ratio CO2/O2 goes quickly to a ratio well above 1. You can clearly observe in your VO2Max test data the workloads where you burn fat, the workloads where you start to burn glucose, and the place where you rapidly escalate towards full on glycolysis. All of those data points can be compared before and after you take NR. And - to your point - all of these effects can be measured before you exhaust your maximum capacity to deliver oxygen.
So, if you want to measure aerobic metabolism, and you do not have a heart or vascular issue that prevents deliver of oxygen to your cells, VO2Max tells you a lot.
Now the really good question you ask is why would NR / Niagen improve aerobic metabolism. I don't have a hypothesis there. It does help convert NADH to NAD+, which in theory should turn up the rate of citric acid cycle, which should then feed electron transport chain. But I don't see how that could be sustainable. Niagen is a mystery to me. Others here were making comments that they could exercise more efficiently with Niagen than without. So what exactly causes that to happen? You could hypothesize several effects and test each of those:
1) Maybe NR improves aerobic metabolism, which VO2Max should help many people to detect. This might show up on the test as burning fat efficiently for a higher workload (i.e., putting off a rising glycolysis level until a higher workload). It's not necessarily about reaching a higher VO2Max, although this could happen as well.
2) Maybe NR increases adrenalin levels, so you just run harder. That is a harder thing to test. But if you were really dedicated I guess you could design some way to capture adrenalin with a 24 hour metanephrines urine test before you start NR, and then after a week of supplementing, repeat the test and compare overall adrenalin levels.
One of my great surprises when I was on a ton of supplements is that they made my adrenalin EXPLODE. I was working 24x7 well into the red line area of adrenalin, and when my allopath made me stop all supplements, adrenalin came down dramatically, and I could within days of stopping supplements feel the removal of a huge physiological stress.
Here is full text for the study you pointed to:
http://www.kirunahas..._limitation.pdf
It's impossible for us to assess this without going to each primary source and seeing the actual VO2Max data points for their test subjects. It would not surprise me that these were young people in perfect health who were athletic. Yes, those endurance-trained individuals are limited on heart rate. Did these studies fail to test people who are either aging, metabolically impaired, or under-trained? I doubt that population was well represented, even though that population represents most people who would be taking Niagen to improve their performance in the first place. In any case, my use of VO2Max + CO2 bypasses this entirely, by observing aerobic efficiency at very early workloads in the test, looking for improvements far before you get to VO2Max.
Edited by pone11, 15 March 2015 - 01:44 AM.
Posted 15 March 2015 - 02:44 AM
Long time lurker - first time poster on this thread.
Not seeing the direct connection between a metabolic intervention and performance enhancement at maximum thresholds.
Anyone care to propose a mechanism to put reason behind investigations into NR's effect on peak performance?
The way I see it is.......
I think the link is the original hype about NMN (and NR supposedly doing a similar thing) having the efect that it did on the mouse muscle tissue, in as far as it regressed the age of the tissue from a 60 year old to a 20 year old (in human terms) in the mice that it was used on.
If the NR was having an effect on muscle tissue then maybe it would mean the muscles might perform better.
VO2 max levels alter with age so if the NR was having a positive effect on the muscles it might just show on a VO2 max test over a period of time......Just my thoughts, I'm no scientis
VO2 max is rate limited by the cardio-pulmonary system, i.e. the delivery of O2, not the need.
There the might be the potential for sub-maximal VO2 performance gains. By how much and at what VO2 level separate from any training adaptations and general variance is difficult to assess. There is no direct influence upper-limit performance.
http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/10647532
VO2Max is rate-limited by the heart only for a few cases:
1) You are an endurance-trained athlete with perfect mitochondrial function. In that case you reach a maximum mechanical capacity of your heart, and your mitochondria are still performing aerobically. It would be a great problem to have, frankly, and most of us are not built like Lance Armstrong!
