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

Nicole Newman15 said:What does it mean to have high leukocyte and erythrocyte counts in urine?

Sent from my Apple iPhone 13 using Reddit

Context matters. You have to look at whether the patient is actually experiencing symptoms. It could point to several things: a urinary tract infection, kidney stones (with or without an infection), or perhaps some form of kidney damage or disease.

restlessangler said:09/08/2015 (after taking 10,000 IU daily for 2.5 months)

Calcium - 2.57 (ref. 2.14-2.53)
Phosphate - 1.42 (ref. 0.79-1.42)
Vitamin D - 166 (ref. >75)

I’m stopping the Vitamin D supplement now, so I’ll check the results again at the 12-month mark.

Can someone tell me if this Vitamin D level is significantly elevated? I'm not sure what constitutes a toxic level.
I haven't had any side effects.

The Vitamin D value is clearly in nmol/l, which makes it 166 nmol/l. That isn't considered toxic yet. Toxicity usually isn't a concern until levels exceed 375 nmol/l (150 ng/ml).

That said, there is room for debate regarding a level of 166 nmol/l (66 ng/ml). Some might call it "high-normal," others just "normal," and some might wonder if there is any actual benefit to having 166 nmol/l versus, say, 125 nmol/l.

Unfortunately, studies haven't established a definitive "ideal" blood Vitamin D level specifically for Lupus patients.

Given that you were deficient prior to supplementation, I'm not certain if you should stop entirely or if it would be wiser to simply scale back—perhaps to 1,000 IU daily—and then retest in three months.

dustytinker52 said:@Bryan Barnes2 thanks for the reply👍

Could you please give me your thoughts on this part of the report as well:

Fungi by PCR
Pfizer 2904 10-5000 Positive
Candida (albicans tropicalis) 588 MFI 10-5000 Negative

Thx

I am inclined to agree with Nicholas Myers.

A potential reason for this colonization could be a malabsorptive syndrome—or perhaps damage to the intestinal lining (if I recall correctly, there was some suspicion regarding Celiac disease in your case).

Now—assuming the analysis is accurate and the lab hasn't made an error—the real question is whether treatment is necessary at all. If there are no symptoms, is it truly justifiable to treat something based solely on a positive finding?

The antifungals used against Pfizer aren't common medications—unlike, say, fluconazole... we are talking about much more modern, extremely expensive drugs that aren't just handed out; they typically require approval from a medical board first.

Any doctor you show this report to will find themselves in quite a difficult position.

Maria Fisher46 said:Vitamin D levels are clearly measured in nmol/l—in this case, 166 nmol/l. That level isn't considered toxic just yet. Usually, we don't start talking about toxicity until you cross the 375 nmol/l (150 ng/ml) mark.

That said, whether 166 nmol/l (66 ng/ml) is an ideal number... well, that’s definitely up for debate. Some might call it "high-normal," others just "normal," and then there's the question of whether there's actually any extra benefit from that level compared to, say, 125 nmol/l.

The tricky part is that studies haven't quite nailed down what the "perfect" vitamin D blood level should be specifically for people living with lupus.

Since you were deficient before starting supplements, I'm not entirely sure if you should stop taking it altogether or if it would be smarter to just scale back—maybe try 1000 IU a day and then retest in three months to see where things stand...

Nicholas, I've been waiting for you 😁—I remember you gave me some general advice on Vitamin D a few months back.
Since I have those 10,000 IU capsules, would it be okay to just take one every ten days?
I know that here in the US, some patients get prescribed 50,000 IU once a week (though I guess it depends on the doctor), even though from another perspective
it doesn't seem quite right. Taking an extreme dose one day and then nothing at all for the rest of the week... I kind of struggle with that logic.

P.s. Is nmol/l the standard unit?

restlessangler said:Nicholas Myers, I’ve been waiting for you 😁. I know you gave me some general advice regarding Vitamin D a few months back.
Since I have 10,000 IU capsules, could I just take one every ten days?
I know that in the United States, some patients (I assume it varies doctor to doctor) are prescribed 50,000 IU once a week, even though from other perspectives
it isn't quite standard practice. You take an extreme dose one day and nothing for the rest of the week. I'm struggling to wrap my head around that info.

