Our Story

Abstract crystalline lattice suspended in dark space

Why we started

Pure Limitless began as a straightforward supplement brand. Over time we kept running into the same problem as our customers: it is genuinely hard to tell, from a product page, what you are actually buying. Panels are vague. Amounts are hidden inside proprietary blends. Claims outrun the evidence behind them.

So we narrowed our focus. Rather than a wide catalogue of everything, we are building around a small number of products we can describe precisely — starting with NAD+.

The science, stated carefully

NAD (nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide) is a coenzyme found in every living cell. It is involved in hundreds of metabolic reactions, and it plays a central role in how cells convert food into energy. This is settled biochemistry, taught in every undergraduate course. It is not marketing.

Research has also observed that NAD levels in human tissue tend to decline with age. That observation is what drew scientific and commercial interest to the molecule in the first place, and it is why a whole category of NAD-related supplements now exists.

Here is the part most brands skip. The fact that a molecule is important in the body is not the same as evidence that consuming a particular product changes anything measurable in you. Those are two different claims, resting on two different bodies of evidence. Established biology is not a licence to promise outcomes.

We take that distinction seriously enough to put it on our pages. We will tell you what a product contains, in what amount, and how it is made. We will not translate a mechanism into a promise about your energy, your ageing or your health.

Three glass forms with different facet structures arranged side by side

NAD+, NMN and NR are not the same thing

These three names get used interchangeably across the category, and they should not be. NMN (nicotinamide mononucleotide) and NR (nicotinamide riboside) are precursors — compounds the body can convert into NAD. Direct NAD+ is the coenzyme itself.

They are chemically distinct, they behave differently, and they sit in different places regulatorily. When we say a product contains NAD+, we mean NAD+. If we ever release a precursor product, we will name it precisely too.

A droplet meeting a polished dark surface with fine mist dispersing

How we think about delivery

Format is a real engineering question, not a marketing angle. A capsule, a gummy, a powder and a sublingual spray are different propositions in terms of how a product is taken, how consistently it gets taken, and how it needs to be stored.

Our NAD+ is a metered sublingual spray. That choice was made for practical reasons: a measured dose each time, no water needed, and a format people actually keep up with day to day. What we will not do is dress that practical choice up as a bioavailability claim. Absorption and comparative-uptake claims require product-specific evidence, and until that evidence exists for our exact finished product, we are not making them.

A vast field of glass shards at varying heights receding into darkness

How we assess research

The NAD literature is large, uneven, and frequently over-interpreted. Our working rules:

  • Cell and animal studies are hypotheses, not conclusions. A result in a mouse or a petri dish tells you where to look next. It does not tell you what a spray does in a person.
  • Mechanism is not outcome. Showing that a molecule participates in a pathway is not the same as showing that supplementing it changes a health outcome.
  • Counting papers proves nothing. “Backed by 200 studies” is a rhetorical device. The question is what the best-designed studies of the specific compound, at the specific dose, actually found.
  • Where the evidence is thin, we say so. Silence about uncertainty is its own kind of claim.

A glass cube held in a precise chrome clamp

What we are still working on

We would rather show our workings than pretend the job is finished. Currently in progress:

  • Publishing full ingredient and nutrition detail on every product page, replacing generic supporting-ingredient wording.
  • Batch-level documentation, published where we can evidence it.
  • Reviewing every claim across the site against the GB nutrition and health claims register, and removing anything that cannot be supported.
  • Tightening how we describe origin, testing and sourcing so that each statement is true of the specific product it appears on, rather than applied as blanket copy.

Our standard

If we cannot evidence it, we will not print it. If the evidence changes, we will change what we say. And if you want to see the detail behind any product — the panel, the directions, the warnings — it should already be on the page. Where it is not yet, tell us and we will fix it.