Why does iron deficiency cause fatigue, even in the absence of anemia?
twitter.com
twitter.com
Experienced this myself. So mant doctors behave like JavaScript developer and I am another webpage
Its a business and you have 10m to do all paper work, check patient and prescript something.
Its horrible. Doesnt help that private doctors are super expensive, dont care about you and dont believe you.
Health became just another accommodity only super rich can pay for.
Paid healthcare? As a europopulator i can choose to pay for my healthcare. Rest assured, that when i do pay, i insist on certain things. Like doing the tests i insist on...
"Plus a lot of doctors won't believe or authorize tests."
Surely, the money talks in a situation like this? I can pay for any test i like and no (socialist, here) doc would ever say no, nor would they actually give a crap.
Ironically, that same population also is the most likely to have insurance that will cover the tests in the first place. So it goes.
Source: have done this 2-3 times in the past when I was poor / used to not have self insurance.
The fact your ok with having to pay for a better standard of healthcare rather than just having a society which provides the best healthcare for all. Is legit cooked.
I've been trying to get certain blood screenings through 3 doctors, and they were all more than happy to repeat the same basic blood panel 3 times, since it is incontrovertible, even though it would have cost less overall to get the specific blood screen I asked for.
And if I want to pay "out of pocket" it is impossible because the tests often require a doctor's prescription, and even if not, the non-insurance rate for the tests are 2-10x what providers negotiate with insurance companies.
For much of my 30s, 40s, and 50s I was strictly a fee for service patient in Southern California. This, of course, is no solution for someone with significant health problems. I've been blessed with good health, undeservedly so. I had cataract surgery on my left eye in 2011 for $2600 cash, up front, at the area's biggest hospital. No further charges materialized. I had no regular primary care physician at the time. To me, $2600 for a surgery, the result of which was so magically wonderful that I burst into happy laughter in the ophthalmologist's office when he removed the eye bandage, was worth far more than the $2600.
Don't overlook businesses like Everlywell or Private Labs MD that enable one to get tests performed outside your own network. I've used such a service to "nudge" my health care provider (with whom I am generally satisfied) to investigate some subject further. Admittedly, this is not much help for exotic tests.
If, like me, you are lucky enough to live reasonably near our southern border, labs in Mexico don't even require a doctor's order to perform tests. There may be exceptions to this -- I don't want to imply that I know more than I do.
I don't want to "wave away" the very real problems that exist for those who cannot afford any service outside their network, nor do I mean to ignore the very real problem of arrogant medical professionals who ignore a patient who tells them, "Listen, Doc, I've had this same test three times in the last three months." I only mean to suggest that sometimes, when it is possible, it helps to work around a stubborn physician, rather than attempting to bend said physician to your view.
Because of digital record keeping and insurance laws, even if I go to a independent, fee-based doctor, the results of his test can mean that in 10 years, insurance can refuse to cover certain treatments.
It's really an inescapable web, that even my doctor is aware of and seems paralyzed to authorize a test for me because of not only the implications for my finances, but also her practice.
The existence of Chronic Lyme disease is very controversial and diagnosing it can get doctors in trouble (depending on the jurisdiction.) Whether or not Chronic Lyme disease is real (I don't know), I think the general consensus of CLD diagnoses being quackery might bias doctors against diagnosing any sort of tick related disorders, particularly chronic ones.
A patient experiencing fibromyalgia is very obviously unwell, but in many (not all!) cases it's comorbid with depression and treatment with antidepressants and therapy helps with both the depression and fibromyalgia.
As of right now, it's not especially clear what things like fibro and CFS are, and whether they might be mental disorders in some cases, but they're definitely real.
There are lots of things that cause anemia! And someone with unexplained anemia deserves a complete work up (especially with hemoglobin levels in the 4-5 range), including for tick-borne illnesses, especially if they have been in an endemic area. But lots of other things worth checking too, many more dangerous than tick-borne illnesses.
http://www.smashcompany.com/philosophy/how-i-recovered-from-...
My dad also found out through my diagnosis why he kept getting those same signs in his tests... :) Eastern European medical system at its finest.
It is a bit odd though the apparent coinfection with multiple tick borne illnesses from different species of ticks - A lyme and ehrlichiosis coinfection is not surprising, but rocky mountain spotted fever is a very different illness, often more acute in presentation with distinctive signs and symptoms - but coinfection with the other two would be quite rare.
Also, those specific tick illnesses listed are unlikely to cause that profound of an anemia by themselves, so there's probably some other pathology going on - the tick borne infection may only be a trigger.
Any relatively young person that is otherwise healthy (no near end state kidney disease) should definitely get referral to a hematologist for hemoglobin of 4-5 if it isn't something blindingly obvious like blood loss.
That seems like a somewhat myopic perspective.
Saying this patient was "correctly diagnosed with anemia" would be like diagnosing a cancer patient currently undergoing chemotherapy with male pattern baldness.
