Does Meditation Change How Much Sleep You Really Need?

When I go to a doc, and they give me some forms to fill out, one of the questions may be, “How many hours of sleep do you get each night?” My answer is "Six to seven hours." And that answer often raises an eyebrow.

We’ve all been told that adults need seven to nine hours of sleep, so getting six hours usually leads medical professionals to assume you’re chronically sleep-deprived. But there are two crucial questions that never get asked: “Do you meditate?” and “How long have you been meditating?”

Long Term Meditator

I’m a very long-term meditator. I’ve been meditating regularly for over 55 years, and my personal experience is that six to seven hours is genuinely all my body requires. I don't feel tired the next day, I don't struggle to stay awake during the day, and I don't rely on caffeine to get through the afternoon. I woke up ready to start the day, especially after I finished my morning meditation. I do my second meditation late afternoon or early evening, and I’m energized for the evening.

While this is me, this has raised the question for me – in general, can long-term meditators actually influence their biological sleep needs?

There is a vast difference between someone who sleeps six hours because they were up late scrolling through their phone, worrying, or managing stress, and someone who has practiced meditation for years, sleeps six hours, and wakes up naturally feeling alert. The number on the clock is identical, but the physiological circumstances are entirely different.

I Decided to See What the Research Says

It turns out that my experience isn't an anomaly. Studies on experienced meditators show noticeable differences in sleep duration and what the researchers call sleep architecture compared to non-meditators. Research indicates that long-term meditators often sleep less while maintaining normal daytime alertness and cognitive performance. In fact, a study published in Behavioral and Brain Functions found that meditation acutely improved psychomotor vigilance and suggested that meditation may actually decrease the need for sleep.

It isn't just about sleep quantity…it's about sleep quality. Sleep isn't a single homogeneous block; we rotate through different phases of sleep from light sleep to REM, and slow-wave sleep, which is deep sleep.

Deep slow-wave sleep is the most restorative phase. Research shows that long-term meditators often experience higher proportions of slow-wave sleep. Seven hours of tossing, turning, and waking up in a state of high stress is not equivalent to six hours of uninterrupted, highly restorative deep sleep.

Restful Alertness and Stress Reduction

Meditation itself provides a form of deep physiological rest. During a person’s meditation session, heart rate and metabolic activity drop while parasympathetic activity increases, which is a state researchers refer to as “restful alertness.” While you aren't asleep, your body isn't operating under the constant strain of daily stimulation.

In addition, stress is inherently exhausting. Modern life keeps our brains processing information, anticipating problems, and replaying events right up until we hit the pillow. Meditation trains the mind to step back from that constant mental chatter. Systematic reviews of one type of meditation called mindfulness show significant improvements in sleep quality and reductions in insomnia symptoms. When your brain isn't spending half the night processing unmanaged anxiety, you may simply require less time in bed to feel restored.

A Word of Caution

I am certainly not suggesting that anyone should deliberately cut their sleep short just because they started meditating. The research is looking at “experienced meditators and “long-term meditators.”

So…if you start meditating, after a couple of months, you can experiment by seeing if six to seven hours is enough. Let your body tell you what it needs. If you wake up exhausted or rely heavily on stimulants after you’ve gotten up (as in: ”I got to have that cup of coffee”), six hours is likely not enough for you. The goal isn't to hit the lowest possible number on the clock; it's to get enough restorative sleep to function at your best.

My Take

Before I started meditating, I needed 8 to 10 hours of sleep. Years of meditation have changed how my mind and body respond to stress, rest, and recovery. While the science on long-term meditation and sleep duration is still evolving, we shouldn't dismiss these experiences simply because they fall outside standard baseline recommendations.

So…perhaps it's time for medical sleep evaluations to expand beyond a single number. Instead of only asking "How many hours do you sleep?", maybe the questions on the form should also ask: "How rested do you feel?" and “Do you meditate” and "How long have you been meditating?"

This way, the doc will get the real picture of a patient's health and not just look at them as just a number!

References

·         Kaushik, R. M., et al. (2010). “Meditation acutely improves psychomotor vigilance, and may decrease sleep need.” Behavioral and Brain Functions.

·         Nagendra, R. P., Maruthai, N., & Kutty, B. M. (2012). “Meditation and Its Regulatory Role on Sleep.” Frontiers in Neurology.

