• How does NR compare to NMN?

  • Sources:

    Nicotinamide riboside (NR) and nicotinamide mononucleotide (NMN) are both precursors to NAD+, an essential molecule involved in cellular processes and aging. Here's a comparison based on discussions from the :

    1. Efficacy as NAD+ Precursors: NR is noted to cross the cell membrane more easily than NMN, which cannot enter cells directly due to its extra phosphate group. This means that NR is generally considered more effective at increasing NAD+ levels in cells compared to orally ingested NMN, which must first be converted into NR to become bioavailable 1.

    2. Bioavailability and Dosage: NMN can be taken sublingually, which may improve its efficacy. However, due to the conversion process NMN undergoes, it requires a higher dosage to achieve similar effects as NR. The cost-effectiveness of each supplement depends on these dosage requirements 1.

    3. Regulatory and Commercial Aspects: There's a commercial debate surrounding the two, with NR having an FDA designation of "Generally Recognized As Safe" (GRAS), allowing it to be sold freely. NMN, however, faces regulatory scrutiny and is not authorized as a supplement by the FDA, despite still being available 2.

    4. Scientific Consensus: and have both studied these molecules extensively. Some data from animal studies suggest potential benefits in terms of energy and aging; however, the relevance to humans and their impact on lifespan are still largely speculative 3 4.

    5. Personal Experiences and Recommendations: personally uses both NR and NMN for energy rather than lifespan extension, acknowledging that the benefits in humans have yet to be conclusively proven 5.

    Overall, while NR and NMN are similar in their ultimate goal of boosting NAD+, their methods of action, regulatory status, and commercial availability differ. It appears there's no strong consensus favoring one over the other, and personal choice may depend on individual response and considerations like cost.

    RELATED QUESTIONS