Lab results - looking for opinions [PLEASE READ 1ST POST]

Melissa Bishop49 said:(vK) RBC 4.66 ( o ) 10e12/L 3.86 - 5.08
(vK) hemoglobin 135 ( o ) g/L F 119 - 157
(vK) hematocrit 0.412 ( o ) 0.350 - 0.470
(vK) MCV 88.4 ( o ) fL 83.0 - 97.0
(vK) MCH 29.0 ( o ) pg 27.4 - 33.9
(vK) MCHC 328 ( o ) g/L 320 - 345
(vK) RDW 12.9 ( o ) % 9.0 - 15.0
(vK) platelets 179 (o ) 10e9/L 158 - 424
(vK) MPV 11.4 ( ) > fL 6.8 - 10.4
(vK) WBC 8.2 ( o ) 10e9/L 3.4 - 9.7
(vK) neutrophils 67.7 ( o) % 44 - 72
(vK) # 5.55 ( o ) 10e9/L 2.06 - 6.49
(vK) lymphocytes 22.9 (o ) % 20 - 46
(vK) # 1.88 ( o ) 10e9/L 1.19 - 3.35
(vK) monocytes 7.2 ( o ) % 2 - 12
(vK) # 0.59 ( o ) 10e9/L 0.12 - 0.84
(vK) eosinophils 1.5 ( o ) % 0 - 7
(vK) # 0.12 ( o ) 10e9/L 0.00 - 0.43
(vK) basophils 0.7 ( o ) % 0 - 1
(vK) # 0.06 ( o) 10e9/L 0.00 - 0.06

Hi, I'd appreciate some input. Is everything within range, or is there anything suspicious here?
Thanks 🙂
I had COVID two months ago; no other underlying health issues.

Aside from a slightly elevated platelet volume—which might be linked to that recent infection, though perhaps too much time has passed since the acute phase—everything else looks standard. No other deviations noted in these results.

slycyclist14 said:Hi, I need to renew my driver's license. Part of the process involves a medical exam where they draw blood, followed by a review of the results—blood work, psychological tests, etc. Here’s the catch: I need to claim I’m not on any medication, but I actually am. I don't take them here in the States. Is it possible for certain medications to show up in a standard blood test? Are these screenings comprehensive or just basic panels? Basically, can I get caught in a lie?

Standard medical evaluations for a Class D driver's license don't typically screen for specific drug levels in the bloodstream; instead, they focus on routine biochemistry and a complete blood count. However, keep this in mind: certain medications can cause fluctuations in lab results—for instance, elevated liver enzymes might hint at something. Furthermore, because drugs can impact psychomotor skills, a combination of lab data, physical exams, and psychological testing could indirectly raise red flags, potentially leading a doctor to suspect someone is using medication or other substances.

brightscout9 said:Hello,

Thanks for the reply.

I don't have any symptoms and I'm not suffering from any illnesses.

No specific instructions were given; I just run these types of tests twice a year on my own initiative.

In previous tests, my Zeljezo levels were always fine, as was my urinalysis.

I'm not an athlete.

There hasn't been any significant physical exertion.

Thanks for the response...

Dear Sir,

The results primarily show high transferrin saturation, even though the ferritin level is normal—this can be one of the earliest indicators of iron overload. Since iron concentrations fluctuate quite a bit, relying on a single data point isn't reliable. I suggest repeating the test in a few weeks; if the transferrin saturation remains high, further investigation will be necessary. Your cholesterol is slightly elevated, so it would be wise to address that through dietary adjustments. As for the urinalysis, there are no abnormalities; the slightly higher epithelial cell count isn't a pathological finding, it simply suggests skin contact during sample collection.

amberowl said:Full panel results

Glucose 5.30 (ref. 3.9 - 6.2)
Urea 3.5 (ref. 2.8 - 8.3)
Creatinine 60 (ref. 59 - 104)
ALT 21 (12-48)
AST 20 (11-38)
GGT 23 (11-55)
Cholesterol 6.30 (3.2 - 5.2)
Triglycerides 0.90 (0.11 - 1.70)
HDL cholesterol 1.20 (0.9 - 2.2)
LDL cholesterol 4.7 (2.60 - 4.1)
Iron 17.8 (11-32.2)
Total bilirubin 20.20 (2.0-21.0)
Direct bilirubin 3.00 (
I also ran urine tests and a full CBC. I wasn't sure if I should post those too, but everything looks fine. Nothing is even hitting the borderline; most values are sitting right in the middle of the reference range.

