SuppCo is a separate, unaffiliated supplement-tracking site with no partnership, data-sharing agreement, or business relationship with NO1GEVITY. We are not endorsed by them and they do not endorse us. The two facts below are individually verified against the manufacturer or NSF; the outbound link is provided only so readers can independently cross-check on a third-party site if they want to.
Basis
How we scored this product Show the full breakdown
Bevisning gates dose: the evidence grade sets the ceiling, and the dose decides how much of that ceiling the product reaches. Value = inverse of price-per-trial-dose-day. Community = mean sentiment of external reviews. Säkerhet caps applied after weighting.
This score is our editorial judgment, not a scientific standard. We combine published evidence, dose, price, transparency, and consumer signals into one composite: this is our method, not a peer-reviewed clinical rating. A higher score means a product does better on the factors we weight, not that it is medically proven to work.
Question 1
Does the molecule work?
Does the molecule work?
The science behind each active ingredient, independent of which brand sells it.
Resveratrol's more bioavailable cousin, mostly used in blends.
Question 2
Is this bottle good?
Is this bottle good?
The specific product: dose, price, transparency, and what buyers report.
Question 3
What's the catch?
What's the catch?
Säkerhet flags, transparency gaps, dosing concerns, and recurring buyer complaints.
Quick verdict
The numbers
Data verification
Per-ingredient breakdown
All product data is checked against original sources. Prices, doses, and testing status are updated when product pages change. Bevisning grades are reviewed when new human RCTs are published. Read how we verify.
What's inside
Consumer signals
3.8 out of 5 across 1 verified reviews on 2 platforms.
Medium confidenceConsumer sentiment compiled from 2 public sources (Labdoor, Reddit).
3.8/5 · mixed sentiment
Compiled from a Labdoor listing located during manual research; not independently re-verified against the live page at build time. Rating converted from 100-point to 5-point scale.
1 threads discussed · negative sentiment
Compiled from a Reddit r/longevity listing located during manual research; not independently re-verified against the live page at build time.
These are consumer sentiment signals. They do not measure whether the product actually works. See our evidence section for that.
Independent external anchors
Public sources on this same product, unrelated to NO1GEVITY. NIH DSLD is the US government's registered label database (shown verbatim). SuppCo.com is a separate, unaffiliated commercial site with no partnership or data-sharing arrangement with us. NO1GEVITY scores are computed independently of both.
What others say, with a source hierarchy
We treat external opinion very differently depending on where it comes from. Tier A is our strongest signal. Tier C is background sentiment only. Tier Rejected is what we excluded, listed openly so you can see what we discarded.
These reviews are aggregated from third-party sources, not written by NO1GEVITY. Each entry shows its source, retrieval date, and whether the source has an affiliate or paid relationship. We do not edit reviews to change their meaning. Disclosure policy.
Independent deep reviews, lab tests, certificates of analysis
Our strongest external evidence. Long-form independent reviews, physical-product lab work, and third-party certifications.
ConsumerLab maintains a page covering Elysium, but the substantive test results and ratings sit behind a paid membership wall.
General-category skepticism: longevity supplements as a class lack proof of lifespan extension in humans, and the sector is described as under-regulated.
An independent academic patient-advocacy group assessed NRPT/Basis specifically for ALS use and concluded they could not recommend it for that condition due to a total absence of preclinical ALS models, case reports, or ALS-patient trials, while corroborating the safety data from the Dellinger trial.
Registered dietitians and physicians, without affiliate ties
Credentialed commentary from clinicians who disclose no paid relationship. Useful as supporting critique but not a substitute for a clinical outcome trial.
Describes Basis as a legitimate, trial-backed, third-party-certified product but poor value relative to competitors on a cost-per-dose basis.
Sources we transparently discard
Marketing-quoted press, obviously fabricated aggregate ratings, or heavy-affiliate 'reviews'. Listed openly so you can see what we excluded.
The page is a review of Innerbody's own competing NAD+ supplement, with Basis appearing only in a pricing/dose comparison table, not as an independently tested product.