P.s. Is nmol/l the correct unit?

Angie, treating a Vitamin D deficiency involves two stages: first, hitting your target blood levels, and second, maintaining those levels. During the initial phase, you can approach supplementation on a daily, weekly, or monthly basis (though daily dosing typically yields the best results). However, during the maintenance phase—which is where you are now—daily intake is usually recommended. If it isn't a hassle, consider going back to taking Vitamin D3 supplement drops daily, much like a baby 😍.

Most guidelines agree that maintenance doses should be taken daily. If for some reason that isn't feasible, you can pivot to a regimen of larger doses at longer intervals.

Maria Fisher46 said:Angie, when you're dealing with a vitamin D deficiency, there are really two different stages: first, you have to hit that target level in your blood, and then comes the maintenance phase to keep it there. For that initial push, people sometimes go with daily, weekly, or even monthly doses—though, honestly, daily dosing usually gets the best results—but once you reach the maintenance stage (which is where you are now), most experts suggest sticking to a daily routine. If it’s not too much trouble, maybe try going back to just a few drops of your Vitamin D3 supplement every day, almost like a baby dose 😍.

Most medical advice points toward daily maintenance doses. If that just doesn't work with your schedule for some reason, you could always switch to larger doses at longer intervals...

Anyway, I'll give my doctor a call tomorrow to see about ordering that baby dose 😬
Thanks for all the help 👍

restlessangler said:Whatever. I'll just call my doctor tomorrow and ask about the microdose option.😬
Thanks for the input, everyone.👍

Don't mention it! 🙂

Glad to hear the skin is clearing up (following the updates here 😬).

Take care!

And don't forget to get your Vitamin D levels checked in about three months.

👋

Also, sending good vibes to my colleague, Bryan Barnes2, 👋 and 🙏.

Maria Fisher46 said:And to my esteemed colleague, Bryan Barnes2—I also offer my 👋 and 🙏.

🙂

My regards to a respected peer—an authority here on the Health forum. 👍

Alright, I need some advice because this feels totally weird. I just got my full blood work back, and lately, I’ve been dealing with anemia.

Everything else looks fine, but this part is tripping me up:

Iron: 27.1
UIBC: 18.8 L

How is it possible to have such high iron levels but such low UIBC? Thanks.

Just a heads-up, I stopped taking doxycycline five days before the blood draw.

redcyclist7 said:So... I'm looking for some advice because this seems quite strange to me. I recently had a full blood panel done—I've been dealing with anemia lately.

Everything else looks fine, but this part is confusing me.

Iron: 27.1
UIBC 18.8 L

How is it possible to have such high iron levels but a low UIBC? Thanks.

You didn't mention it, but I assume you've been taking an iron supplement due to the anemia (iron-deficiency anemia?).

Things become much clearer if we look at the formula:
TIBC (total iron binding capacity) = UIBC (unsaturated iron binding capacity) + Fe

Think of UIBC as the portion of a specific protein—transferrin, which carries iron through the bloodstream—that remains unbound.

To put it simply: the more iron present in the blood, the less free protein (UIBC) there is available. It works both ways—less iron means more free protein.

Therefore, your results are perfectly logical.

To get a more precise picture of your body's actual iron stores, I would suggest having your ferritin levels checked.

I was taking Centrum. Honestly, I never had any issues with my iron levels until this year... Now I'm just confused. Could it be some kind of underlying illness? Anyway, thanks for the reply 🙂

Quote: Felix the Cat

redcyclist7 said:I’ve been taking Centrum—honestly, I never had any issues with my iron levels until this year. Now, I'm left wondering... could this be an underlying health issue? Anyway, thanks for the input. 🙂

If you are still experiencing regular cycles, the primary driver behind iron-deficiency anemia is often heavy menstrual bleeding. For those who fall into this category—and I truly mean this as a sincere suggestion—I would advise scheduling routine gynecological exams and periodic blood work to monitor your iron levels. It is much better to start an iron supplement regimen early—well before the actual symptoms of anemia begin to take hold.