I'm 21. These were just routine checkups since my last blood work was back in 2013. Just wanted to see where things stood out of curiosity. As far as I know, I don't have any other health issues, though I dealt with some arrhythmia once in a while.

Over the last year, I haven't really watched what I eat or stayed active. I've gained some weight—went from an ideal 92kg up to 110kg, currently at 105kg, and I'm working on bringing it down. I started hitting the gym and immediately cut out all the junk. I'm getting back into the healthy habits I had before COVID. Around New Year's, I was eating quite a bit of jerky; generally, I've always been fond of dried meats and eggs.

Sir,

Fix your diet and drop some weight, and your cholesterol numbers should follow suit. For a 21-year-old, this cholesterol profile isn't acceptable. Do you smoke? What are your blood pressure readings?

Maria Fisher46 said:Hey there,

Looking at these results, the first thing that jumps out is that high transferrin saturation, even though the ferritin levels look totally normal. That could be one of those early red flags for iron overload. Since iron concentrations can swing wildly from day to day, you really shouldn't bank on just one test... it’s not reliable enough. I’d suggest waiting a few weeks and then running the labs again. If that saturation is still hanging high, then we talk about more serious follow-ups. Also, cholesterol is creeping up a bit, so cleaning up the diet might be a good move. As for the urine test, everything looks fine. A slightly higher epithelial cell count isn't a medical issue—it just means the sample touched skin during collection.

When you say high transferrin saturation, are you talking about low UIBC?

I'll definitely redo the labs in maybe 2-3 weeks...

and try to cut back on all the high-iron foods...

Maria Fisher46 said:Look, lady,

all those symptoms you’re bringing up? You can't just chalk them all up to high calcium levels. It really depends on how high we're talking about the concentration here. Seeing hypercalcemia paired with low Vitamin D isn't exactly common, so someone needs to dig deeper and figure out what's actually going on. Plus, high calcium usually causes constipation, not diarrhea—that's a weird twist right there. Then you've got these systemic issues that still don't make sense, even though the rheumatologist is convinced it's not an autoimmune thing.

So, besides the fact that this whole cluster of results is pretty unusual, most of what you're describing doesn't fit the typical profile for just high calcium, and more testing is definitely needed. Unfortunately, I've gotta run, so I can't go into more detail right now.

Hey Nicholas Myers, I asked my doctor to send over the lab results so you could take a look. If you wouldn't mind giving me your take, I'd really appreciate it. Thanks a million!

brightscout9 said:Are you suggesting high transferrin saturation happens when UIBC is low?

I’ll definitely retake the test in 2-3 weeks.

And I'll try cutting back on foods high in iron.

Transferrin saturation is calculated using the formula: Fe/TIBC or Fe/(Fe + UIBC). So, my primary focus is the ratio of elevated iron against a lower TIBC. But yes, since TIBC equals Fe + UIBC, your logic holds up too.

My advice? Don't mess with your diet. Just eat normally so the lab results actually reflect reality.

Maria Fisher46 said:To whom it may concern,

Fix your diet and drop some weight; that should bring your cholesterol numbers down. For a 21-year-old, these levels just aren't acceptable. Are you a smoker? What are your blood pressure readings like?

Thank you.

I was smoking, but I quit the very same day I got these results. I’ve started working out, and my diet is on track now—I'm being careful about what I eat.

I'm about 6'2" and weigh roughly 235 lbs; I'm aiming to get down to around 205 lbs.

My blood pressure is mostly around 120/80.

How long should I wait before getting my labs redone to see where my cholesterol stands?

Thanks again.