A more accurate and helpful diagnosis would probably be something like "Babesiosis"——anemia caused by ticks infected with a microbe that destroys red blood cells especially considering the multiple cofactors at play. Or whatever it was that specifically caused the anemia; the parent comment didn't say.
Which is a bit of a confused statement.
> Saying this patient was "correctly diagnosed with anemia" would be like diagnosing a cancer patient currently undergoing chemotherapy with male pattern baldness.
No, that's a pretty shit analogy and completely wrong. First, because chemotherapy doesn't cause "male pattern baldness" - the mechanisms aren't the same. So that's just wrong - while someone with a hemoglobin of 4 has anemia, whatever the underlying cause may be - it isn't a look alike - it is.
Second, diagnosing Alopecia (secondary to chemotherapy) is a perfectly reasonable diagnosis. Because it is something that doctors do manage with specific things separately from the chemotherapy and other cancer treatment, eg wigs, scalp cooling.
People can have more than one relevant diagnosis that they are treated for and are interrelated. For instance, if someone has anemia that is due to something like a GI bleed, they have both a GI bleed and anemia. If their hemoglobin is less than 7 you will likely treat that anemia with a blood transfusion independent of what you're doing to manage the GI bleed. GI bleed, iron deficiency, malabsorption, microcytic anemia are all diagnoses - they may be all interrelated.
> A more accurate and helpful diagnosis would probably be something like "Babesiosis"--anemia caused by ticks
But babesiosis is not anemia. It often occurs with it, but the diagnostic criteria for babesiosis is blood smear or PCR. If someone has a smear positive for babesia then they have babesiosis regardless of their Hgb/Hct.
And notably they listed a bunch of tick borne illnesses listed, babesiosis was not among them.
My mother was diagnosed with anemia, and received many recommendations ranging from not drinking tea to getting a hysterectomy (which was done, in her mid 40s). It turned out she wasn’t absorbing iron due to Celiac disease. Treating the anemia as if it was an isolated condition wasn’t helpful at all since she needed to address the root cause, Celiac.
Your mother had a microcytic anemia (a broad class based on lab results), of which there are several types including iron deficiency anemia.
Next, there are multiple causes of iron deficiency anemia of which celiac disease is one of them.
You would never diagnose a patient with “anemia” and stop there. Further work up for the etiology is mandatory and endoscopy is commonly performed.
There is no such thing in modern medicine as “just treating anemia” unless you know the cause and the only treatment is transfusions.
I kind of doubt that. In my experience, the treatment for chronic heartburn is to throw meds at it to stop the symptoms. After an upper endoscopy, no attempt at root cause was ever made.
I can say with absolute confidence at none of the places I’ve worked at would a doctor leave a patient with a diagnosis of anemia as this is malpractice. Are there physicians in some hospitals who practice negligently?
Sure, but there are also pilots who show up drunk to work and engineers who are negligent. That doesn’t mean the entire profession has a “problem”.
Anemia is not heartburn. Anemia can be life threatening.
As an analogy for the tech world. Anemia is a server crash. Heartburn is a warning in the server logs.
You may decide the warning is not worth fixing / may result in new bugs (aka complication).
When a server crashes step 1 is to get it back online (transfuse to a safe hemoglobin target).
Step 2 is find out why the server crashed (why is this patient anemic, which is a sign/symptom and not a diagnosis).
Just as a computer engineer would never say “I’m not sure why but let’s just keep restarting every time it crashes”, a doctor would not say “I’m not sure why you’re anemic” unless there was an extensive negative workup and the patient normalized therefore no longer requiring treatment.
There is no situation where a physician just keeps transfusing an anemic patient without figuring out why. This is not only expensive, but transfusions carry risks and with repeated transfusions some risks increase. This is not a medically accepted management plan anywhere and the hospital / blood bank would quickly intervene if a non-hematologist was serially transfusing a patient as this is outside their scope.
In your example:
Your negative endoscopy excluded H. pylori, gastric malignancy, peptic ulcer disease, and a hiatal hernia. Those are all of the easily treatable and life threatening conditions we should not miss.
Your next options for investigation would be a 24 hour pH study with consideration for fundoplication. This is a major surgery with risks and complications that are believed to be worse than PPI therapy.
Patients who fail PPI, are unable to be weaned, or have contraindications are the ideal candidates for such an invasive procedure. You don’t want to send every heartburn patient to fundoplication, we used to do that and made a lot of people worse.
I am sure that you’re a good doctor, but to answer your question, yes, there are many doctors who operate negligently, to some extent. I had a long experience at one of the major hospitals in the US following drastic weight loss and months of pain. A major hospital did various tests, and ended up telling me I had “health anxiety”. It turned out that I was actually developing LADA, a form of type 1 diabetes. Since I had already been diagnosed with celiac and was having primarily digestive symptoms, the tests they did focused on the digestive tract and they never investigated other causes. I had to finally go into diabetic ketoacidosis before anyone figured it out.
