Plain-language summary of research published in the Georgian Medical Journal. Written for the general public by the GMJ News editorial team.
Wellness clinics and social media influencers are selling NAD⁺ injections and “NAD boosters” as anti-ageing miracles — energy, longevity, brain health, all in a drip. A review in the Georgian Medical Journal examines what consumers are actually getting: the science, the documented risks, and a regulatory vacuum that lets marketing run far ahead of evidence.
The Science Behind the Hype
NAD⁺ (nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide) is a genuine and important molecule — central to cellular energy production and DNA repair, and its levels do decline with age. This kernel of real biology powers the marketing. But the leap from “important molecule that declines” to “injecting it reverses ageing” is exactly that — a leap. Robust human trial evidence for the marketed benefits of NAD⁺ infusions is thin, and how infused NAD⁺ even reaches the inside of cells remains scientifically unsettled.
The Risks Nobody Advertises
The review catalogues what the promotional materials omit: adverse effects reported with infusions (from infusion reactions to chest tightness and nausea, particularly with rapid administration), the inherent risks of intravenous therapy delivered outside medical supervision, unknown long-term safety, product quality and dosing that vary wildly in an unregulated market, and the financial harm of expensive recurring treatments sold on promises science has not confirmed.
The Regulatory Gap
These products thrive in the space between drug and supplement regulation — medical-grade interventions marketed with wellness-industry freedom. The review argues that rapid consumer adoption has outpaced oversight, and outlines the regulatory responses public health requires.
Why It Matters
The global anti-ageing market — Georgia included — is growing explosively. Consumers deserve the full picture before the needle goes in. This review provides it.
Read the Original Research
Original article: NAD⁺ Injections and “NAD Boosters”: Public Health Risks, Adverse Effects, and Regulatory Implications in the Context of Rapid Consumer Adoption
Authors: Giorgi Pkhakadze
Published in: Georgian Medical Journal, Vol. 1 No. 1 (2026) — A New Voice in Georgian Medicine
DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.19051458
📄 Read the full article at gmj.ge →
Georgian Medical Journal (GMJ) · ISSN 3088-4322 · gmj.ge · Open Access CC BY 4.0 · Published by the Public Health Institute of Georgia (PHIG). This summary is an independent editorial product of GMJ News; for clinical decisions, consult the original peer-reviewed article and a qualified professional.
Was this article helpful?
Disclaimer. This article is health journalism intended for general information and education. It is not medical advice and is not a substitute for professional diagnosis or treatment. Always consult a qualified healthcare provider about your individual circumstances. Full disclaimer →
Related Coverage
Editorial standards. This article was produced under the GMJ News editorial process, with oversight by the GMJ Editorial Board. Our editorial process. Spotted an error? Contact the editorial team.
