NMN for Muscle, Exercise & Physical Performance: Human Evidence

NMN exercise research has produced several positive human signals, but NMN is not a proven sports-performance or muscle-building supplement. Trials report selected improvements in aerobic capacity, gait or walking measures, while systematic evidence remains mixed and muscle mass has not consistently increased.

NMN and exercise: evidence summary

Outcome	Best evidence	Current conclusion
Aerobic capacity	Randomized amateur-runner trial	Positive signal
Gait / walking speed	Several older-adult RCTs	Some positive secondary outcomes
Grip strength	Older-men study	Limited nominal signal
Muscle mass	Systematic review	No consistent increase
Resistance-training adaptation	No long-term NMN hypertrophy RCT	Unproven
Post-exercise inflammation	2026 BFR crossover study	NMN dampened acute inflammatory/remodeling response
Mitochondrial biology	Mechanistic and biopsy data	Biologically active, clinical meaning uncertain

Performance, function and muscle mass are not interchangeable

NMN exercise articles often blend three endpoints: athletic performance in trained people, physical function in older adults and skeletal-muscle mass. The evidence differs substantially between them.

The runner trial informs aerobic performance. Older-adult gait tests inform functional mobility. A grip-strength change informs one measure of force production. None automatically proves hypertrophy.

The amateur-runner trial in more detail

Liao and colleagues randomized 48 amateur runners to placebo or 300, 600 or 1,200 mg/day NMN while all groups completed a six-week exercise program. ^[1]

The medium- and high-dose groups showed improvements in several ventilatory-threshold and aerobic measures beyond training alone, while body composition did not materially change. The authors proposed improved skeletal-muscle oxygen utilization rather than larger muscle mass as a possible explanation.

This is legitimate human performance evidence, but it is one study with a modest sample and should not be treated like the decades of replication behind established ergogenic aids.

Older-adult physical function: potentially more relevant than sports performance

For longevity, the ability to walk, rise from a chair and maintain mobility may matter more than race performance. Several NMN trials have therefore focused on gait, walking speed and lower-body function.

Igarashi reported nominal gait and left-hand-grip signals in older men, although the later trial data were compromised by a supplement-supply error. ^[2] Morifuji reported maintained walking speed in older adults alongside NAD and sleep outcomes. ^[3]

What the systematic reviews say

A systematic review of 10 randomized studies and 437 participants found that physical-strength and aerobic-performance measures improved non-significantly overall, while muscle mass and body composition were not significantly affected. ^[4]

A separate 2025 meta-analysis reported a modest pooled gait-speed effect in middle-aged and older adults. ^[5] Gait speed is clinically interesting, but it is not the same as leg-muscle hypertrophy or athletic strength.

The BFR study: when reducing inflammation may not be obviously good

Blood-flow-restriction resistance exercise deliberately creates a strong local stress response. In the 2026 crossover trial, seven days of 1,200 mg/day NMN reduced TNF-α and IL-10 responses, altered p21 signaling, delayed resolution of infiltrating cells and abolished an acute increase in mitochondrial staining seen with placebo. ^[6]

Exercise adaptation uses inflammatory signaling as part of repair. Therefore “anti-inflammatory” is not automatically synonymous with “better recovery.” The trial did not measure months of hypertrophy or strength, so the long-term consequence remains unknown.

What the newest 2025–2026 evidence adds

The newest evidence makes the overall performance case weaker, not stronger.

Evidence	NMN exposure	Result	Why it matters
Prokopidis 2025 meta-analysis	Older-adult NMN RCTs pooled by endpoint	No significant effect on skeletal muscle index, handgrip, gait speed or five-chair-stand	Individual positive functional findings do not translate into a consistent sarcopenia effect
Zhao 2026 acute RCT	300 mg once before exhaustive exercise	No significant exercise-capacity benefit; significant interoception signal belonged to PQQ, not NMN	Argues against treating NMN as an acute pre-workout
Nishimura 2026 athlete RCT	500 mg/day for 8 weeks	Blood NAD+ increased, but NMN alone did not improve the primary endurance endpoint	Shows target engagement without performance benefit in trained athletes

The older-adult muscle meta-analysis found no significant NMN effect on skeletal muscle index, handgrip strength, gait speed or five-chair-stand performance. ^[7]

In the February 2026 acute four-arm trial, 300 mg NMN taken one hour before exhaustive treadmill exercise did not significantly improve exercise-capacity measures; the only interoception domain with a significant group-by-time interaction favored PQQ, while the NMN-only group did not significantly improve. ^[8]

Most importantly for endurance marketing, the March 2026 collegiate-athlete trial found that 500 mg/day NMN for eight weeks increased blood NAD+ but did not improve the primary endurance-performance endpoint. ^[9] Positive exploratory signals appeared mainly with the NMN-plus-paprika combination and subgroup analyses. The study was funded by Ezaki Glico, all authors were company employees, and they reported a patent application based on the results.

