A review found mixed NAD+ supplement results. For golfers over 40, physical function matters more than blood markers, with activity remaining a priority.
On October 13, 2026, The Conversation published a report on NAD+ supplements and healthy ageing. It described a systematic review of 33 human studies that found inconsistent effects on physical function, metabolism and other measures of healthy ageing.
The article was written by Justin Roberts, a professor of nutritional physiology at Anglia Ruskin University. His conclusion was that the human evidence is intriguing but not convincing for longer-term health or lifespan benefits.
NutraIngredients reported that the wider review assessed 113 intervention studies: 33 in humans and 80 in rodents. The research covered NR, NMN, nicotinamide and niacin. For golfers thinking about preserving their playing years, the human findings deserve more attention than the larger combined total.
At Golfergy, our focus is practical guidance that helps experienced golfers maintain mobility and play for longer. The useful question here is not just whether a supplement changes a laboratory result. It is whether that change translates into something you can use on the course.
For a golfer, meaningful function might mean walking the course comfortably or moving through a swing without feeling restricted. A blood measurement answers a different question. The review’s findings show why those outcomes should not be treated as interchangeable.
According to NutraIngredients, NR and NMN consistently increased NAD+-related metabolites in the human trials. Effects on physical performance, metabolism and vascular outcomes varied. Some findings were positive while others showed no significant benefit or changes limited to particular measures or groups.
The Conversation gives a clear example of a biochemical change. In a study of 30 healthy adults, blood NAD+ increased by about 50% after four weeks of NMN supplementation. Levels remained elevated during the 12-week trial.
That is evidence of a change in blood NAD+. It is not the same finding as better walking ability or improved golf mobility. Roberts also notes that it remains unclear whether NR and NMN raise NAD+ in tissues such as muscles and organs.
The physical-function results tell a more uneven story. The Conversation describes one study of men over 65 that reported about a 7% increase in walking speed and a 4% increase in left-hand grip strength after 12 weeks of NMN. Only 20 of 42 participants completed the study as planned, which limits how much confidence to place in those results.
A separate 24-week study involved 14 older men with diabetes and reduced physical function. The Conversation reports that NMN produced no significant improvement in walking speed or grip strength in that group. These studies should not be combined into a promise that a golfer will walk faster or grip a club better.
There were also positive exercise findings in recreational runners. Roberts reports that NMN alongside six weeks of exercise training improved some measures of oxygen use during exercise. Those findings do not establish longer-term fitness or healthy-ageing benefits.
NutraIngredients reports that the human trials found good tolerability overall. That does not establish long-term safety or effectiveness. The review researchers called for larger and longer randomized trials using consistent measures that matter to health and daily function.
The practical concern for an experienced golfer is keeping the ability to play. A supplement result becomes relevant when it connects with that goal, not simply because a blood marker moves in a favourable direction.
This distinction matters when weighing a longevity claim. Walking speed and grip strength are more closely connected to everyday physical capability than a laboratory value alone. Yet the reported results for those functions were not consistent enough to support a reliable supplement promise.
Golf itself can be part of an active life. A golf-focused article describes the game as predominantly moderate-intensity activity and notes that walking the course can add movement. That provides a useful activity context without turning golf into a proven stand-alone answer to mobility loss.
The same article describes a 2023 comparison in which older golfers had higher grip strength and better balance than sedentary peers. The comparison was observational, so it cannot show that golf caused those differences. It is a reason to keep activity in the conversation, not proof of protection from injury or age-related decline.
For golfers over 40, the sensible focus is the capability they want to retain. Our broader resources on staying active as you age keep that long-term goal at the centre of the discussion.
The supported adjustment is to put regular activity ahead of a supplement-led mobility plan. Roberts writes that the strongest evidence for healthy ageing continues to support physical activity that maintains strength, fitness and mobility. He places a varied, nourishing diet and stress management alongside it.
That is a useful order of priorities. It does not require turning every round into a fitness test. It means keeping the habits with stronger evidence at the centre of the plan rather than expecting a supplement to replace them.
A practical way to organize those priorities is to keep each decision separate:
For the golf side of that plan, keep the goal specific: movement that serves your game. Golfergy’s resources on connecting mobility with golf movements address that broader focus. A steady weekly approach to healthy ageing can also help frame the routine around lasting habits rather than isolated purchases.
Personal decisions about supplements belong with qualified care. This review is evidence to discuss with a clinician, not a golf-specific supplement protocol. The useful conversation is about your health goals and whether the proposed product has evidence for outcomes that matter to you.
A future trial could provide a clearer answer about who benefits from NAD+-related supplements and which outcomes improve. For now, the most useful distinction is between changing a marker and maintaining a capability.
For a golfer, the second question is the one that matters on the first tee and late in the round. Keep the plan anchored to regular activity, nourishing food and stress management rather than treating a supplement as the foundation.
What change will you make to your healthy-ageing routine this season to put lasting golf mobility ahead of supplement promises?
Follow Golfergy for practical insights on performance, mobility, recovery and healthy ageing. Stay connected for new articles, research-led guidance and ideas to help you play better for longer.
A practical strength framework for golfers over 40, built around everyday goals, sensible progression and a careful look at limited golf research.
A research-led look at strength, balance, mobility and trunk control, with a flexible planning framework for golfers over 40.
Understand golf mobility after 40 with a comfortable-turn self-check, hip and shoulder guidance, and a clear look at flexibility and swing speed.
Explore practical resources on performance, recovery, mobility and golf longevity.
Read the Blog