Beyond the typical reasons for iron deficiency, I would point to dietary gaps—perhaps a lack of meat consumption? Or even more concerningly, occult bleeding within the gastrointestinal tract or issues stemming from the urinary tract.

Help. 18-year-old guy here. Symptoms: low libido, depression, and constant fatigue despite being at a healthy weight.
LAB RESULTS
Testosterone 14.2 nmol/l (404 ng/dL) — within range, but feels pathetic for someone my age.
Free T - 0.291
Free T % 2.04
Total Cortisol (morning) 804 (Reference: 171-536)
I was spiraling pretty hard the day I had my blood drawn, which explains the cortisol—maybe not entirely, but still. Does this have anything to do with my testosterone?

James Booth9 said:Help. I'm an 18-year-old guy dealing with low libido, depression, and unexplained weight gain despite being at a normal weight.
LAB RESULTS
Testosterone 14.2 nmol/l (404ng/dl) - within range, but feels pathetic for my age.
Free T - 0.291
Free T % 2.04
Total Cortisol (morning) 804 (ref: 171-536)
I was feeling pretty depressed the day I got blood drawn, which explains the cortisol—maybe not entirely, but still... does that actually impact testosterone?

Forgot to include this part...
prolactin 292
SHBG 30.3

It’s closely linked to your testosterone levels. Your cortisol is likely elevated because your testosterone is sitting way too low—it really needs to be about double what you're seeing for someone your age.

I deal with testosterone issues myself; I actually detailed my situation in a separate thread within this subforum. At this point, your best bet is to see an endocrinologist to figure out exactly why those levels are dropping.

There’s primary and secondary low T. Primary is usually caused by issues within the testicular tissue itself, whereas secondary stems from the pituitary gland failing to signal the testes to produce testosterone, or perhaps due to certain genetic factors.

Did this happen suddenly, or has it been a constant thing for you...

It hasn't always been this way. It only started a few months ago.
Since I was thirteen, my libido has been above average, but lately, I've been dealing with both that and depression.
I’m feeling slightly better now, though. Do you think it matters if my results come back different because I'm calmer? The night before my last test, something incredibly stressful happened, so I'm certain I was in the worst possible state when they drew my blood.
I have an appointment with an endocrinologist, but not until December, and the wait is driving me insane... plus, I'm struggling to gain or even keep any muscle mass.
Worst of all, my testosterone levels are pathetic for my age, even though my doctor insists everything is fine. Based on a level of 400ng/dl, I’ll never qualify for TRT, but realistically, I need therapy if these numbers reflect my true baseline.
Thanks for the reply.

General practitioners aren't specialists in this field, which is why you need an endocrinologist. I assume you'll re-run your labs both before and after seeing the specialist just to rule out stress as a variable, though I doubt it played a massive role if this has been a constant issue for you...

Depression can definitely tank your levels, especially since this is a new development for you, but it’s surprising how much yours dropped. In my initial bloodwork, I was at 18 nmol/L, even though my right testicle isn't functional—meaning under normal circumstances, I really should be north of 30 nmol/L. I've actually been waiting months for my next appointment; it's been about five months of waiting in total...😵

I get why you're worried. Doctors tend to be skeptical about starting therapy; they often hide behind "normal" reference ranges just to avoid liability. It seems like it's the same story everywhere. For your situation, you really need to rule out every possible cause before jumping into treatment, because you might not even need it—it could just be a symptom rather than the root problem...

How active are you physically? More importantly, what does your diet look like? Smoking and alcohol can also have a significant negative impact...