2) You are a person with a severe cardiomyopathy. In this case the heart is damaged in some way and simply cannot keep up with your mitochondria.
For everyone else - which is probably 70%+ of us - the rate limiting factor is your mitochondria's capacity to do work. For the vast majority of us, we get LOTS of oxygen delivered into the mitochondria, and the fact is the mitochondria reach a point where they cannot use any extra oxygen because the electron transport chain is at its full capacity.
To prove this to yourself, you need to go find a few actual VO2Max printouts, and what they will clearly show is that you reach VO2Max *before* you reach maximum oxygen intake. In other words, the body goes into full-on glycolysis at workload of X watts, and at subsequent workloads of X+Y1 and X+Y2 your are breathing in more and more oxygen, but the CO2 / O2 ratio goes higher and higher. The only explanation for that is that the additional O2 was never used in aerobic metabolism, and the higher CO2 / O2 ratio represents the body supplying the added energy in the form of glycolysis.
A great way to further convince yourself of this is to study a person with a mitochondrial injury or chronic fatigue syndrome that has a metabolic origin. Such people can easily sustain heartrates of 160+ beats per minute without any stress on the heart. But they go into full-on glycolysis at 95 to 120 beats per minute.
The other thing that is nice about VO2Max is it clearly shows you how your body transitions to glycolysis. When you burn fat in aerobic metabolism the ratio of CO2 to O2 is 70%. When you burn glucose in aerobic metabolism that ratio goes to 1:1. When you go into glycolysis there is a surge of CO2, and the ratio CO2/O2 goes quickly to a ratio well above 1. You can clearly observe in your VO2Max test data the workloads where you burn fat, the workloads where you start to burn glucose, and the place where you rapidly escalate towards full on glycolysis. All of those data points can be compared before and after you take NR. And - to your point - all of these effects can be measured before you exhaust your maximum capacity to deliver oxygen.
So, if you want to measure aerobic metabolism, and you do not have a heart or vascular issue that prevents deliver of oxygen to your cells, VO2Max tells you a lot.
Now the really good question you ask is why would NR / Niagen improve aerobic metabolism. I don't have a hypothesis there. It does help convert NADH to NAD+, which in theory should turn up the rate of citric acid cycle, which should then feed electron transport chain. But I don't see how that could be sustainable. Niagen is a mystery to me. Others here were making comments that they could exercise more efficiently with Niagen than without. So what exactly causes that to happen? You could hypothesize several effects and test each of those:
1) Maybe NR improves aerobic metabolism, which VO2Max should help many people to detect. This might show up on the test as burning fat efficiently for a higher workload (i.e., putting off a rising glycolysis level until a higher workload). It's not necessarily about reaching a higher VO2Max, although this could happen as well.
2) Maybe NR increases adrenalin levels, so you just run harder. That is a harder thing to test. But if you were really dedicated I guess you could design some way to capture adrenalin with a 24 hour metanephrines urine test before you start NR, and then after a week of supplementing, repeat the test and compare overall adrenalin levels.
One of my great surprises when I was on a ton of supplements is that they made my adrenalin EXPLODE. I was working 24x7 well into the red line area of adrenalin, and when my allopath made me stop all supplements, adrenalin came down dramatically, and I could within days of stopping supplements feel the removal of a huge physiological stress.
Here is full text for the study you pointed to:
http://www.kirunahas..._limitation.pdf
It's impossible for us to assess this without going to each primary source and seeing the actual VO2Max data points for their test subjects. It would not surprise me that these were young people in perfect health who were athletic. Yes, those endurance-trained individuals are limited on heart rate. Did these studies fail to test people who are either aging, metabolically impaired, or under-trained? I doubt that population was well represented, even though that population represents most people who would be taking Niagen to improve their performance in the first place. In any case, my use of VO2Max + CO2 bypasses this entirely, by observing aerobic efficiency at very early workloads in the test, looking for improvements far before you get to VO2Max.
A thoughtful response with some good information.