Very small, inconsistent sample; recent visible feedback centers on subscription billing problems (irregular shipment frequency, difficulty cancelling) rather than product efficacy.
Community threads and aggregate ratings
Additional public mentions we located, kept separate from the deep independent reviews above.
Labdoor passed on purity; docked for under-dosing versus 2026 research levels.
Community view: pioneering but out-competed on both price and dose since 2023.
Vår sammanfattning
Bevisning, what actually backs this product
Longevity brands rarely test their exact finished product. We separate what's tested from what's inferred.
Research behind this product
The studies that established the trial dose and evidence grade for each active ingredient in this product. Click through to read the original paper.
Claim check, vendor claims vs. our reading of the evidence
Not medical advice. We list the strongest claims made by the brand and check each against traceable evidence.
Regelverk status
Rules change often. We record when we last verified each row. See the full regulatory timeline →
What we could not verify
We list this openly. If a claim isn't backed by a source we can trace, we'd rather flag it than repeat it.
- Elysium has never submitted its own New Dietary Ingredient Notification (NDIN) to the FDA for Basis, NR, or pterostilbene as sold in this product, it relies on ChromaDex's ingredient-level NR GRAS/NDI filings rather than a product-specific FDA submission, per court filings in the SDNY litigation (https://www.sdnyblog.com/files/2022/02/ChromaDex.pdf).
- ConsumerLab's Elysium/Basis page exists but its full test results and ratings are members-only/paywalled; we could not independently verify ConsumerLab's specific findings on Basis (https://www.consumerlab.com/elysium/).
- Trustpilot's aggregate rating and review count for elysiumhealth.com could not be pinned to one reliable current figure, different snapshots and third-party trackers report anywhere from 6 to 34 reviews and ratings ranging roughly 2.0 to 3.4 out of 5, well under the N>500 threshold this site requires to treat Trustpilot as Tier B evidence (https://www.trustpilot.com/review/www.elysiumhealth.com).
- No long-term (beyond the ~60-day Dellinger 2017 follow-up window) randomized trial on hard clinical or health-span endpoints (e.g., mortality, disease incidence, physical function) was located for Basis, existing trial data covers only the NAD+ biomarker and short-term safety.
- Pterostilbene's specific FDA regulatory status (GRAS or NDI) as formulated in Basis was not independently confirmed in this research pass.
- Innerbody's comparison table places Basis, not a dedicated Innerbody teardown of Basis; the page found during research is primarily a review of Innerbody's own competing NAD+ product, with Basis appearing only as a pricing comparison line item, so no independent Innerbody lab teardown of Basis itself could be verified.
Redaktionellt notes
The original NR + pterostilbene combo. Under-dosed by 2026 research standards.
Why this scored this way
This Elysium Health Basis scores 6.1, making it below the site average. It delivers 250mg of NR (83% of the 300mg trial dose) with grade B evidence (promising human data, not yet comprehensive). At $2.40/day it's among the more expensive options in Combo.
What drives the score up
- Dose-evidence score of 6.1 shows decent alignment with trial doses.
- Tested by independent lab (transparency 7.0).
What drags it down
- No public analysintyg available for independent verification.
- Limited consumer feedback (community score: 4.5).
- At $2.40/day it's on the expensive side.
Why you'd choose it
- You want NR from a Elysium Health product.
- You want a tested by independent lab product.
Why you might skip it
- You want a product with a publicly available CoA.
- You want a cheaper option (this is $2.40/day).
- You prefer produkter with substantial consumer feedback.
Where this sits
Spot an error?
If you are the manufacturer or brand owner of Basis and believe any data on this page is incorrect (wrong dose, wrong ingredient, wrong price, missing certification, outdated status), you can request a correction.
We review every request, verify it against primär sources, and publish any change with a dated note in the version history above. Corrections from brand owners are treated the same as corrections from anyone else: verified before they move.
Request a correction →Similar produkter
All Combo →The next highest-scoring produkter in Combo, same scoring method, same rules.