- Advertised price
- Starting at $149
- Total amount
- 500 mg in the headline offer
- Concentration
- 200 mg/mL
- Implied volume
- 2.5 mL, calculated from amount and concentration
- Prescribing
- Physician evaluation required; final pricing determined afterward
A quantity-specific starting point
Strut Health's NAD+ injection page displays a starting price of $149 for a 500 mg offer at 200 mg/mL. Dividing the listed total amount by the concentration gives an implied liquid volume of 2.5 mL. This is arithmetic from the provider's figures, not a measurement of a delivered vial. Confirm the actual label before treating that specification as final.
The page also refers more broadly to other vial amounts. Those references should not be merged into the lowest-price offer. A reader needs the price for the exact quantity offered after the medical assessment.
What the $149 figure can support
At the listed starting price and total amount, a simple container calculation is possible. It cannot establish a monthly expense until the refill interval and prescribed plan are known. We therefore retain the starting-price label instead of recasting the figure as a guaranteed monthly all-inclusive charge.
Ask whether delivery, supplies and clinical review are included, whether a recurring order is created and when that order can be changed. Strut's disclaimer states that a complete consultation is required and final pricing is determined. That qualification belongs beside the headline when the product enters a comparison.
Resolve the page's contradictory description
The product page correctly identifies compounded NAD+ but also includes a tile describing a peptide that signals the pituitary gland. NAD+ is not that peptide. A patient should receive an unambiguous explanation of the actual preparation, its intended use and its route before the prescription is filled.
This is a website-content issue we can observe. It does not establish the chemical composition of the dispensed product, nor justify assuming the pharmacy supplied a different substance. Clarification from the clinical and pharmacy teams is more useful than guessing from a mismatched marketing tile.
Quality questions should name the pharmacy
For an injectable product, ask who compounds and dispenses the medication, what labeling will arrive and whom to contact about a storage or delivery concern. A platform's brand on a website does not identify the manufacturing party by itself. Keep the actual pharmacy information with the prescription record.
FDA's general NAD+ alert discusses ingredient suitability and adverse-event reports associated with injectable preparations. It does not name this particular product as the cause. Our review uses that alert to explain why source and handling questions matter, without treating an industry warning as a product-specific test result.
How to evaluate the final offer
The review becomes most useful when the patient can put the final invoice beside the product specification. Check that the amount, concentration, container count and renewal arrangement match what was discussed. If a larger vial is proposed, ask whether the usable period supports that purchase instead of assuming a lower unit cost means less waste.
The brand's separate FDA warning letter concerns GLP-1 marketing and is covered in our provider review; it should not be misreported as an NAD+ recall. This injection remains a compounded preparation without FDA approval. Its cost and convenience can be described, but claims of improved energy or longevity require a different standard of evidence.
Useful distinctions
- Total quantity and concentration are public
- Implied volume can be calculated transparently
- Consultation requirement is explicit
Limitations to weigh
- Final price and recurrence are not established by the headline
- An inaccurate mechanism tile needs clarification
- No product-specific clinical superiority established
Sources & further reading
Official pages and evidence consulted for this article. Checked October 11, 2026. Provider pages establish advertised terms; they do not independently establish effectiveness.