Absolutely agree that the baseline physiology has a huge bearing on the degree of improvement in exercise, but I'm thinking of your average punter*.
I still stand by the original point: that whatever aerobic (and anaerobic) improvements NR offers at exertion levels relevant to exercise, will be undetectable from noise and other variables or, given sufficient n, negligible in effect.
Happy to be proven wrong and look forward to some VO2 tests to indicate I might be mistaken.
*ok health, usual aging impact.
Posted 15 March 2015 - 03:10 AM
I began NR over 6 months ago, with the understanding that it is operating at the cellular level and thus things might unfold/improve over time (I'm 64). I spent two all nighters consuming every scrap of information I could gleen on NR once I began to explore it/restarted my membership ion LongeCity.... It sounded exciting and intriguing... so I bought in.... I noticed improvements in night vision within a few weeks (undeniable, not subjective) and a gradual improvement in metabolic functioning with NO changes to my lifestyle/exercise/life extension regimin. I specifically tried to change nothing but NR/micronized Resveratrol.I am at 1 gram/day. Would love testing but it ain't gonna happen at my economic level...
I do a wide range of telomere/mitochondrial health adjuncts as well as a host of other things... Eat extremely well. I do most of this on faith in selected research results I've come across over the years. Have no idea what I'd be like if I didn't have a fairly complete stack (I'm healthier than most of my peers).
Since beginning NR/Res I walk easier, climb rocks better, ascend/descend stairs with no more niggles, and do believe there are cellular improvements going on. As Duarte notes, it'll be a decade before we begin to fully understand this complex ecosystem which houses us but I'm convinced that my body is functioning better. It is NOT placebo that I can see the combo and unlock my gate at dusk these days when I needed a flashlight before... I assume elevating nad at the cellular level is having such a wide range/myrid of effects,,,it will be quite awhile before we get a handle on it.
I kind of laugh at all the WOW! comments... this ain't speed...
Edited by Vastmandana, 15 March 2015 - 03:12 AM.
Posted 15 March 2015 - 03:46 AM
A thoughtful response with some good information.
Absolutely agree that the baseline physiology has a huge bearing on the degree of improvement in exercise, but I'm thinking of your average punter*.
I still stand by the original point: that whatever aerobic (and anaerobic) improvements NR offers at exertion levels relevant to exercise, will be undetectable from noise and other variables or, given sufficient n, negligible in effect.
Happy to be proven wrong and look forward to some VO2 tests to indicate I might be mistaken.
*ok health, usual aging impact.
Just to be clear, I was never saying NR is going to improve aerobic efficiency. I was responding to someone whose exercise performance supposedly improved while taking NR, and I was suggesting that he measure that performance in an objective way, to determine if the reason for the better performance was better aerobic metabolism.
To your point on O2 being the bottleneck for aerobic metabolism: it would be really cool if they could get some of your mitochondria right before you take the VO2Max test, then test them in vitro. If there were a way to calibrate the work done by the isolated mitochondria to the numbers in the VO2Max test, you would be able to bombard the mitochondria with extra oxygen and see whether O2 is actually the rate limiting factor.
Posted 15 March 2015 - 08:04 AM
A thoughtful response with some good information.
Absolutely agree that the baseline physiology has a huge bearing on the degree of improvement in exercise, but I'm thinking of your average punter*.
I still stand by the original point: that whatever aerobic (and anaerobic) improvements NR offers at exertion levels relevant to exercise, will be undetectable from noise and other variables or, given sufficient n, negligible in effect.
Happy to be proven wrong and look forward to some VO2 tests to indicate I might be mistaken.
*ok health, usual aging impact.
Just to be clear, I was never saying NR is going to improve aerobic efficiency. I was responding to someone whose exercise performance supposedly improved while taking NR, and I was suggesting that he measure that performance in an objective way, to determine if the reason for the better performance was better aerobic metabolism.
