Epithalon vs NAD+

Epithalon

A Khavinson-school tetrapeptide (Ala-Glu-Asp-Gly) marketed for telomere lengthening and pineal regulation. The telomere claim rests on small Russian studies; the sleep effect is the more honest reason people use it.

Best for

Best if the telomere/telomerase angle appeals; the human evidence is thin and largely from Russian literature.

NAD+

Technically a coenzyme rather than a peptide — central to energy metabolism, DNA repair, and sirtuin activity. Levels fall with age; injectable and IV protocols try to restore them.

Best for

Best if you want to target metabolic and mitochondrial decline with a more mechanistic rationale.

Epithalon

Khavinson, Anisimov, and colleagues have published cell-culture telomerase data and small clinical cohorts in elderly Russian populations, including the often-cited Khavinson 2003 longevity study. Independent replication outside that network is sparse. The melatonin-rhythm and sleep-architecture data is more robust than the telomere data. Treat the longevity marketing with skepticism; treat the sleep effect as plausible at the level of a short peptide with a long Russian clinical tradition.

NAD+

Injectable and IV NAD+ have essentially no controlled trial data — the use case is built on mechanism plus anecdote. Oral precursors (NR and NMN) have a better-developed picture: published Phase 1 and 2 studies show they raise blood NAD+ levels reliably, but downstream clinical outcomes (physical function, biomarkers of aging) are mixed and small. The IV protocols popular in wellness clinics are pharmacologically interesting but not supported by trial-level evidence.