·         Rusch, H. L., et al. (2018). “The effect of mindfulness meditation on sleep quality: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.” Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

·         Cahn, B. R., et al. (2013). “Experienced mindfulness meditators exhibit higher parietal-occipital EEG gamma activity during NREM sleep.” PLOS ONE.

Mental Health: It’s for the Birds

My wife, Elizabeth, is a birder. Her whole family is into birdwatching. When we’re on a road trip and I’m driving, she’ll suddenly say, “There’s a hawk!” or “Look, an eagle!”

Because I’m driving, I can only glance for a moment at what she sees. Many times, by the time I look, the bird is gone.

During the winter, we also spend a chunk of money on birdseed, with Elizabeth faithfully keeping the bird feeders full. Don’t tell her, but I actually enjoy watching the birds come to the feeders.

She subscribes to Living Bird, and while I was flipping through the magazine recently, an article about birding and brain health caught my attention. Since one of my areas of expertise is stress management, I decided to read it.

At first, I was a little skeptical. But as I dug into the research, I discovered something unexpected: birdwatching isn't just a pleasant way to spend a morning. A growing body of research suggests that engaging with birds may support cognitive function and mental well-being.

Before you run out and buy an expensive pair of binoculars, let’s take a look at the science.

Birding Gives Your Brain Something to Do

At first glance, standing outside and waiting for a bird to appear doesn't seem like much of a brain workout. Yet identifying a bird can engage several cognitive skills at once.

You’re combining visual cues, sounds, memory, attention, and pattern recognition. Deciding whether you’re looking at a Carolina Wren or a Song Sparrow requires comparing real-time sensory information with what you’ve learned from previous experiences.

At this point, I have no idea which is which.

But experienced birders do.

A 2026 study published in the Journal of Neuroscience found that experienced birders had differences in brain structure compared with beginners, particularly in areas associated with cognition and working memory. The researchers also found differences in how the brain responded to bird-related knowledge.

That doesn’t prove that birding caused those brain changes. People who are naturally inclined toward certain kinds of learning may also be more likely to become expert birders. Still, the findings are consistent with the broader concept of neuroplasticity, which is the brain’s ability to adapt and change with experience.

In other words, years of paying attention to birds may leave a measurable imprint on the brain.

Birds Can Change the Way We Experience a Walk

The benefits of birding aren't limited to identifying species.

Emily Nichols discovered this firsthand after suffering a traumatic brain injury. During her recovery, her neurosurgeon prescribed 90 minutes of walking every day. Understandably, she found walking around her neighborhood pretty boring.

Then she discovered a family of Great Horned Owls.

She spotted the owls and three owlets in a palm tree during one of her walks. Instead of thinking about how long she still had to walk or focusing on her injury, she became curious about the owls. She began visiting them at sunrise and sunset, learning about them, and looking forward to seeing them.

The walks suddenly had a purpose.

That story illustrates something important about birding: it can turn an otherwise ordinary activity into an opportunity for curiosity, attention, and connection. Nichols herself describes birds and birding as becoming an important part of her recovery.

Birding and Mindfulness

Birding also encourages you to pay attention to the present moment.

You listen for a bird call. You watch the trees for movement. You notice colors, shapes, and sounds. You are waiting quietly for a bird to appear.

In many ways, that resembles a simple form of mindfulness meditation where you are paying close attention to what is happening around you.

And there is a growing body of research suggesting that birdsong and encounters with birds can be associated with improved mental well-being.

A 2022 Scientific Reports study found that listening to birdsong for six minutes reduced anxiety and paranoia in participants compared with traffic noise.

More recently, researchers using the Urban Mind smartphone platform collected 11,631 assessments from 2,088 participants between 2020 and 2025. They found that exposure to birdsong environments was associated with higher momentary emotional well-being than environments without birdsong. Interestingly, the association was somewhat stronger among people with a mental health condition.

These studies don't prove that birdsong is a treatment for anxiety, depression, or other mental health conditions. But they add to a growing body of evidence that our everyday encounters with nature, and birds in particular, may influence how we feel.

Birding May Be More Than Just Another Nature Walk

There’s also evidence that birdwatching itself may offer benefits beyond simply being outdoors.

A study involving college students compared birdwatching with other nature-based activities and found that birdwatching was associated with improvements in well-being and reductions in psychological distress.

And the benefits aren't limited to college students.