To your point on O2 being the bottleneck for aerobic metabolism: it would be really cool if they could get some of your mitochondria right before you take the VO2Max test, then test them in vitro. If there were a way to calibrate the work done by the isolated mitochondria to the numbers in the VO2Max test, you would be able to bombard the mitochondria with extra oxygen and see whether O2 is actually the rate limiting factor.
You were clear, I should have worded my post less like I was stubbornly holding my ground.
Posted 15 March 2015 - 02:54 PM
I kind of laugh at all the WOW! comments... this ain't speed...
................I agree, I am expecting NR at the dosage most people are taking making things work more like they used to for us older dudes (53 years old) and keeping things working as they are for the younger folks.......Anything other than that will be a welcome bonus. Only time and more research will tell.
Posted 15 March 2015 - 03:35 PM
I began NR over 6 months ago, with the understanding that it is operating at the cellular level and thus things might unfold/improve over time (I'm 64). I spent two all nighters consuming every scrap of information I could gleen on NR once I began to explore it/restarted my membership ion LongeCity.... It sounded exciting and intriguing... so I bought in.... I noticed improvements in night vision within a few weeks (undeniable, not subjective) and a gradual improvement in metabolic functioning with NO changes to my lifestyle/exercise/life extension regimin. I specifically tried to change nothing but NR/micronized Resveratrol.I am at 1 gram/day. Would love testing but it ain't gonna happen at my economic level...
I do a wide range of telomere/mitochondrial health adjuncts as well as a host of other things... Eat extremely well. I do most of this on faith in selected research results I've come across over the years. Have no idea what I'd be like if I didn't have a fairly complete stack (I'm healthier than most of my peers).
Since beginning NR/Res I walk easier, climb rocks better, ascend/descend stairs with no more niggles, and do believe there are cellular improvements going on. As Duarte notes, it'll be a decade before we begin to fully understand this complex ecosystem which houses us but I'm convinced that my body is functioning better. It is NOT placebo that I can see the combo and unlock my gate at dusk these days when I needed a flashlight before... I assume elevating nad at the cellular level is having such a wide range/myrid of effects,,,it will be quite awhile before we get a handle on it.
I kind of laugh at all the WOW! comments... this ain't speed...
I started Niagen two months ago. I'm 45 years old. Here are the things I observed and are similar with yours:
- my eyes are not that tired. My job is a lot sitting in front of computers (let's say 24/7 like my wife is teasing me)
- more energy and improved endurance at the gym (not every time, but I do feel that more than before).
- more focus and ability to concentrate
- can go on for hours without being hungry - I can fast for 18-20 hours.
- let's call it more "well being" - sometimes I do feel "well", like when I was a kid and had not many problems, but just do homework for school, play, eat ...
I did NOT see any iprovements in:
- skin (skin texture, like less wrinkles, etc.)
- hair (less gray, regrowth, etc.)
- I have problems when the weather changes, I feel pain through my legs and neck (we had a whiplash like 16 years ago when a car hit us in the rear) and the neck pain when weather changes is bothersome - so this pain both legs and neck did not change/improve
I take Niagen early in the morning (250 mg) with MitoQ, Blueberry extract, Trans-Resveratrol, D3+K2 and fish oil/Omega 3, B12.
During the day I take Alpha-Lipoic Acid, CoQ10, L-Carnitine, L-Carnosine, L-Gluthatione, propolis, Gerovital, Green Tea Extract - some days I take N-Acetyl Cysteine.
Before bed I take Melatonin + L-Taurine
Posted 15 March 2015 - 10:59 PM
Hi Everyone- I've been lurking on this thread since late fall. I've found it very useful. Thanks for all the posts and links!
I'm age 60, female.
I've been taking 1250. mg of Niagen sublingually every morning since Dec. 15th.
I also started MitoQ & PQQ 1 week later.
