National Advertising Review Board Recommends Niagen Modify or Discontinue Certain Tru Niagen NAD+ Dietary Supplement Claims
New York, NY – May 21, 2026 – A panel of the National Advertising Review Board (NARB), the appellate advertising body of BBB National Programs, has recommended that Niagen Bioscience, Inc. discontinue or modify several health-benefit advertising claims for its Tru Niagen line of nicotinamide riboside (NR) dietary supplements.
The underlying National Advertising Division (NAD) decision (Case #7487) was initiated by Reus Research LLC, a competitor in the dietary supplement industry. Niagen appealed NAD’s recommendation to modify or discontinue challenged express and implied claims for the Tru Niagen dietary supplement, including certain health-benefit, establishment, structure/function, and ‘clinically proven’ claims.
Regarding establishment claims, the panel agreed with NAD that the relied-upon clinical studies did not support the claim asserting that specified increases in NAD+ levels following use of Tru Niagen had been clinically proven for the general population.
For health-benefit claims, the panel noted that while Niagen argued these were "structure/function" claims permissible under the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA), the required substantiation depends on the message conveyed to consumers, not the advertiser's regulatory classification. The panel agreed with NAD and found that many of Niagen's claims went beyond cell-level mechanistic effects to promise perceptible or functional health benefits that were not properly supported.
The NARB panel determined that NAD’s decision should be affirmed and recommended that Niagen discontinue its "clinically proven" establishment claims, as well as specific health-benefit claims, including those related to heart, brain, and immune health.
The panel further recommended that Niagen discontinue anti-aging claims and consumer testimonials that communicate perceptible, real-world improvements, as well as muscle health and energy-related claims that promise functional recovery or vitality benefits.
Regarding modification, the panel noted that certain claims phrased in biological or cellular terms should not be used in a context that conveys a message of a perceptible or functional health benefit.
In its advertiser statement, Niagen stated that it is “deeply disappointed with the NARB Panel’s decision but will nevertheless comply” with NARB’s recommendations.
All BBB National Programs case decision summaries can be found in the case decision library. For the full text of NAD, NARB, and CARU decisions, subscribe to the online archive. This press release shall not be used for advertising or promotional purposes.
The underlying National Advertising Division (NAD) decision (Case #7487) was initiated by Reus Research LLC, a competitor in the dietary supplement industry. Niagen appealed NAD’s recommendation to modify or discontinue challenged express and implied claims for the Tru Niagen dietary supplement, including certain health-benefit, establishment, structure/function, and ‘clinically proven’ claims.
Regarding establishment claims, the panel agreed with NAD that the relied-upon clinical studies did not support the claim asserting that specified increases in NAD+ levels following use of Tru Niagen had been clinically proven for the general population.
For health-benefit claims, the panel noted that while Niagen argued these were "structure/function" claims permissible under the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA), the required substantiation depends on the message conveyed to consumers, not the advertiser's regulatory classification. The panel agreed with NAD and found that many of Niagen's claims went beyond cell-level mechanistic effects to promise perceptible or functional health benefits that were not properly supported.
The NARB panel determined that NAD’s decision should be affirmed and recommended that Niagen discontinue its "clinically proven" establishment claims, as well as specific health-benefit claims, including those related to heart, brain, and immune health.
The panel further recommended that Niagen discontinue anti-aging claims and consumer testimonials that communicate perceptible, real-world improvements, as well as muscle health and energy-related claims that promise functional recovery or vitality benefits.
Regarding modification, the panel noted that certain claims phrased in biological or cellular terms should not be used in a context that conveys a message of a perceptible or functional health benefit.
In its advertiser statement, Niagen stated that it is “deeply disappointed with the NARB Panel’s decision but will nevertheless comply” with NARB’s recommendations.
All BBB National Programs case decision summaries can be found in the case decision library. For the full text of NAD, NARB, and CARU decisions, subscribe to the online archive. This press release shall not be used for advertising or promotional purposes.