A 2023 study involving 1,684 nursing-home residents examined birdwatching as a nature-based intervention. The intervention they did included placing bird-feeding stations outside nursing homes so residents could observe birds.

The researchers found that regular birdwatching experiences were associated with maintaining cognitive resources, mobility, and social and emotional well-being for the residents.

That finding is particularly interesting because birdwatching doesn't have to require strenuous exercise, expensive equipment, or even leaving the building.

Sometimes, all you need is a window.

You Don't Need to Be a Birder

The good news is that you don't need to become an expert to potentially enjoy some of these benefits.

You don't need expensive binoculars. You don't need to memorize hundreds of species. And you certainly don't need to be able to tell a Carolina Wren from a Song Sparrow.

Start simply.

Sit outside for 10 minutes. Put your phone away for a few minutes. Listen. Watch. Notice what moves.

If you want help identifying what you see or hear, smartphone apps such as Merlin Bird ID and BirdNET can help. If you get more involved, eBird lets you keep track of the birds you observe and contribute your observations to a massive citizen-science database.

The point isn't to see the rarest bird or check the most species off a list.

The point is to pay attention.

Maybe Elizabeth and Her Family Are Onto Something

Birding brings together several things that can be good for our mental well-being: movement, time outdoors, mental stimulation, focused attention, curiosity, and connection with nature. For many people, it can also provide social connection and a sense of purpose.

We still need more research to understand exactly how birding affects the brain and whether it can help prevent neurological or mental health conditions. But the evidence so far makes birding an intriguing and remarkably accessible way to support well-being.

I may never become the birder my wife is. I still can't tell a Carolina Wren from a Song Sparrow.

So…maybe the next time she says, “There's a hawk!” I'll catch it in my quick glance and get a smile on my face!

---

References

• Nichols, E. (2026). “Birding Influences Brain Health and Mental Health.” Living Bird, Summer 2026.
• Wing, E. A., et al. (2026). “The Tuned Cortex: Convergent Expertise-Related Structural and Functional Remodeling Across the Adult Lifespan.” Journal of Neuroscience.
• Hammoud, R., et al. (2022). “Smartphone-based ecological momentary assessment reveals mental health benefits of birdlife.” Scientific Reports.
• Stobbe, E., et al. (2022). “Birdsongs alleviate anxiety and paranoia in healthy participants.” Scientific Reports.
• Andrews, J. G., Ammirati, R. J., & Andrews, C. J. M. (2025). “Birding Benefits: A Review of Mental Health, Cognitive, Social, and Conservation Impacts.” Ecopsychology.
• Zieris, P., Freund, S., & Kals, E. (2023). “Nature experience and well-being: Bird watching as an intervention in nursing homes to maintain cognitive resources, mobility, and biopsychosocial health.” Journal of Environmental Psychology, 91, 102139.
• Liu, S., Hammoud, R., Zhu, X., Smythe, M., Lei, D., & Mechelli, A. (2026). “Associations between birdsong environments and momentary human affective wellbeing: evidence from real-world.” Environment International, 214, 110397.

Cancer-Causing Chemicals in Processed Foods: Should We Be Worried?

So, you go into your local supermarket and assume that if food is sitting on a supermarket shelf, someone has already made sure it's completely safe.

In many cases, that's true.

But then I started reading about some of the chemicals that are still permitted in food processing and food-contact materials, even though many are recognized as carcinogens.

I was surprised and have to admit that it got my attention. So, I needed to dig deeper to answer the question.should we be concerned?

The answer is yes...but probably not for the reason you might think.

First...What Are These Chemicals?

Several chemicals linked to cancer are still allowed in certain parts of the food production process.

One of the best known is formaldehyde. While it's no longer used as a food ingredient, FDA regulations still allow formaldehyde in some food-contact surfaces, in melamine kitchenware, and in certain defoaming agents used during food processing. Small amounts can migrate into food under some conditions.

Melamine is used to create a durable plastic compound by combining organic melamine with formaldehyde under heat and pressure. It should never be used in microwave ovens, conventional ovens, or on stovetops, and at high heats it can release small amounts of melamine or formaldehyde into food. (Sounds yummy!)

Another is methylene chloride, a solvent that can still be used to decaffeinate coffee and in the production of hops and spice extracts. During the processing, extremely small trace amounts (often less than 0.1 to a few parts per million) can occasionally remain on the final bean or in spice extracts.