I was already taking [for many years each]:
3 EPAx fish oil capsules
250 mg Metformin (not prescribed, no diabetes, just for possible life-extension)
Resveratrol and/or Pterostilbene in varying doses
SAMe 1600 mg
Methyl-B12, Methyl Folate
D3
BHT
Enteric coated aspirin
Turmeric
Within the first week I was taking Niagen, I noticed:
-more energy and concentration
-sharper vision but intermittently
Gradually those effects are less noticeable--can't entirely tell if they diminished or I got used to the better norm, but I think it's "diminished again" in the case of the super vision and "got used to" in the case of energy levels.
I've noticed no change to grey hair or fine wrinkles, but my skin has gradually come to feel softer and doesn't have the dryness it usually does in the winter.
I have also developed some soreness in my ankles and upper part of my feet, especially on one side, which my doctor thinks is mild tendonitis. I've never had this before and it's come on gradually over the last couple months.. I hadn't considered that it could be related to the Niagen until I read some of the recent posts about similar symptoms. Mine's not that bad and I think it's slightly better the last 10 days, so I'm not considering lowering the Niagen so far.
I'm happy with the subtle effects--mostly bit more energy and skin seems in better shape--and impressed with the research so I intend to continue for the foreseeable future.
Posted 16 March 2015 - 01:21 AM
Walking extensively is not the culprit, it's not the first time I've done it. I know my body and what ales me, and when it ales me. I'm 41 yo, I play sand volleyball on the regular, and have never had issues with my feet. I have always exercised in one way or another.
That being said, I keep close tabs on what happens to me when taking new supplements. I was not taking any other supplements save for the NR at that point, so monitoring was fairly easy. I took specific notice when I had a tightening of my tendons in the heel area. The ache in my foot would indicate to me that more irritation has occurred. I am now off NR and the ache has subsided and so has the tightness in my tendons... I really wish it was not the case as I enjoyed the extra energy as I said before.
Out of curiosity are you taking any Statins? I'm not suggesting you stop or anything, just asking.
Musculoskeletal side effects are reported with HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors which have included rhabdomyolysis, arthralgia, tendonitis and tendon rupture.
http://www.webmd.com...o-tendon-injury
There is a line of evidence suggesting statins interfere with collagen production http://arthritis-res...ontent/14/2/r90
I can site a number of other studies.
Now this is just me but I stopped taking Pravastatin because the NR just couldn't keep up with the tendonitis and leg weakness symptoms I was getting from the statin. I'm feeling much better now.
Posted 16 March 2015 - 05:43 AM
Walking extensively is not the culprit, it's not the first time I've done it. I know my body and what ales me, and when it ales me. I'm 41 yo, I play sand volleyball on the regular, and have never had issues with my feet. I have always exercised in one way or another.
That being said, I keep close tabs on what happens to me when taking new supplements. I was not taking any other supplements save for the NR at that point, so monitoring was fairly easy. I took specific notice when I had a tightening of my tendons in the heel area. The ache in my foot would indicate to me that more irritation has occurred. I am now off NR and the ache has subsided and so has the tightness in my tendons... I really wish it was not the case as I enjoyed the extra energy as I said before.
Out of curiosity are you taking any Statins? I'm not suggesting you stop or anything, just asking.
Musculoskeletal side effects are reported with HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors which have included rhabdomyolysis, arthralgia, tendonitis and tendon rupture.
http://www.webmd.com...o-tendon-injury
There is a line of evidence suggesting statins interfere with collagen production http://arthritis-res...ontent/14/2/r90
I can site a number of other studies.
Now this is just me but I stopped taking Pravastatin because the NR just couldn't keep up with the tendonitis and leg weakness symptoms I was getting from the statin. I'm feeling much better now.