Here is a link that provides a really solid breakdown of the condition, the side effects, and the various treatments available.

http://tnation.t-nation.com/free_onl...w_t_weird_case

restlessdriver said:Are you physically active? More importantly, how much do diet, smoking, and alcohol play a role?
Here’s a link with a solid breakdown of the condition, the side effects, and potential treatments.

http://tnation.t-nation.com/free_onl...w_t_weird_case

I've been hitting the gym at least 4 or 5 times a week for the last two years, no exceptions.
Diet isn't perfect, but it's decent enough—I try to avoid processed junk and stick to whole foods whenever I can. I take multivitamins and Omega-3s too.
Quit smoking, never touched drugs, maybe a couple of beers a week at most.
Thanks for the link. We can pick this back up in a separate thread once there's an update.

Hello,

I’m looking for some perspective on these results. It’s a male patient, over 60.
Specifically, I’m focused on the invasion level, the depth, and the figure showing 13 mitoses per 1mm of tumor.

Also, what should we expect next, and just how serious is this situation?
The patient is scheduled for surgery in two weeks—though I might be misinterpreting things since he’s still in shock and I wasn't actually in the room when the doctor spoke. From what I gathered, they’re planning a deeper excision of this specific tumor, and they also intend to inject a fluid into the bloodstream to check for potential metastasis...

Thanks in advance. Please excuse any errors in my terminology; this isn't my field of expertise.

Finally got around to getting some blood work done after years of avoiding it. Here’s the breakdown. Everything looks fine and within range except for a few things:

Neutrophil % at 40.1 (should be at least 44)
Lymphocytes at 49.2 (max should be 46)
And the big one—PV INR is sitting at 1.0 (target is 2.0-3.5), and there's a note about anticoagulant therapy

What am I looking at here? Is this bad?

Grace Nguyen71 said:Hello,

I would appreciate your thoughts regarding this report. We are looking at a male patient, aged 60+.
The details I want to emphasize are the invasion level, the depth, and the fact that there are 13 mitoses per 1mm of tumor.

Also, what can be expected in terms of next steps—how serious is this truly?
The patient is scheduled for surgery in two weeks (I might not have grasped everything perfectly—the individual is still in shock, and I wasn't present during the consultation with the doctor)—but from what I understand, they are performing a deeper excision of this specific tumor, and they also plan to inject a fluid into the bloodstream to, I assume, check for potential metastases...

Thank you in advance, and please excuse any errors in my phrasing (terminology); this isn't my professional field.

We are dealing with melanoma, which is among the more aggressive skin cancers. So, yes—it is serious. If the disease remains localized strictly to the skin lesion, it can be completely removed via surgical excision, effectively curing the patient.

Clark and Breslow are classifications used to measure how deep the tumor has penetrated. A Breslow thickness of 2.9 mm falls into stage 4 (out of 5 total stages).
Statistically, the five-year survival rate for this group is between 60-75%—which implies that in these patients, the tumor hasn't metastasized, and they live longer than five years; essentially, they are cured.
In 25-40% of cases, the disease has spread, and metastatic melanoma is unfortunately an incurable and fatal condition. Current chemotherapies aren't particularly effective due to high tumor resistance, and experimental drugs haven't shown strong results just yet.

That’s correct—the "fluid injection" (scintigraphy) aims to identify if the sentinel node (the regional lymph node) has been affected by the tumor—essentially, checking for regional metastasis.

David Parker44 said:After many years, I finally had a blood panel done. Here is the status. Everything is within range except:

Neutrophils: 40.1 (should be at least 44)
Lymphocytes: 49.2 (max 46)
And most critically, PT INR is 1.0 (recommendation states it should be 2.0-3.5 for anticoagulation therapy)

What does this mean?

A neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio like this is quite possible following a recovered viral infection.
For future reference, when posting lab results, please always include the reference ranges—those are vital for us to interpret the findings correctly.

A PT INR of 1.0 is a normal finding for someone who is not currently on oral anticoagulant therapy (such as Coumadin). If a person *is* on anticoagulants—due to various reasons like atrial fibrillation, a past thromboembolic event, or prosthetic heart valves—then the target PT INR would typically be between 2 and 3.5.

If you were actually on that medication, you would certainly be familiar with the term PT INR.