Unlike the growing, though still preliminary, research linking NAD+ to menopause-related changes in women, a comparable body of evidence does not exist indicating NAD+ benefits specific exclusively to male physiology. Research does not support it as a clearly distinct scientific category.
However, men are widely represented in NAD+ research. Some important studies have included only men, while many others have recruited mixed-gender populations. In this article, we discuss what these studies show, whether men need different NAD+ products or doses, and how products advertised specifically „for men” differ from standard formulations.
Are there any NAD+ benefits specific to men?
Current research does not indicate a separate set of NAD+ benefits that would apply exclusively to men.
Much of the foundational research on NAD+ precursors involved men or was conducted exclusively with male participants, but the reported results generally concerned broader areas such as safety, metabolism, physical fitness, and NAD+ biology, rather than male-specific effects.
For example, one of the first human safety studies on NMN was carried out on healthy Japanese men. Single doses of up to 500 mg were tested, and no significant changes in vital signs or laboratory test results were found [1].
In a separate 12-week, randomised, placebo-controlled trial, nicotinamide riboside at a dose of 2,000 mg per day was evaluated in men with obesity and insulin resistance [2].
The study showed increased release of fatty acids into the bloodstream, suggesting a fat mobilization effect. However, no significant improvement in insulin sensitivity or body weight reduction was demonstrated [2].
Aside from these studies involving exclusively men, the majority of important NR and NMN studies have recruited both men and women. In many cases, results were not presented separately by sex.
This makes it difficult to determine whether men respond differently than women to the same intervention using an NAD+ precursor.
There is some evidence pointing to baseline biological differences between the sexes.
In one observational study measuring the plasma NAD+/NADH ratio, it was shown that the average ratio in men was lower than in women, although this difference decreased with age [3].
This is a measured difference in output NAD+ metabolism, but it does not prove that men derive greater, different or more specific benefits from supplementation.
Generally, men are well represented in NAD+ research, but the evidence does not support treating „NAD+ benefits for men” as a distinct biological category.
Potential effects described in wider NAD+ research — including changes in metabolic markers, NAD+ levels, lipid profile and selected parameters of physical performance — relate to men as part of wider studied adult populations.
Do men need different NAD+ products or dosages?
There is no established evidence to indicate that men require a different dose of NAD+ precursor, a different formulation, or a different route of administration based on sex alone.
The dose ranges used in human NR and NMN trials also included men. Across various studies, doses ranged from approximately 100 mg to 2,000 mg per day, depending on the specific compound, study design and population investigated.
These ranges are therefore not specific to women or men. They come from general studies of adults, which often included both sexes, and in some cases exclusively men.
The same applies to the way it is served.
Oral capsules, transdermal patches, and injection and intravenous NAD+ preparations do not have established male-specific usage requirements.
Scientific issues relating to each form primarily concern factors such as absorption, bioavailability, molecular properties, manufacturing quality and route-specific safety, rather than sex.
For example, limitations related to the transdermal delivery of NAD+ — including the relatively large molecular weight and charged structure of NAD+ — are pharmacological properties of the molecule itself and are not known to differ between men and women.
Similarly, there is no evidence that an NAD+ product labelled „for men” works differently than the standard version, unless it actually contains different active ingredients, dosages or delivery technology.
Merely labelling a product as intended for men does not mean it is a scientifically distinct product.
Which NAD+ products are advertised specifically for men?
NAD+ products targeted at men typically differ more in their branding and additional ingredients than in the NAD+ precursor itself.
One of the common approaches is the use of multi-ingredient formulations.
These products may combine NR, NMN or another NAD+-related ingredient with compounds commonly promoted as supporting testosterone, muscle recovery, energy or athletic performance.
Examples might include zinc, D-aspartic acid, plant extracts or other ingredients associated with men's health products.
However, there are few direct clinical studies evaluating NAD+ precursors together with such testosterone- or muscle-targeted ingredients as a single combined formulation.
This means that claims of synergy are usually based on separate data or a biological rationale for the individual ingredients, rather than studies showing that their combination produces a distinct effect.
Another significant difference is marketing.
Some products use packaging, language and positioning focused on themes such as gym performance, strength, recovery, „peak form” or general male wellness.
Such marketing choices do not necessarily reflect a different scientific formulation.
Dose and route of administration may also be used for product differentiation.
For example, a product targeted at men may contain a higher amount of NR or NMN, use a different capsule format, or combine several ingredients.
Such differences should not be automatically interpreted as male-specific benefits if they have not been directly investigated.
Generally, products advertised „for men” are usually variants of standard products containing NAD+ precursors, rather than a separate category supported by male-specific clinical evidence.
The most significant differences still concern the specific active compound, the actual dose, additional ingredients, the method of administration, manufacturing quality, and whether the formulation itself has been evaluated in human studies.
How strong is the evidence regarding men?
The evidence regarding men is broad enough to confirm that men participated in studies on NAD+ precursors, but not sufficient to establish a distinct benefit profile specific to men.
Some studies provide useful information precisely because they included exclusively men.
A Japanese NMN study provided early human safety data [1], while a 12-week NR study in men with obesity and insulin resistance provided metabolic data indicating increased fatty acid mobilisation without significant improvement in insulin sensitivity or weight reduction [2].
These studies are useful, but they answer narrow questions regarding specific populations.