And if you are with statins I recommend that better check your CK levels, statins are relationated with myophaties, so better check that. Like said Brian, there are many studies of myophaty and statins
http://www.medsafe.g.../Statinmyop.htm
Posted 27 March 2015 - 04:30 PM
Is anyone else having any "brain fog" issues? I alluded to this in an earlier post where I noted that my ability to solve sudoku puzzles had declined. Since then I have added in some methylation supplements and the brain fog has become worse. But it started with the NR.
At this point I'm stopping everything to get a fresh start in a week or so. At that point I'll probably start with metafolin and b12 only. After a little time on that if I don't see negative impact I'll add back in the NR starting at 125mg.
One thing I'm curious about is whether or not the high availability of Niacin through NR could be doing some detox that is causing the brain fog. I started off on 250mg but proceeded pretty quickly to 1 gm. The last week or so I've been on 250mg bid.
I tend toward the impulsive and don't keep records so what I've done remains a bit vague which is partly why I'm stopping completely except for my rx meds of 100mg buproprion and gabapentin 300mg both daily along with vitamins d3 and A.
thanks for any feedback,
Mike
Posted 28 March 2015 - 12:02 AM
Is anyone else having any "brain fog" issues? I alluded to this in an earlier post where I noted that my ability to solve sudoku puzzles had declined. Since then I have added in some methylation supplements and the brain fog has become worse. But it started with the NR.
At this point I'm stopping everything to get a fresh start in a week or so. At that point I'll probably start with metafolin and b12 only. After a little time on that if I don't see negative impact I'll add back in the NR starting at 125mg.
One thing I'm curious about is whether or not the high availability of Niacin through NR could be doing some detox that is causing the brain fog. I started off on 250mg but proceeded pretty quickly to 1 gm. The last week or so I've been on 250mg bid.
I tend toward the impulsive and don't keep records so what I've done remains a bit vague which is partly why I'm stopping completely except for my rx meds of 100mg buproprion and gabapentin 300mg both daily along with vitamins d3 and A.
thanks for any feedback,
Mike
I get brain fog with B vitamins (B6 particularly) and CoQ10, but in my case it seems to be driving overproduction of adrenalin/epinephrine. Many of the symptoms I get seem to be secondary to the high epinephrine. I'm not clear yet that NR has any positive effect, but it does not by itself cause a dramatic brain fog or negative effect.
I have to say I have serious doubts about the whole methylation optimization bandwagon. I normally see people who are really sick doing these methylation therapies, and I have yet to see one say "I'm cured". I have seen several claim they feel better, but they seem to always be chasing their tail, changing the dose, claiming they have setbacks, etc. I don't have good empirical evidence suggesting that methylation therapies really make a permanent and positive difference to people's lives. And as I said elsewhere, I had a doctor that had me stop taking all supplements recently and I felt much better very quickly. That really disappoints me that you can significantly harm your sense of well being by over medicating yourself with supplements.
One thing that really bothers me is that many of the practitioners in the methylation area do not do closed loop testing. In other words, they will find a genetic "defect" then start piling you on supplements. But did you in fact have a problem as a result of this defect? There should be some tight testing of metabolites before and after to prove that something was in fact broken, and that the supplements did in fact resolve the metabolic issue. I don't see practitioners ever getting that deeply detailed with their patients.
Edited by pone11, 28 March 2015 - 12:12 AM.
Posted 30 March 2015 - 11:13 PM
Age:43
Sex: Male
Dosage: Life Extension, Optimized Resveratrol with NAD+ Cell Generator Nicotinamide Riboside (so only 100 mg Niagen)
Dosage frequency: One in the morning every day
How did you arrive at the dosage you're using: Just followed the recommendation on the bottle
Consumed with or without food: On empty stomach, sometimes taken with Inulin
When did NR consumption commence A bit more than one month now
Are you considering the circadian clock in your decision of when to dose: No
Are you taking any other NAD+ precursors: No
Are you taking any CD38 inhibitors: No
Are you taking any other "mitochondrial enhancers": I guess the resveratrol in the NAD+ pills I take?