I'm a bit unsure how to interpret these OGTT results. My doctor isn't overly concerned about these lower numbers; she mentioned we’ll just retest the fasting glucose in a month. She feels that even though the other two are slightly low, there's no need to "investigate" further much more...

Fasting - 5.2 (pregnancy
1-hr - 4.4 (pregnancy
2-hr - 3.2 (pregnancy
I had my OGTT done at my local community health clinic. It was incredibly crowded, so I asked if I could spend the waiting period between blood draws at home. They said that was fine, as long as I took a slow walk. I live literally about 200 meters from the clinic—maybe a 2 or 3-minute walk—and I certainly wasn't rushing. I also checked if I could use the restroom, and they told me it was okay... Now I've ended up with these results and I'm wondering if the levels are artificially low because of that light movement, or if it points to an actual issue. For comparison, my fasting level was identical to this one during my last pregnancy, but the rest of the sequence followed a more typical pattern: 5.2, 7.8, 6.4.

Could I get some thoughts on this lab result?
My mom, who's 74, had her D-Dimer checked because of some knee pain and slight swelling. The results showed a D-Dimer level of 1800—everything else in her bloodwork looked perfectly normal, though.
Her primary care doctor—he was worried about potential thrombosis—sent her straight to the ER yesterday.
While she was there, they ran an EKG, a chest X-ray, and a venous ultrasound on her right leg (where the knee is acting up).
All those tests came back clear, and they sent her home after explaining that they’ve ruled out any DVT.
They just told her to follow up with her regular doctor...
I'm still a little uneasy about that high D-Dimer value—what else could cause it? And is a leg ultrasound enough to be certain we've ruled out deep vein thrombosis?...

Nicholas Johnson8 said:Please give me your thoughts on this lab result.
My mom, 74 years old, had a D-Dimer test because of some knee pain and slight swelling. The results showed a D-Dimer value of 1800. All her other blood work was within the normal range.
Her primary care doctor sent her straight to the ER immediately due to suspicions of thrombosis.
At the ER, they performed an EKG, a chest X-ray, and a venous ultrasound on her right leg (where the knee pain is located).
All those tests came back fine, and she was discharged home with explanations that DVT had been ruled out.
They just told her to follow up with her own doctor.
I'm a little worried about that high D-Dimer—what else could it be for, and is a leg ultrasound enough to truly rule out deep vein thrombosis?

Ugh, D-Dimers. They’re absolute lifesavers when they come back negative, but they are a total nightmare when they come back positive.

A value of 1,800... what are we even measuring here? $\mu$g/L? That seems most likely, but who knows. What is considered the "normal" threshold for whatever unit they used? If it's actually mg/mL, then anything up to 740 $\mu$g/L might be considered normal since the lady is over 50—you take age into account and multiply by ten for the upper limit. I ask because I'm used to seeing values around 0.5, so I really need to double-check those units, even though they're probably $\mu$g/mL.

If all the other findings were okay, does that mean the D-Dimer at the ER was also okay? Honestly, that's entirely possible.

You're stressing out, so why don't you do some digging on the medical sites yourself? Look, D-Dimers are incredibly sensitive, but they are notoriously non-specific, which is infuriating. It means they can be elevated because of practically anything, or even for no reason at all. You're the one seeing your mother in person; we aren't. For starters, go calculate the Wellsov score:
https://www.mdcalc.com/wells-criteria-dvt

Then you'll have a better idea of what's going on.

An ultrasound can't settle everything here; neither can a CT or an MRI. An experienced doctor using ultrasound can look for signs of a clot in the major veins of the legs with pretty high probability, but even then, it's never 100%. The ER staff did their job by saying suspicion of DVT was ruled out based on their assessment, but that doesn't mean DVT itself is impossible.

brightgull95 said:Man, those D-Dimers... they're freaking amazing when they come back negative, but a total nightmare when they're positive.

A value of 1,800 what? ug/L? That’s probably what it is, but who knows. What’s considered "normal" for whatever unit they're using here? If it really is mg/mL, then up to 740 ug/L might be okay since the mother is over 50—I think some rules say the upper limit is ten times your age. I'm just asking because I'm used to seeing numbers around 0.5. I need to double-check the units, though they're likely ug/mL.

