Folks at r/longevity suggested that the crowd here would have the chops to dig into this and the interest.I am a sometime Niagen user and pissed off if this is true (begging the question of whether it is). I have not seen this discussed anywhere here yet but sorry if it was and I missed it (and please point me there if it was. Many Redditors want to know)
Repost: the showdown between Chromadex and Elysium for control over NAD and living forever just took a weird turn. Elsyium apparently just sued Chromadex for false advertising that Tru Niagen raises NAD levels and says that Chromadex's clinical trial actually says Tru Niagen has no effect on NAD levels. I would dismiss it as more Chromadex/Elysium drama but turns out that another company sued Chromadex for the same thing a few months ago.
Main points from the legal document are that there is only one paper that tested Niagen NR at 300 mg (AKA Tru Niagen) and that if you analyze the data used for the paper there is no increase in NAD at 300 mg, only at 1000 mg. There is some unsavory stuff about Chromadex forcing the paper authors to hide it by pooling the data/information together (?) and mentioning NAD metabolism raising to make people think that NAD itself was raised.
It's bullshit if true. Paying 3x the price to get NAD up? Nah bro. Fisetin. But that begs the question of whether it is true. It's pretty detailed (and there is the second lawsuit saying the same thing) but on the other hand it could be one of those "reasonable minds could differ" things. Anyone who knows their way around a p-value want to do us all a solid and check out the data??
Legal doc: docs.wixstatic dot com ugd/7fb8ed_c222b490689d41f586ddfab11c5bd5d6.pdf
Thanks to the blogger that posts the legal docs.