NYC Woman Dead After Receiving a “Longevity Infusion”

According to the experts that we spoke to, the death, which followed an intravenous NAD⁺ infusion that went catastrophically wrong, underscores the risks of unproven treatments and the need for rigorous longevity medicine.

Earlier this week, Elizabeth Baron, a 27-year-old woman from New York City, died after receiving an intravenous infusion at a local “wellness clinic.” The procedure was performed by 55-year-old Luis Rojas Cabrera, the owner of Bereshit Lifestyle Center. Cabrera was taken into custody by the NYPD and charged with reckless endangerment and unauthorized practice of a profession. He was later released without bail but ordered to surrender his passport. Cabrera claims to have completed his medical training in the Dominican Republic, but he is not licensed to practice medicine in the United States.

A popular but misused coenzyme

The tragic incident is directly connected to the longevity field: the infusion Baron received was supposed to contain NAD⁺ (nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide), a coenzyme central to energy production and DNA repair and a popular subject of longevity research.

NAD⁺ levels generally decline with age, and the molecule has been linked to aspects of aging biology by multiple studies. NAD⁺ supplementation has significant appeal but is not easily achievable, as the molecule is rapidly metabolized. Most human research has therefore focused on the precursors NR and NMN, which can reliably raise blood NAD⁺ after oral administration.

NR can extend lifespan in yeast [1], and both NR and NMN have improved numerous age-related outcomes in rodents [2]. The lifespan evidence is less consistent: NR improved survival in a 2016 study [3], but failed to extend lifespan in either sex in the National Institute on Aging’s rigorous Intervention Testing Program (ITP) [4].

Human data is currently even less convincing, which has not stopped NAD⁺ and its precursors from becoming a fad in longevity circles. Numerous supplements can be bought online, including NAD⁺ nasal sprays and patches, and then there are NAD⁺ infusions, which, despite appearing more “serious” to laypeople, are backed by particularly slim evidence.

The experts weigh in

“Stories like this are heartbreaking,” said Dr. Matt Kaeberlein, a longevity researcher, University of Washington affiliate professor, and CEO and co-founder of Optispan. “Unfortunately, it isn’t the first time someone has been seriously harmed – or killed – while pursuing an unproven ‘longevity’ therapy. We still don’t know exactly what happened in this case, and it’s important to wait for the medical examiner’s findings before jumping to conclusions about the specific treatment involved. But the broader lesson is one I’ve been repeating for years: every experimental intervention comes with unknown risks. Those risks may come from the biology of the therapy itself, from manufacturing or quality-control problems, or simply from errors in preparation or administration.”

One of the cases that Kaeberlein is referring to happened last year at RAADfest, a popular gathering of longevity enthusiasts. It, too, involved injections offered in a setting where some of the practitioners reportedly were not properly licensed. The injections supposedly contained peptides, chains of several amino acids that can perform various biological actions. Two people almost died as a result.

In neither case do we yet know whether the reaction was caused by the purported active ingredient, contamination, incorrect preparation or dosing, or another aspect of administration. Unfortunately, what the general public will remember – and what will certainly resonate with its stereotypes – is that those longevity treatments turned out to be dangerous, and this one turned out to be deadly.

“The danger increases dramatically when these interventions are provided by unlicensed practitioners, through offshore clinics, or obtained through unregulated channels, whether that’s IV infusions, stem cells, or research-grade peptides purchased over the internet,” cautioned Kaeberlein.

Cabrera seems to clearly fit that bill, with his website offering a wide array of seemingly unrelated treatments alongside bombastic ‘scientific’ claims. One page features “a personalized Wellness Kit with the combination of over 100 components.” There is no indication that such a complex, personalized combination has been rigorously tested as a whole for safety, efficacy, or possible interactions among its components.The story also reflects the gap between intense public demand for interventions that promise better health and longevity and the much slower progress of clinical science. In fact, the list of proven longevity treatments is extremely thin and headlined by “boring” lifestyle interventions such as diet and exercise. To many people, real longevity medicine – a nascent but quickly developing field – seems less glittery than the pseudoscientific talk of modern snake oil salesmen.

“Healthy Longevity Medicine is a medical discipline and, like every other medical discipline, it must be grounded in evidence, clinical governance, and patient safety,” said Dr. Andrea Maier, Oon Chiew Seng Professor in Medicine at the National University of Singapore and a longevity medicine pioneer trying to bring it to the masses. “We have created tremendous public interest in healthy longevity, but we have not done enough to educate the public about what is proven, what is experimental, and what remains unvalidated. The solution is not to question the field itself, but to strengthen physician education, international standards, and appropriate regulation so Healthy Longevity Medicine develops with the same scientific rigor and accountability expected of every other branch of medicine.”

“Alongside the need for more robust evidence and well-conducted safety trials, we also need to pay much greater attention to the potential adverse effects of different compounds, as well as the safety of their sourcing and manufacturing,” said Dr. Evelyne Bischof, Professor at Shanghai University of Medicine and Health Sciences and President of the Healthy Longevity Medicine Society. “When a substance is neither FDA-approved nor recommended by professional guidelines, and is often produced without rigorous independent quality control, traceability, or verification by accredited laboratories, there are important safety concerns that simply cannot be overlooked. It is deeply unfortunate that they are so often only recognized after tragic events like this occur.”

“I understand why people are eager to try the next promising intervention, but enthusiasm should never replace evidence or basic safety standards,” added Kaeberlein. “My advice remains the same: focus first on the interventions that have actually been shown to improve health and reduce disease risk, and when medication is appropriate, work with a qualified healthcare professional and stick to FDA-approved drugs from legitimate sources.”

Literature

[1] Belenky, P., Racette, F. G., Bogan, K. L., McClure, J. M., Smith, J. S., & Brenner, C. (2007). Nicotinamide riboside promotes Sir2 silencing and extends lifespan via Nrk and Urh1/Pnp1/Meu1 pathways to NAD+. Cell, 129(3), 473-484.

[2] Mills, K. F., Yoshida, S., Stein, L. R., Grozio, A., Kubota, S., Sasaki, Y., … & Imai, S. I. (2016). Long-term administration of nicotinamide mononucleotide mitigates age-associated physiological decline in mice. Cell metabolism, 24(6), 795-806.

[3] Zhang, H., Ryu, D., Wu, Y., Gariani, K., Wang, X., Luan, P., … & Auwerx, J. (2016). NAD+ repletion improves mitochondrial and stem cell function and enhances life span in mice. Science, 352(6292), 1436-1443.

[4] Harrison, D. E., Strong, R., Reifsnyder, P., Kumar, N., Fernandez, E., Flurkey, K., … & Miller, R. A. (2021). 17‐a‐estradiol late in life extends lifespan in aging UM‐HET3 male mice; nicotinamide riboside and three other drugs do not affect lifespan in either sex. Aging cell, 20(5), e13328.