If all the results look fine, does that mean her D-Dimers were clear at the ER? Honestly, it’s possible.

Look, stop obsessing over me and go dig through some medical websites instead. Even though D-Dimers are super sensitive, they aren't specific enough to drive you crazy. Basically, they can be elevated for absolutely everything or for nothing at all. You're actually there seeing your mom, whereas we're just staring at screens. For starters, go calculate the Wells score:
https://www.mdcalc.com/wells-criteria-dvt

Then maybe you'll have a better idea of what's going on.

A CT scan won't help much here, and neither will an ultrasound or any other basic imaging alone. An experienced doctor using ultrasound can usually spot signs of a clot in the large leg veins with pretty high probability, but even then, it's never 100%. If the ER told you DVT was ruled out, they meant the suspicion was low, but that doesn't technically mean a DVT isn't physically there.

I swear, I live for brightgull95's posts. That dry humor is top-tier. It actually helps break up the tension for us sick folks and everyone following along.

My bad on the units—I'm not at my mom's right now to double-check the exact number, but I know the D-Dimer reference value on the report was 550.
They didn't bother testing dimers at the hospital since this result came in earlier this morning.
When I said CD, I meant color Doppler... not computer peripherals.

I know you were talking about Color Doppler, which is obviously a standard component in any modern ultrasound machine, but Kimberly Morris correctly called me out on my nonsense there. When we're actually looking for a DVT, the ultrasound itself—specifically the imaging part—is way more critical than the Doppler. You track the vein and apply pressure with a linear probe; if you can't compress it, you've found a clot. Honestly, you could skip the color altogether and still get the job done.

Just take a look at what Wells is saying and follow that lead. In that case, the unit is almost certainly ug/L.

Thanks a million, man—really appreciate the kindness...
A little sarcasm is always welcome, but I think my sense of humor sensors were clearly offline yesterday—after spending five hours camping out in the ER... 🙂

Kimberly Morris said:

Here is the report for Felix the Cat. I asked my doctor if you could take a look and perhaps offer some commentary. Thanks in advance!

Ma'am,

My apologies; it appears my response from yesterday failed to post due to some technical glitches.

I previously noted that a total calcium level of 2.58 mmol/L shouldn't be directly linked to your symptoms. It's a very mild hypercalcemia, though we really need to see the ionized calcium levels to be sure. This specific pattern—low Vitamin D paired with elevated calcium—is often seen in hyperparathyroidism, primarily the primary type. While secondary hyperparathyroidism can occur alongside Vitamin D deficiency, calcium levels in those cases are typically normal or even low. I see your endocrinologist is already considering this possibility and has ordered follow-up testing.

However, none of that accounts for the elevated ESR, high CRP, or the leukocytosis with neutrophilia. Those markers point toward systemic inflammation, which is actually more concerning to me than the calcium levels. The cause of this inflammation remains unclear, though a colonoscopy to rule out inflammatory bowel disease might provide some answers. That said, IBD wouldn't necessarily explain the neurological symptoms you mentioned. It is worth noting that migraines are more frequent in patients with IBD, potentially triggered by the inflammatory process, which usually subsides once the condition is managed. Still, it will be quite problematic if the endoscopic findings and biopsies come back negative.

As for temporal arteritis, the clinical picture and lab results don't seem to align.

It is entirely possible that the neurological issues are one matter, while the systemic inflammation is an entirely separate issue. It is difficult to say for certain at this stage.

amberowl said:Thank you.

I was smoking, but I quit the very same day I saw these results. I've started exercising, and my diet is on track now—I'm being very careful about what I eat.

I'm roughly 6'2" and weigh about 235 lbs; my goal is to get down to around 200-205 lbs.

My blood pressure is mostly sitting at 120/80.

How long should I wait before getting my labs redone to check my cholesterol levels?

Thanks again.

