Peptide therapy TikTok claims: what the science actually supports

What did @alexandrajaye5 actually say?

She stopped her ADHD medication and started exploring peptides as an alternative. A friend pointed her toward NAD+ first, and on day one she reported feeling "fucking fantastic" within 15 to 20 minutes, describing a burst of clean energy, happiness, and no anxiety. She's planning to dose up from 25 to 50 units over two weeks.

To be clear about what this video is: a single person, one dose in, reporting how she feels. That's an anecdote, not evidence. The enthusiasm is real and relatable. The conclusions she's drawing from it, however, are running way ahead of the data. And the part where she stopped a prescription medication to try supplements instead is where this gets genuinely concerning from a clinical standpoint.

Does the science back this up?

There is real and growing research on NAD+ precursors, particularly nicotinamide riboside (NR) and nicotinamide mononucleotide (NMN), for cellular energy metabolism and mitochondrial function. What there is not, as of now, is solid clinical evidence that NAD+ supplementation reliably treats ADHD symptoms in adults.

The mechanistic logic isn't crazy. NAD+ plays a role in dopamine synthesis pathways, and dopamine dysregulation is central to ADHD. Braidy et al. (2019, Antioxidants and Redox Signaling) documented NAD+'s role in neuronal function, but that's a long way from "this replaces Adderall." A 2023 review in Neuropsychopharmacology found no randomized controlled trials specifically testing NAD+ supplementation for ADHD. The energy boost she felt is plausible, possibly from increased mitochondrial activity, but the 15-to-20-minute window she describes is faster than most pharmacokinetic models would predict for oral supplementation, which suggests placebo response is doing some of the heavy lifting here.

What did they get wrong (or right)?

She gets partial credit for one thing: approaching this incrementally. Starting low and building up is reasonable harm-reduction thinking, even if "25 units" as a dosing description is vague enough to be nearly meaningless without knowing the product concentration and delivery method.

What she gets wrong is the implication that day-one subjective feelings are a meaningful signal about long-term efficacy. They aren't. The placebo effect on energy and mood can be substantial, especially on day one of something you're excited about. Geers et al. (2019, Health Psychology) demonstrated that expectancy effects alone can produce measurable physiological changes. She's essentially describing textbook expectancy response: anticipation, rapid perceived onset, and mood elevation.

More seriously, stopping ADHD medication without medical supervision to try an unregulated supplement is not a neutral decision. ADHD medications have established efficacy profiles backed by decades of controlled trials. NAD+ does not have that evidence base for this indication. Presenting this as a potential "really great solution" for ADHD, on day one, is misleading to her audience even if she doesn't intend it that way.

What should you actually know?

NAD+ supplementation is not a fraud. There's legitimate science behind its role in aging, mitochondrial health, and neuroprotection. Yoshino et al. (2021, Science) showed NMN improved insulin sensitivity and muscle function in older women, which is promising but not ADHD-specific. The compound has a real research track record in longevity and metabolic contexts.

For ADHD specifically, the evidence gap is significant. No peer-reviewed trial has demonstrated that NAD+ supplementation reduces core ADHD symptoms like inattention or executive dysfunction at clinically meaningful levels. Anyone watching this and thinking about swapping their medication for NAD+ should have that conversation with a prescriber first, not after a TikTok rabbit hole.

The other thing worth flagging: the term "units" for dosing NAD+ is nonstandard. NAD+ is typically dosed in milligrams. If she's using an injectable formulation, "units" could mean something specific to that product, but without context it's impossible to evaluate whether her dose is physiologically meaningful at all.