Athletic/exercise experience: intermediate
Types of exercise involved: 1.5 - 2 hours of fitness 3 times a week
Health metrics: I'm 186 cm high, 92 kilo, normal blood pressure
Measurable cognitive changes: I'm now really awake and relaxed during the whole day, while I used to have many 'dips', and 'brain fog'. I feel better overall.
Measurable changes in fitness: A subtle kind of relaxed energy
General, overall analysis of NR: For me this is the best supplement I ever took. I used to be able to sleep perfectly up untill I was about 25.
After that I started getting major problems with my sleep, and the last few years my overall energy was really going down. I mentally sometimes was not 100%
during the day, even after having slept well. Now I don't have ANY sleep problems anymore, and I sleep 1.5 hours LESS a day. Plus I'm more awake and
energetic during the day. This is for sure something I will continue taking.
Besides this supplement I'm taking 'on most days' 3 times 1 gram of Vit C, Green Tea Extract (500 mg), Calcium (333mg), Magnesium (133 mg), Zinc (5mg). Sometimes I also take Wobenzym N.
Posted 01 April 2015 - 09:23 AM
Within the first week I was taking Niagen, I noticed:
-more energy and concentration
-sharper vision but intermittently
Gradually those effects are less noticeable--can't entirely tell if they diminished or I got used to the better norm, but I think it's "diminished again" in the case of the super vision and "got used to" in the case of energy levels.
I've noticed no change to grey hair or fine wrinkles, but my skin has gradually come to feel softer and doesn't have the dryness it usually does in the winter.
I have also developed some soreness in my ankles and upper part of my feet, especially on one side, which my doctor thinks is mild tendonitis. I've never had this before and it's come on gradually over the last couple months.. I hadn't considered that it could be related to the Niagen until I read some of the recent posts about similar symptoms. Mine's not that bad and I think it's slightly better the last 10 days, so I'm not considering lowering the Niagen so far.
I'm happy with the subtle effects--mostly bit more energy and skin seems in better shape--and impressed with the research so I intend to continue for the foreseeable future.
The experiences of my friend Brian (63), wife Donna (55) and self (58) have been almost identical to yours. The tendonitis reduces as your dosage reduces, but wont go completely away till you have been off N/R for a few weeks, but gets much worse as your dosage increases. I was taking about 21/2 grams a day for a while and found I could barely walk.
I'm hoping the problem is the N/R itself and that some other precursor can raise NAD without the side effects.
Mike
Posted 02 April 2015 - 05:33 AM
"I had a pain in the 5th metatarsal on the outside of my foot" ..................."after a day and a half of walking around the park"
I think the answer is right there, I dont think the NR has anything at all to do with it.
Maybe he knows what his body can tolerate and that activity would usually not have caused anything. I'm not saying it causes tendonitis.
Posted 02 April 2015 - 07:16 AM
Took a single cap of NR this morning and the brain fog has returned. I'll try again tomorrow but it's not looking good. I recall being extra sensitive to SamE and 5htp 10+ years ago when I tried them as well. SamE gave me prozac like sexual side effects and 5htp made me extremely sleepy. I have a gene that impacts metformin as well. Sounds like I just might not be a good candidate for some of this stuff including NR.
BTW stopping NR rulted in complete cessation of the brain fog after only one day.
Mike
Posted 02 April 2015 - 08:00 AM
If you want you can buy it in powder form but it's more expensive than the caps.
http://www.tigerfitn...hpnnrpowder.htm
You get the same number of servings and it is given as 125mg for 60 servings.
Posted 02 April 2015 - 03:30 PM
Stats: 70yo, 179lb, 6'1", good health, physically active
I have been taking 500mg of HPN Niagen (4 caps) for a couple of months without much effect.
I take it first thing in the morning with coffee before eating, along with a couple of ibuprofen and 5000iu D3.
No other supplements. I try to eat lots of polyphenols: nuts, berries, red wine, apples, etc.