To avoid this, you can use decaffeinated coffee that has gone through the Swiss Water Process,  or carbon dioxide methods, or that has USDA Organic certification.

Trichloroethylene (TCE) has also been permitted for use in decaffeinated coffee and in certain spice and hops extracts, despite being classified as a known human carcinogen. Even though TCE is no longer used in food processing, you can make sure to avoid this chemical by also using the Swiss Water Process or only buying USDA Organic products.

Then there's asbestos. Most people think of old insulation, but it is still permitted in certain adhesives, rubber articles, and polyester resins used in aspects of food-related manufacturing.

In addition, chemicals such as acrylamide can form naturally when starchy foods are fried or baked at high temperatures, while heterocyclic amines (HCAs) and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) are produced when meats are heavily charred or grilled. (Attention…there will be a test on these names…only kidding!).

Does Eating These Foods Mean You'll Get Cancer?

Fortunately...no.

Cancer doesn't usually develop from one meal or one exposure. It's generally the result of many factors working together over many years. These factors are the familiar ones: Genetics...Smoking...Alcohol...Obesity...Physical inactivity...Environmental exposures...And yes...diet.

The World Health Organization has classified processed meat as a Group 1 carcinogen because regular consumption increases the risk of colorectal cancer.

That doesn't mean eating bacon is as dangerous as smoking cigarettes.

It simply means the scientific evidence linking both to cancer is strong.

Can You Reduce Your Exposure?

While eliminating your exposure to every processed food from your life is probably almost impossible.

A few simple habits can make a meaningful difference.

Choose fresh, minimally processed foods more often, and if you buy organic, it’s even better!

Limit processed meats and cook meats at lower temperatures when possible and avoid heavily charring them.

If you're cooking potatoes, aim for a golden color instead of dark brown to reduce acrylamide formation.

You can also choose coffee brands that use the Swiss Water Process or carbon dioxide methods instead of solvent decaffeination.

Finally, maintaining a healthy weight, exercising regularly, limiting alcohol, and not smoking will have a much greater impact on cancer risk than worrying about any single chemical.

My Take

One thing I've learned from writing about health over the years is that our bodies are remarkably resilient.

But that doesn't mean we should ignore unnecessary exposures.

The Environmental Defense Fund recently identified 25 chemicals linked to cancer that are still permitted somewhere within the U.S. food system: as processing aids, food-contact materials, packaging components, or manufacturing materials.

That doesn't mean they're present in dangerous amounts in every food. It does suggest that our regulatory system sometimes moves more slowly than the science. Until those rules catch up, making informed choices is one of the best tools we have.

To me, this isn't about fear.

It's about awareness.

Small changes, practiced consistently, can make a meaningful difference over a lifetime.

So…chew away, but do it as consciously as you can!

References

• Environmental Defense Fund. New Analysis Identifies 25 Cancer-Causing Substances Allowed in U.S. Food.
• Environmental Defense Fund. Why Are Four Notorious Carcinogens Approved by FDA for Food?
• Environmental Defense Fund. Petition: FDA Must Stop Allowing Four Cancer-Causing Chemicals in Food.
• International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). Red Meat and Processed Meat.
• National Cancer Institute. Acrylamide and Cancer Risk.
• National Cancer Institute. Chemicals in Meat Cooked at High Temperatures and Cancer Risk.
• 21 CFR §177.1460. Melamine-Formaldehyde Resins in Molded Food-Contact Articles.

Neonics Pesticides: It’s Not Just a Bee Problem Anymore

I remember when all the talk about neonicotinoid pesticides centered around one thing...the bees.

And that certainly got my attention because without pollinators, much of the food we enjoy would become harder and more expensive to produce, if we could even make up for the loss of our pollinators.

Today, there has been a precipitous decline of bees and other pollinators. The environmental group Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) has taken the Environmental Protection Agency to court because over 200 species are threatened and endangered by neonics!

With the latest research, I discovered the story has become much bigger.

Scientists are now asking another important question.

Could these pesticides also affect us?

First...In Case You’re Not Aware - What Are Neonics?

Neonicotinoids, or "neonics," are among the most widely used insecticides in the world. They're used on crops, ornamental plants, lawns, and even some pet products.