Taken together, these newer studies strengthen a central editorial distinction: raising NAD+ is easier to demonstrate than improving exercise performance.

Does NMN improve mitochondria in muscle?

Human evidence does not establish that NMN produces a clinically meaningful improvement in muscle mitochondrial function. NMN clearly engages NAD metabolism, and mitochondria are central to the mechanistic rationale. But a rise in blood NAD+ or a change in a mitochondrial marker is not the same as more mitochondrial ATP production during real-world exercise or superior training adaptation.

The 2026 umbrella review of NAD+ interventions concluded that human functional outcomes remain heterogeneous even though target engagement is consistent. ^[10]

NMN versus creatine, caffeine and beta-alanine

Supplement	Primary evidence base	NMN comparison
Creatine	Large literature for strength, power and lean mass with training	NMN lacks comparable hypertrophy evidence
Caffeine	Large acute performance literature	NMN is not an acute stimulant
Beta-alanine	Substantial evidence for selected high-intensity efforts	Different mechanism; NMN evidence much earlier
NMN	NAD biology, small exercise and older-function trials	Promising but exploratory

What about taking NMN only on training days?

No trial validates training-day-only dosing. Human studies generally use daily exposure, and pharmacokinetic work shows NAD pools can change over days rather than behaving like an acute pre-workout stimulant. The Berven 2026 study found slow accumulation and washout of blood NAD during precursor supplementation. ^[11]

Could NMN help recovery?

There is no robust human trial showing reduced soreness, faster strength recovery or improved subsequent-session performance. Suppressing inflammatory markers is not sufficient evidence of better recovery because inflammation also coordinates repair.

What research would make NMN an evidence-based sports supplement?

• Longer randomized training studies in trained participants.
• Prespecified VO2max, time-trial, one-repetition maximum or repeated-sprint endpoints.
• Muscle-biopsy data linked to actual performance rather than biomarkers alone.
• Body-composition and hypertrophy measurement under standardized protein intake.
• Clear timing and dose comparisons.
• Independent replication across sexes and age groups.

NMN exercise trials compared

Study	Population	Outcome	Editorial interpretation
Liao 2021	Amateur runners	Aerobic-capacity signal	Promising but not enough to classify NMN as an endurance aid
Igarashi 2022	Older men	Selected gait/grip-related measures	More relevant to function than sports performance
Yi 2023	Healthy middle-aged adults	Dose-related NAD+ and selected physical-performance outcomes	Useful dose-response evidence, not proof that 900 mg is optimal
Morifuji 2024	Older adults	Walking and sleep-related measures	Supports further functional research
Yang 2026	Young men + BFR exercise	Altered inflammatory/remodeling response	Shows “anti-inflammatory” effects may be context-dependent

The runner trial reported improved aerobic-capacity measures. ^[12] The older-male study provides a different kind of evidence: functional aging rather than athletic performance. ^[13]

What the systematic review says

A dedicated systematic review covering 10 studies and 437 participants did not find a statistically significant overall physical-performance benefit and found no significant body-composition or muscle-mass effect. ^[14]

That pooled result is the reason individual positive trials should be described as signals rather than a settled ergogenic effect.

September 2026 network meta-analysis: endurance signal, not a blanket performance win

A new September 2026 network meta-analysis pooled 27 NAD+ precursor studies, including seven NMN studies with 370 participants. In the network model, medium-dose NMN improved endurance-related outcomes (SMD 0.66, 95% CI 0.09–1.23) and high-dose NMN showed a larger effect (SMD 1.02, 95% CI 0.43–1.60). Neuromuscular strength remained unchanged. ^[15]

This does not overturn the newer null athlete trial. The review searched through January 1, 2026, so the later Nishimura collegiate-athlete RCT was not incorporated. The network was also largely placebo-centered, with few active head-to-head comparisons, heterogeneous populations and indirect dose rankings.

Our current interpretation is therefore narrower: NMN has an emerging pooled signal for endurance-type outcomes, but not for strength, and the most recent direct athlete RCT remains negative for its primary endpoint.

Could NMN blunt useful exercise adaptation?

The 2026 BFR study found that high-dose NMN changed acute inflammatory and tissue-remodeling responses after exercise. ^[16] Acute inflammation is not always harmful; it is part of the adaptation process. That makes indiscriminate “NMN reduces exercise inflammation” marketing scientifically incomplete.

Related NMN guides

• NMN benefits
• NMN, fatigue and energy
• NMN dosage
• NMN human trials

Bottom line

NMN is scientifically interesting for exercise because NAD metabolism sits close to mitochondrial and muscle biology. Human performance evidence is real but mixed. It is not yet in the same evidence tier as established training, nutrition and ergogenic interventions.