When I first started Niagen, it seemed my dreams were more vivid, but that went away quickly, and I
have no other psycho active experiences to report.
In the last year I have had some problems with arthritis in my lower back and neck, but Niagen has not helped this.
I was taking C60oo weekly for several years, but I stopped taking C60oo about 6 months ago to see if was
connected with the arthritis. Since they seem unconnected I may resume weekly teaspoon of C60oo.
2 or 3 times a week I play tennis, run, and lift weights, so I keep close track on my endurance and strength, and
there has been no significant changes since Niagen. My tennis serve has not improved :(.
For folks who have been asking for VO2max data, I have some but you probably will not be happy with its validity!
A few months ago, my gym got some new stair steppers (Matrix C5X ClimbMill by matrixfitness.com) and I found
a "WFI Fitness Test" setting that calculates?!? VO2max from stair climbing results without any breath analysis.
You input age, weight and height and the stepper continually ramps up your step rate until you hit a maximum heart rate
as measured by heart rate sensors on the machine hand grips. Here is the manufacturer's description:
Posted 02 April 2015 - 03:45 PM
I take it first thing in the morning with coffee before eating, along with a couple of ibuprofen and 5000iu D3.
I dont know if this is relevant to your Niagen but I have the powdered form and you mix it with water of juice. It stated NOT to use hot or warm water but does not give a reason......I wonder if the warm or hot liquid it may render it inactive?
And for what its worth that V02 max result will be way off, their is no way that can be calculated from anything other than you breath analysis.
By the way AV02 max reading of 40 at your age would be phenomenally good..If your true V02 max were 40, then that may be another reason you may not be feeling any benefits from NR as you may be in super fit condition and your NAD levels may be excellent already......Just a thought?
Posted 02 April 2015 - 05:57 PM
Within the first week I was taking Niagen, I noticed:
-more energy and concentration
-sharper vision but intermittently
Gradually those effects are less noticeable--can't entirely tell if they diminished or I got used to the better norm, but I think it's "diminished again" in the case of the super vision and "got used to" in the case of energy levels.
I've noticed no change to grey hair or fine wrinkles, but my skin has gradually come to feel softer and doesn't have the dryness it usually does in the winter.
I have also developed some soreness in my ankles and upper part of my feet, especially on one side, which my doctor thinks is mild tendonitis. I've never had this before and it's come on gradually over the last couple months.. I hadn't considered that it could be related to the Niagen until I read some of the recent posts about similar symptoms. Mine's not that bad and I think it's slightly better the last 10 days, so I'm not considering lowering the Niagen so far.
I'm happy with the subtle effects--mostly bit more energy and skin seems in better shape--and impressed with the research so I intend to continue for the foreseeable future.
The experiences of my friend Brian (63), wife Donna (55) and self (58) have been almost identical to yours. The tendonitis reduces as your dosage reduces, but wont go completely away till you have been off N/R for a few weeks, but gets much worse as your dosage increases. I was taking about 21/2 grams a day for a while and found I could barely walk.
I'm hoping the problem is the N/R itself and that some other precursor can raise NAD without the side effects.
Mike
Mike,
Thanks for your message--interesting.
I'm not 100% convinced my foot and ankle pain is related to the NR but it is striking how many of the 55-60 year old users have mentioned tendonitis. (Your 3, Brainfart, me, and at least one more I've lost track of) My doctor ordered an x-ray of the foot/ankle that was hurting the worse of the two, and it shows mild inflammation in both one tendon and the ligament. I think it's gradually getting better and even if it is related to the NR, I'm hoping that whatever about NAD activity there is causing some inflammation will abate or even prove healthy in the long run. The extra energy/focus is worth sticking it out a while, though it's certainly why I haven't acted on my original intention to work myself up from 1250 to 2000 mg.
0 members, 28 guests, 0 anonymous users
Community Forum Software by IP.Board
Licensed to: ImmInst.org
This topic is locked