Unlike many older pesticides that stay on the surface when they’re sprayed by the farmer, neonics are coated as a preventative on crop seeds such as corn and soybeans. This means that they are absorbed into the entire plant. That also means they're found in the leaves, pollen, nectar, fruits, and vegetables.

That sounds like an effective way to kill insects, and it is. However, the problem is that the chemicals don't stay where they're supposed to. Upwards of 95% of the coating ends up leaching into the soil and then into streams, groundwater, and eventually our environment and potentially into…us!.

So...Should We Be Concerned?

For bees and other pollinators, the answer is yes.

A large body of research has shown that with bees, neonics interfere with their ability to navigate, find food, reproduce, and survive. That's one reason the NRDC has been pushing for tighter restrictions.

What’s as concerning to me is the growing research involving us humans.

Several studies have linked long-term exposure to possible effects on brain development, pregnancy outcomes, and metabolism. Scientists have even detected neonic compounds in the vast majority of pregnant women who have been tested.

This means we are all the test group for how neonicotinoids are affecting us in our lives.

What's Being Done About the Situation?

Europe decided not to wait.

The European Union has banned most outdoor agricultural uses of several major neonic pesticides because of concerns about pollinators and the environment.

Here in the United States, the picture is more complicated.

According to NRDC, the EPA has continued to allow many uses while reviewing additional scientific evidence. In response, NRDC has repeatedly challenged EPA decisions in court, arguing that the agency has not done enough to protect pollinators, endangered species, and public health.

Some states have even begun passing their own restrictions while the federal debate continues.

As a matter of fact, New York is poised to eliminate 80 to 90 percent of the neonics entering the state’s environment.

Also, due to lawsuits by the NRDC, California and Minnesota are on a path to potentially regulate neonic-coated seeds, and Colorado is finalizing a tax incentive for farmers to switch away from neonic treatments on corn, soy, and wheat seeds.

Why’s It Taking So Long to Get Rid of This Chemical?

If the concerns are growing, why hasn't everyone agreed to phase these chemicals out?

The answer is simple.

Money...and farming.

Chemical manufacturers and some agricultural organizations argue that neonics protect crops, reduce losses, and help farmers remain productive.

Environmental scientists counter that many routine seed treatments provide little benefit in areas where damaging insects are uncommon and that integrated pest management can often reduce pesticide use without hurting yields.

As with many public health issues, science, economics, and politics don't always point in the same direction.

My Take

I've been writing about natural health for a long time, and one thing I've learned is that we shouldn't ignore early warning signs.

History has taught us that chemicals once considered perfectly safe (you may remember or have heard about DDT's negative effect on the environment) sometimes turned out to have consequences we didn't recognize for years.

Does that mean neonics are the next major public health disaster? It’s not totally clear.

But…why wait to find out and discover down the road that it’s a situation we go OOPS!!!! After all, protecting our health and protecting the environment often go hand in hand.

References

• Natural Resources Defense Council. Neonicotinoids 101: Effects on Humans and Bees.
• Natural Resources Defense Council. Human Health Risks from Neonic Pesticides: 7 Questions Answered.
• Natural Resources Defense Council. Neonics: The Toxic Truth (2024).
• Pisa LW, et al. Effects of neonicotinoids and fipronil on non-target invertebrates. Environmental Science and Pollution Research.
• Sánchez-Bayo F, Wyckhuys KAG. Worldwide decline of the entomofauna: A review of its drivers. Biological Conservation.

 

NAD+: Is It the Fountain of Youth or Just Another Overhyped Supplement?

I was browsing through social media recently when I saw another celebrity talking about getting NAD+ infusions. It made me smile because over the decades of reading and writing about natural health, I've watched one 'miracle' supplement after another make headlines. Some stood the test of time, and I even take them myself. Others quietly disappeared.

So…where does NAD+ fit?

The answer isn't as simple as the advertisements would have you believe.

What Is NAD+?

First of all, nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide, or NAD+, is a substance found in every cell of your body. It helps convert the food you eat into energy and plays an important role in hundreds of chemical reactions.

Scientists also know that NAD+ helps repair DNA, supports healthy mitochondria, and activates proteins called sirtuins that are involved in aging and metabolism.

One consistent finding among researchers is that NAD+ levels decline as we get older.

That naturally raises an interesting question.

If our NAD+ levels go down with age, would increasing them help us stay healthier?