They do not confirm a broader impact on testosterone, fertility, muscle mass gains, sexual function, athletic performance, or other effects commonly associated with products advertised for men.
Most of the remaining evidence comes from clinical trials involving both sexes.
Because many of these studies did not present separate analyses for men and women, it remains unclear whether there are clinically significant sex differences in response to supplementation.
Current evidence therefore supports the general interpretation regarding adults rather than a separate interpretation specific to men.
Claims regarding men's health that remain poorly researched
Several claims commonly associated with the „NAD+ for men” category have little to no direct clinical evidence.
One example is testosterone.
Although NAD+ participates in cellular metabolism and many biological pathways, there is no established base of human clinical research showing that standard NR or NMN supplementation increases testosterone levels in men.
Another area where marketing can go beyond the available evidence is muscle growth.
Some studies on NAD+ precursors evaluated physical performance, mitochondrial biology, or muscle-related parameters, but this is not equivalent to demonstrating an increase in muscle mass or strength specifically in men.
Similarly, there is no established evidence that NAD+ precursors improve male fertility, semen quality, erectile function, libido or other reproductive parameters in healthy men.
Sports results also remain insufficiently researched as a male-specific outcome.
Studies on walking performance, mitochondrial metabolism or general physical function should not be automatically interpreted as evidence of improved gym performance, endurance, recovery or athletic achievement.
These distinctions are important because the broad biological role of NAD+ in energy metabolism does not confirm a specific clinical benefit for every area of men's health.
How should the available evidence be interpreted?
The most accurate interpretation is that men form part of a broader body of evidence regarding NAD+ precursors, rather than constituting a distinct therapeutic category.
Some important studies have been conducted exclusively on men, but their results mainly concern safety and metabolic effects.
Currently, there is no strong evidence to suggest that male physiology requires different NAD+ products, a different dosage, or a different route of administration.
Similarly, branding directed at men does not imply a different biological effect.
Products labelled „for men” may contain additional ingredients, but such formulations often lack dedicated studies evaluating the entire combination.
Current literature therefore supports the evaluation of NAD+ research based on the specific precursor, dose, study population, evaluated effect and study design, rather than on a marketing-driven gender division.
Limitations of current evidence
- Most research on NAD+ precursors does not present results separately for men and women, which makes it difficult to assess true sex-related differences.
- The number of studies conducted exclusively in men remains limited compared to the entire body of research regarding NAD+.
- The male-specific studies discussed here assessed narrow areas, including short-term safety and metabolic effects, rather than a broad range of men's health parameters [1,2].
- There is no established clinical evidence showing that NAD+ precursors provide men with specific benefits regarding testosterone, fertility, libido, erectile function or muscle growth.
- Dedicated research evaluating athletic performance and recovery specifically in men remains limited.
- No dedicated clinical studies testing NAD+ precursors together with testosterone-supporting or muscle-recovery ingredients, which are often used in „men's” formulations, have been identified.
- Claims regarding synergy in multi-ingredient products are therefore usually based on separate justification for the individual ingredients, rather than direct evidence concerning the complete formulation.
- The reported sex difference in the plasma NAD+/NADH ratio stems from a single observational study and describes a baseline biological difference rather than a difference in response to supplementation [3].
- The lower average NAD+/NADH ratio in men does not prove that they need a greater amount of NAD+ or that they benefit more from supplementation.
- Current evidence does not specify a male-specific NAD+ dose, formulation, or route of administration.
Disclaimer
The article is purely educational in nature and summarises scientific research. It does not constitute medical advice or a recommendation for or against NAD+ supplementation.
NAD+ and its precursors should not be presented as FDA- or EMA-approved treatments for testosterone deficiency, infertility, sexual disorders, muscle mass loss, enhancement of athletic performance, metabolic diseases, ageing, or other conditions, unless referring to a specific approved medicinal product and indication.
Current human studies include both male-only and mixed-sex populations, but do not confirm a distinct set of NAD+ benefits unique exclusively to males.
Branding targeted at men, higher doses, additional ingredients or multi-ingredient formulations should not be interpreted as evidence of greater efficacy or sex-specific action, unless specific products or formulations have been directly evaluated in relevant human clinical trials.
References
[1] Irie, J., Inagaki, E., Fujita, M., Nakaya, H., Mitsuishi, M., Yamaguchi, S., Yamashita, K., Shigaki, S., Ono, T., Yukioka, H., Okano, H., Nabeshima, Y., Imai, S., & Yasuda, K. (2020). Effect of oral administration of nicotinamide mononucleotide on clinical parameters and nicotinamide metabolite levels in healthy Japanese men. Endocrine Journal, 67(2), 153–160. https://doi.org/10.1507/endocrj.EJ19-0313
[2] Dollerup, O. L., Christensen, B., Svart, M., Schmidt, M. S., Sulek, K., Ringgaard, S., Stødkilde-Jørgensen, H., Møller, N., Brenner, C., Treebak, J. T., & Jessen, N. (2018). A randomised placebo-controlled clinical trial of nicotinamide riboside in obese men: Safety, insulin-sensitivity, and lipid-mobilising effects. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 108(2), 343–353. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcn/nqy132
[3] Schwarzmann, L., Pliquett, R. U., Simm, A., & Bartling, B. (2021). Sex-related differences in human plasma NAD+/NADH levels depend on age. Bioscience Reports, 41(1), BSR20200340. https://doi.org/10.1042/BSR20200340