To whom it may concern,

Given the details provided, I recommend scheduling a follow-up lipid panel in six months. This should be paired with strict dietary discipline, regular physical activity, and continued abstinence from smoking.

Megan Jones27 said:I'm struggling to make sense of these OGTT results. My doctor isn't overly concerned about the lower numbers; he suggests we just retest the fasting level in a month. He thinks these other two values are slightly low, but there's no need to "investigate" further.

Fasting: 5.2 (Pregnancy threshold < 5.1)

1 hour: 4.4 (Pregnancy threshold < 10)

2 hours: 3.2 (Pregnancy threshold < 8.5)

I did the OGTT at my local community clinic. It was packed, so I asked if I could wait out the interval between blood draws at home. They said yes, as long as I took a light stroll. I live literally 200 meters from the clinic—maybe a 2 or 3-minute walk—and I certainly wasn't running. I also asked if using the restroom was okay, and they said it was fine. Now I'm left wondering if these numbers are artificially low because of that brief movement, or if they point to an actual issue. In my last pregnancy, the fasting number was identical, but the progression felt more standard: 5.2, 7.8, 6.4.

Sent from my iPhone 15 using Reddit

Ma'am,

Theoretically, these results lean toward gestational diabetes since one value deviates from the norm—specifically the fasting glucose, though in my view, those criteria can be quite stringent. Furthermore, at the two-hour mark, you see hypoglycemia, given that the levels have dropped below 3.3 mmol/l.

In cases of gestational diabetes, there are documented instances of what's called a "delayed insulin response." This occurs in two stages: an initial period of diminished response, followed by a late surge in insulin concentration, which ultimately drives glucose levels down too far.

Additionally, as I recently noted to Roger Rodriguez, some studies tracking pregnant women who developed hypoglycemia during an OGTT (values under 3.5 mmol/l, almost always occurring after the two-hour mark) show that a significant percentage eventually met the diagnostic criteria for gestational diabetes, particularly regarding elevated fasting glucose.

Given that, your OBGYN's recommendation is consistent with these patterns, and you should follow their guidance.

Thank you so much for such a thorough explanation!

Sent from my iPhone 15 using Reddit

Maria Fisher46 said:Hey there,

My bad—looks like some technical glitch swallowed my reply yesterday. So sorry about that.

So, I mentioned earlier that a total calcium level of 2.58 mmol/L probably isn't what’s causing your symptoms. It's just a super mild case of hypercalcemia, but honestly, we really need to see those ionized calcium numbers to get the full picture. When you see this specific combo—low Vitamin D paired with high calcium—it usually points toward hyperparathyroidism. Primary is the usual suspect, though you can occasionally see secondary hyperparathyroidism when Vitamin D is low, but then the calcium levels are typically normal or even low. I see your Endocrinologist already flagged that possibility and ordered more tests.

That said, none of that explains why your ESR is spiked, your CRP is up, and you've got leukocytosis with neutrophilia. Those markers scream systemic inflammation, which, frankly, worries me way more than the calcium levels do. We don't know the cause of the inflammation yet, but maybe a colonoscopy to rule out Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) could clear things up. Then again, that wouldn't necessarily explain the neurological stuff you're feeling. I guess there's a slightly higher chance of migraines with IBD, which can be triggered by inflammation, and those should settle down once the disease is under control. But man, it's going to be a real headache if the endoscopy and biopsies all come back clean.

As for temporal arteritis, the clinical picture and the lab work just aren't adding up for that.

It’s entirely possible that the neurological issues are one thing, and this systemic inflammation is a completely separate issue. It's tough to say for sure right now.

Felix the Cat, how can I ever thank you enough? Seriously, you're a lifesaver. Thanks so much for the reply.

What's actually eating at me is this terrible Vitamin D reading. My Endocrinologist told me to stop taking supplements because of the hypercalcemia. But everywhere I look online, people are saying Vitamin D is absolutely huge when dealing with WHO. I never caught it, I haven't been vaccinated, I'm carrying some extra weight, and I've got all these other diagnoses too.

Do you have any suggestions for what I should take to boost my immunity, since my Vitamin D levels are basically non-existent?