That's what scientists are trying to answer.

Why All the Excitement?

It turns out much of the enthusiasm comes from studies in mice.

When researchers boosted NAD+ levels in laboratory animals, they often found improvements in metabolism, muscle function, endurance, and overall health. Some studies even suggested longer lifespans.

While those are impressive results, animal studies are where research begins, not where it ends.

What About NAD+ IV Therapy?

One of the newest trends involves receiving NAD+ through intravenous infusions.

These treatments can cost several hundred dollars, or even over a thousand dollars per session.

Supporters claim IV therapy works faster and produces better results than oral supplements.

The problem?

There is surprisingly little high-quality research showing that NAD+ IV therapy provides long-term health benefits.

At this point, most of the claims are based on testimonials rather than large, well-controlled clinical trials.

That doesn't mean it doesn't work.

It simply means we don't know yet.

Are There Risks?

Overall, studies suggest that NAD+ precursors like NR and NMN are generally well tolerated when taken for relatively short periods.

Reported side effects have usually been mild and may include nausea, stomach discomfort, headache, fatigue, or diarrhea.

What researchers don't yet know is whether taking high doses for many years is completely safe.

Since these supplements affect cellular metabolism, many scientists believe long-term studies are still needed.

What Have Human Studies Found?

So…here's the encouraging human news.

Several clinical trials have shown that supplements such as nicotinamide riboside (NR) and nicotinamide mononucleotide (NMN) do increase NAD+ levels in humans.

That part seems well established.

The harder question is whether higher NAD+ levels actually make people healthier.

Some studies suggest they might.

Researchers have reported modest improvements in muscle function, insulin sensitivity, and certain markers of metabolic health in some groups of people.

On the other hand, several well-designed clinical trials found little or no improvement in physical performance, blood sugar, memory, or overall health, even though NAD+ levels increased significantly.

In other words, boosting NAD+ may be easier than proving it produces meaningful health benefits.

A recent review of human studies reached much the same conclusion. The supplements consistently raise NAD+ levels, but there isn't enough evidence yet to say they slow aging or prevent disease.

That's an important distinction that sometimes gets lost in the marketing,

Can You Raise NAD+ Naturally?

This is the part I find especially interesting.

Many of the same lifestyle habits we've been hearing about, and that I’ve been writing about for years, also appear to support healthy NAD+ levels.

Regular exercise stimulates mitochondrial function.

Getting enough sleep allows your body to repair itself.

Eating foods rich in vitamin B3 gives your body the raw materials it needs to produce NAD+.

Some research also suggests that intermittent fasting and calorie restriction activate many of the same cellular repair pathways linked to NAD+.

Nobody is making headlines by saying they took a brisk walk, got eight hours of sleep, and ate a healthy dinner.

But these habits have decades of research behind them.

Should You Take It?

At this point, I don't think anyone can honestly say yes or no for NAD+.

The science is exciting, but it's still developing.

If future studies show that NAD+ supplements truly improve healthy aging, I'll be the first to say that's great.

But we're not there yet.

Right now, the best evidence tells us that these supplements raise NAD+ levels. Whether that translates into living longer, thinking more clearly, or feeling younger remains uncertain.

As consumers, it's worth remembering that increasing a number on a lab test isn't always the same as improving health.

I've learned over the years that when something sounds almost too good to be true, it's usually wise to wait for more evidence before spending a lot of money.

Sometimes the newest supplement turns out to be a breakthrough.

Sometimes it turns out to be an expensive lesson.

Only time and good research will tell.

So..to NAD+ now, or NOT is up to you!

References

Conze D, et al. Safety and Metabolism of Long-term Administration of Nicotinamide Riboside in Healthy Adults. Scientific Reports. 2019.

Yoshino M, et al. Nicotinamide Mononucleotide Increases Muscle Insulin Sensitivity in Prediabetic Women. Science. 2021.

Dollerup OL, et al. A Randomized Placebo Controlled Clinical Trial of Nicotinamide Riboside in Obese Men. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 2018.

Rajman L, Chwalek K, Sinclair DA. Therapeutic Potential of NAD Boosting Molecules: The In Vivo Evidence. Cell Metabolism. 2018.

Nadeeshani H, et al. Nicotinamide Mononucleotide as an Anti Aging Health Product: Promises and Safety Concerns. Journal of Advanced Research. 2022.