1. Home
  2. Detail

@tamimarahman__: Songi songi💋

Tamima✨
Tamima✨
Open In TikTok:
Region: BD
Wednesday 22 October 2025 11:36:33 GMT
4747
185
8
6

Music

Download

No Watermark .mp4 (1.38MB) No Watermark(HD) .mp4 (1.34MB) Watermark .mp4 (0MB) Music .mp3

Comments

marufa.akther94
🌸🌸Marufa Akther 🌸🌸 :
Ma sha Allah chul 🥰🥰
2025-10-22 12:05:44
0
bum30y
♡ 𝐘𝐨𝐔𝐫_𝐀𝐫𝐈𝐲𝐀𝐧 🧃 :
𝐀𝐰𝐰𝐰𝐰.....
2025-10-22 12:19:01
0
ayshalslam30
💗রাইসা 💗 :
🥰🥰🥰
2025-10-22 16:06:47
0
mdsakilislam201
mdsakilislam201 :
❤️❤️❤
2025-10-23 03:34:50
0
mdsakilislam201
mdsakilislam201 :
🥰🥰🥰
2025-10-23 03:34:52
0
mdsakilislam201
mdsakilislam201 :
😳😳😳
2025-10-23 03:34:53
0
zakirshaikh8565
zawar zakir hussain :
❤❤❤
2025-10-23 07:34:41
0
_nijhum_jahan_
Nijhum🌷✨ :
dream hairr
2025-10-29 12:17:39
0
To see more videos from user @tamimarahman__, please go to the Tikwm homepage.

Other Videos

Watch the full 10 minute reading on YouTube❤️ karinaemincoachingofficial Subscribe for more divine love messages 💌
Watch the full 10 minute reading on YouTube❤️ karinaemincoachingofficial Subscribe for more divine love messages 💌
البت اتجننت من الي حصل ذاكرة القراميط🤣
البت اتجننت من الي حصل ذاكرة القراميط🤣
༺❀༻🇩🇿༺❀༻༺❀༻ 🇩🇿💚🕊️L´ALGERIE MA FIERTÉ 🕊️💚🇩🇿༺❀༻🇩🇿༺❀༻Algerie 🇩🇿🤍❤️💚Tahia djazaiir💚❤️🤍🇩🇿VIVE NOTRE PRÉSIDENT Abdelmadjid Tebboune🇩🇿🫡
༺❀༻🇩🇿༺❀༻༺❀༻ 🇩🇿💚🕊️L´ALGERIE MA FIERTÉ 🕊️💚🇩🇿༺❀༻🇩🇿༺❀༻Algerie 🇩🇿🤍❤️💚Tahia djazaiir💚❤️🤍🇩🇿VIVE NOTRE PRÉSIDENT Abdelmadjid Tebboune🇩🇿🫡


focus ✌️
focus ✌️
There’s a new 2026 paper in Nature Metabolism titled: “Whole-blood NAD+ levels do not reflect healthy ageing.” And social media is already turning this into: “See? NAD doesn’t decline with age.” “NAD supplements are pointless.” But that is NOT what this paper showed. Here’s what the researchers actually found: They measured NAD+ levels in WHOLE BLOOD and found that blood NAD+ levels did not consistently decline with age. Their conclusion? Whole-blood NAD+ is likely NOT a reliable biomarker for healthy aging. That’s very different from saying NAD+ inside tissues or cells does not decline with age. NAD+ does its real work INSIDE cells: • mitochondria • muscle • brain • liver • immune cells And this paper did not directly measure intracellular NAD+ in those tissues. This is something I’ve talked about before: Commercial blood NAD tests are probably not very useful because blood may not reflect what’s happening inside tissues. But that does NOT automatically mean: • tissue NAD+ stays stable with age • mitochondrial NAD+ is unaffected • supplementation is useless In fact, multiple published studies still show age-related NAD+ decline in tissues, especially in muscle, liver, and mitochondrial compartments. What this paper really tells us is: A simple blood draw may not be a good way to assess NAD biology or “biological age.” And honestly… that’s not surprising. A lot of aging biology is compartment-specific. What’s happening inside mitochondria often does NOT show up clearly in circulation. So this paper is really more about the limitations of blood biomarkers than it is a “debunking” of NAD decline or NAD research altogether. Science is nuanced. One paper rarely overturns an entire body of literature.
There’s a new 2026 paper in Nature Metabolism titled: “Whole-blood NAD+ levels do not reflect healthy ageing.” And social media is already turning this into: “See? NAD doesn’t decline with age.” “NAD supplements are pointless.” But that is NOT what this paper showed. Here’s what the researchers actually found: They measured NAD+ levels in WHOLE BLOOD and found that blood NAD+ levels did not consistently decline with age. Their conclusion? Whole-blood NAD+ is likely NOT a reliable biomarker for healthy aging. That’s very different from saying NAD+ inside tissues or cells does not decline with age. NAD+ does its real work INSIDE cells: • mitochondria • muscle • brain • liver • immune cells And this paper did not directly measure intracellular NAD+ in those tissues. This is something I’ve talked about before: Commercial blood NAD tests are probably not very useful because blood may not reflect what’s happening inside tissues. But that does NOT automatically mean: • tissue NAD+ stays stable with age • mitochondrial NAD+ is unaffected • supplementation is useless In fact, multiple published studies still show age-related NAD+ decline in tissues, especially in muscle, liver, and mitochondrial compartments. What this paper really tells us is: A simple blood draw may not be a good way to assess NAD biology or “biological age.” And honestly… that’s not surprising. A lot of aging biology is compartment-specific. What’s happening inside mitochondria often does NOT show up clearly in circulation. So this paper is really more about the limitations of blood biomarkers than it is a “debunking” of NAD decline or NAD research altogether. Science is nuanced. One paper rarely overturns an entire body of literature.

About

Legal