Yahoo Answers is shutting down on 4 May 2021 (Eastern Time) and the Yahoo Answers website is now in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.

?
Lv 7
? asked in Food & DrinkVegetarian & Vegan · 4 years ago

A Couple More Questions for Vegetarians, Vegans, and Omnitarians (i.e. Meat Eaters As Some Call Us), So What Are Your Thoughts?

Do you think that with the level of nutritional deficiencies, being what they are, that more testing, beyond just vitamin D, should be done. The reason I ask this, is that based on the information I've been able to find, and the fact that over ninety nine percent of the population, some are either at, subclinical levels or even a blatant deficiency. Do you think that it would be of benefit to everyone's health to be tested? Now the top ten, and in order, that many are at or below the subclinical levels for, and for adults nineteen plus years of age.

Vitamin D at ninety nine percent.

Vitamin E almost as bad at ninety five percent (Not a surprise overall, but the percentage was)

Choline ranging from sixty five to seventy nine percent.

Magnesium as high as sixty five percent.

Vitamin A at fifty one percent (again not really shock to me ).

Calcium fourty nine percent.

Vitamin C at fourty three percent, and a big surprise for me, and I strongly suspect most all have meat in their diets.

Vitamin B12 this has varied some but the most common number I've seen is thirty nine percent.

Vitamin B6 fifteen percent, although I've seen a bit higher.

Vitamin B8 or folate at thirteen percent.

Zinc at twelve percent, not a real surprise there, but not as high as I'd expected.

Coming in at number eleven is iron. That may come as a surprise with iron to many, I was mildly surprised to not find it in the top ten. There are others, that falls the ten percent range, but I'll not list those.

Update:

The only real unknown, is for vitamin K, and more specifically, the vitamin K2 subgroup if you will, as there's not any real definitive test for those at this time. I know that this could be asked elsewhere, equally. However I seem to find many here in this section of Yahoo Answers to be slightly better informed nutritionally overall, and regardless of dietary preference and following.

Update 2:

Now HOPEFULLY things won't awry for me, and I this question won't take as long due to real life matters, as what my last one did.

Update 3:

In short should testing for all nutrients be a standard procedure, for everyone, in view of what's been coming out, in more recent years?

Update 4:

By the way my primary medical care provider, confirmed that many micronutrients actually aren't tested for. Her surprise for vitamin C was as big as mine was. To be bluntly honest, it actually took a few minutes to register with me. That6 was after I'd picked my jaw up, out of the basement, and pulled my eyes back into my head. Choline was a bit of a big surprise, to clarify things that point.

Update 5:

I've received three good answers, however sadly the one user whose answer was being strongly considered as being selected the best answer was suspended. So now the best answer is being awarded based on the quality of that answer.

3 Answers

Relevance
  • Louis
    Lv 7
    4 years ago
    Favourite answer

    The last time I got a check up they took blood and did their "standard" work up. I was amazed at how many things they test for. And the report was that I was only slightly borderline anemic - which has been the case for 40 years.

    However, i did't ask them for the printout. and i just assumed they would test for all the vitamins and minerals. My understanding is that "blood work" has been very much streamlined and that lots of tests are run simultaneously and with "kits".

    so if they aren't doing a full test now - they ought to be. Perhaps they are trying to save money - but that seems weird with all the things that they do routinely do checks for now.

    Anyway, i think its up to as individuals to monitor what goes in to our bodies. But I know that how the body uses what goes in varies. You may eat 100% of the mRDA of calcium but not absorb it all. So the blood test work is an important tool for evaluation.

    anyway, i have another check up coming up soon and i will ask about it.

    Also I already take a multi with iron, D, Calcium, and Omega 3. I think just with supplements I hit high numbers of everything but Magnesium (or is it manganese. I get them confused). Maybe the best take away from your study is to continue taking some supplements. My feeling is that they are not very expensive. in the recommended doses they have no down side. and they aren't even that expensive.

    Oh, and by the way, Thanks for the good question. you just raised the IQ level of this forum by 100 points. While you were gone , the trolls, parrots, haters, and guttersnipes have been dragging this forum down to the point its almost useless.

    I've been sticking with it out of some sense of duty or something. Like Don Quixote, I'm on a mission to civilize.

  • polly
    Lv 7
    4 years ago

    Absolutely.

    Gone are the days when people have to succumb to gimmicks & snake oil salesmen In order to make sure that their bodies aren't lacking any nutrients & that they're feeling their best.

    Regular blood work & discussions with our G.P's results are a sensible,practical & accurate way to ensure that our bodies are & continue to be healthy.

    I spend much of my day outdoors & I try to make sure that I eat a healthy,balanced diet but my G.P said that my blood test results found me to have very low vitamin D levels.

    So now I supplement myself & get regular blood work done to ensure that my body Is taken care of for the duration.

    Source(s): G.P's can refer their patients to a licensed dietitian or nutritionist If they feel their patient could benefit from one too.
  • Anonymous
    4 years ago

    So a question for everyone! 😊

    I must say that I am rather surprised by a few of those statistics there so I'd like to start by thanking you for sharing.

    While getting tested offers many benefits and can help prevent illnesses as people become aware of where they are lacking in terms of nutrients my view is that I think it's down to the individual to decide. Which is how it is at present, I don't think it should be made compulsory.

    Now what I am most certainly an advocate of is raising awareness, this should be something that is part of government agenda. A good place to start is the school system, more should be done to teach kids about vitamins that they need and what they do. I don't feel that this is currently up to a sufficient standard, health should be a priority and should be mentioned throughout education and perhaps something that could be incorporated into the workplace (that's a whole different debate!). I feel this is a matter that is rather neglected in society, and could perhaps ease strain on health services.

    At a certain age I feel a recommendation should be given to people to go and be tested for all nutrients, but as I stated I think this should only be a recommendation and not something that is enforced by law enforcement or any other means. In closing I think based on those statistics individuals and families should certainly have this as part of their own, personal, standards.

Still have questions? Get answers by asking now.