anna.melb_AU said:

Most of what circulates confidently in this community traces back to one summary of one study, and the qualifier was dropped somewhere in the third…

Agreed, and one caution: a single measurement is not a measurement. Anything that moves day to day needs a trend before it means anything at all.

BenResearch_OR said:

Agreed, with the caveat that iron should be tested before supplementing, not after.

That reframing is the part I needed. Taking it to my next appointment.

anna.melb_AU said:

Most of what circulates confidently in this community traces back to one summary of one study, and the qualifier was dropped somewhere in the third…

Filing a mild objection. Mild because I might be wrong; an objection because nobody has addressed the case that does not fit. Filing an objection on the n=1 problem. Personal experience is genuine evidence about one person and very weak evidence about anybody else, and this thread keeps promoting the first into the second.

Worth separating that from micronutrient cover, which this thread keeps folding into the same question. They behave differently and the advice does not transfer.

One concrete data point for the thread. Practical: whatever you change, write down the date and the reason. In three months the reason is what you will have forgotten, and the reason is what makes the record worth having.

Moderator note: a couple of off-topic posts removed. Thread quality here is what the rules are for. Keep it up.