NAD+ dosing claims on TikTok: units, milligrams, and what the research actually supports

A recent TikTok video from Inside Out Aesthetics presents a common but confusing picture of NAD+ therapy. The creator says that dosing varies widely, with some patients starting at 20 units and working up to 40–50 units, injected three to five times per week. They also mention that some clinics offer IV NAD+ infusions up to 300 mg, and that their own practice typically recommends 40 units of subcutaneous injections four times a week for improved energy, faster recovery, and overall wellness. The clip also notes that a mild chest-tightening sensation at higher doses is a normal response.

What the clip is claiming

The central claim is that NAD+ can be dosed in “units” for subcutaneous injection, that 40 units four times weekly is a reasonable protocol, and that this approach supports energy, recovery, and wellness. The clip also implies that IV infusions up to 300 mg are a standard clinical option, and that chest tightness is an expected side effect at higher doses.

What the research neighborhood actually covers

NAD+ (nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide) is a coenzyme central to cellular metabolism, DNA repair, and sirtuin activation. Research on NAD+ precursors—like nicotinamide riboside (NR) and nicotinamide mononucleotide (NMN)—has explored their role in age-related decline, mitochondrial function, and metabolic health. However, most published studies use oral supplementation or IV administration, not subcutaneous injections. The dosing in those studies is expressed in milligrams (e.g., 250–1000 mg per day orally, or 100–500 mg per IV session), not in “units” on an insulin syringe.

The “units” terminology is a clinical compounding convention, not a research standard. A unit on a U-100 syringe equals 0.01 mL, and the actual milligram dose depends on how the NAD+ is reconstituted. Without knowing the concentration, “40 units” could mean anywhere from a few milligrams to over 100 mg. The clip does not specify the concentration, which is a critical omission for anyone trying to interpret the claim.

Limits, missing context, and what a 15-second clip cannot show

A short video cannot convey the complexity of NAD+ dosing. First, the clip conflates units with milligrams, which can lead to dangerous misunderstandings. Second, the claim that chest tightness is “normal” is not supported by peer-reviewed literature; while some IV NAD+ infusions may cause transient flushing or chest pressure due to rapid administration, this is not a universal or benign response, and it warrants medical evaluation. Third, the clip does not mention that NAD+ is not FDA-approved for the indications implied (energy, recovery, wellness), and that most clinical use is off-label or experimental.

Moreover, the clip presents a single clinic’s protocol as if it were a standard, but there is no consensus on subcutaneous NAD+ dosing. Research on subcutaneous NAD+ is sparse, and most studies use IV or oral routes. The clip also omits potential interactions, contraindications, and the need for baseline blood work.

How this maps to named research compounds

Within the research-use peptide catalog, NAD+ is listed as a standalone compound. It is often studied for its role in cellular energy and aging, but it is not a peptide in the traditional sense—it is a nucleotide. The catalog also includes NAD+ in combination with other research peptides, but the clip specifically references NAD+ alone.

For researchers, NAD+ is a tool for investigating mitochondrial function, oxidative stress, and metabolic pathways. It is not intended for human use without proper oversight. The clip’s dosing advice is not a research protocol; it is a clinical anecdote. Researchers should refer to published studies for appropriate concentrations and administration routes, not to social media clips.

Research-use caveat

All compounds mentioned are for research and laboratory use only, not for human or veterinary use. They are not approved by the FDA or any regulatory body for therapeutic purposes. This article is for informational purposes and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified professional for any health-related decisions.

Open the full video fact-check page (transcript, takeaways, embedded clip).