What was the negligence what was the diagnostic smoking gun that was missed?
> I feel that patients are qualified to comment on medical standards of care, also.
Patients like doctors is a huge group that should not be generalized - but health and healthcare literacy is pretty bad so by and large, no, patients can comment on standards of care but they aren’t qualified to do so.
“The most common legal definition of standard of care is how similarly qualified practitioners would have managed the patient’s care under the same or similar circumstances. This is not simply what the majority of practitioners would have done.”
Source: https://biotech.law.lsu.edu/map/StandardofCare.html
As you can see, patients are not qualified to comment on the medical standard of care and unfortunately how you “feel” isn’t a consideration in the decision as this is established in case law.
To your larger point, if you are dealing with a negligent doctor the place to address it is at a medical licensing board. With a single paragraph complaint they will gut a doctor for diagnosing anyone with “anemia”.
Instead of spreading partially misremembered stories online and spreading vitriol I suggest you use the many, free channels available for recourse if you feel your doctors actions constitute malpractice.
I appreciate these things can all sound similar and be confusing. Perhaps best to leave to the professionals dedicating 10+ years to learning the trade.
This is not to comment or challenge directly your case but knowing the two above facts it is not uncommon (in fact I have personally seen this in practice) where your above outline is perfectly reasonable.
A woman may have multiple reasons or a sequence of reasons for IDA, developing celiac later in adulthood - it’s totally possible they had chronic blood loss anemia before that.
Iron deficiency can be your body fighting off a disease, and adding iron is the wrong thing to do.
I also learned excessive iron is worse than low iron, your body can regulate the intake but not expend iron.
Iron is complex.
Medicine is a horribly antiquated and biased field. It's one of the few fields that need to be automated.
Most current medical schools (at least reputable ones) provides extensive training on this matter.
It’s a profession that attracts know-it-alls along with those that actually want to help but are overworked.
Perhaps female doctor are more likely to listen better (to men or women).
Sexism is a well recognised problem in medicine - a little googling shows a lot of research into the problem. Here is one article referencing some research with how women are treated for heart attacks: https://www.salon.com/2018/12/14/new-research-reveals-how-se...
I agree with your greater sentiment that people place unreal expectations on their doctors. The point is that doctors are fallible and not omniscient. This is just reality, patients need to be their own advocate.
Blame is beside the point.
My mum had abdominal surgery, and one night following the surgery, she felt an extremely painful tear sensation in her lower abdomen and shortly afterwards noticed a big asymmetric lump in the intestinal area.
My partner is an ICU nurse and suspected a hernia so we took her to the local hospital and the doctor said it's just post-surgical swelling. It didn't go away, rather it got bigger, more painful and frequently gurgled, so we went to the GP. The GP said it's probably just because she's had kids 30 years ago (!?) and that my mum needs to get used to not looking attractive any more, and to lose weight.
What followed was months of doctors visits trying to get them to even accept there was even an issue. Bear in mind, this was a significant, painful gurgling lump, around the size of a tennis ball. Yet doctor after doctor said there was nothing wrong with her and she should consider therapy and antidepressants instead.
After a few more months, she began experiencing such bad pain that she couldn't walk, and finally a junior female doctor suggested she had a hernia. However, she got overruled by her senior and sent home with paracetamol. The junior doctor quietly told her to go to another hospital.
We managed to convince my mum this was ridiculous and brought her to London, where she got looked at by a hernia expert, who was very concerned about her treatment thus far and sent her for a CT and - obviously - found a large hernia. Due to the time it was left untreated, the repair was very challenging with many complications.
Back home again, while recovering, she was having the early warning signs of an infected surgical wound (hot swelling, pus, smell, chills etc.) and again the local hospital fobbed her off and said she's overreacting, didn't swab the wound or change the dressing and sent her home. That night, she called me incoherent and I called for an ambulance - turns out she had sepsis and nearly died.
I can promise you that we made sure everyone treating her had a full medical history at every point, but they still blatantly ignored what was right in front of them. There is actually a ton more to this too - the surgery in the first place which triggered all this was due to a medical error and wasn't necessary. It's been five years so far.
She's currently suing the local hospital and doctors.
In your mom’s specific case, it is inconceivable to me that any trained physician would see her post-surgical history and subsequent development of an abdominal mass and not think immediately of a hernia and possible strangulation as it grew. A first-year medical student can palpate the abdomen and readily tell there is herniation through the abdominal wall. Is it reducible or not? An abdominal CT scan should be reflexive. It’s even more maddening when more than one physician misses the obvious or at least the way it sounds to me given the information you’ve provided.
Physician burnout is a real alarming phenomenon with emergency room doctors having one of the highest rates. This was already an issue pre-COVID-19. I can’t help but worry about how worse it may get.
I can only speak to the centre I’ve worked/rotated at but this seems inconceivable based on the requisitions I get in my career. We do a lot more for a lot less.
The only point I would disagree on is that “time left untreated” can increase complication rate. If this a partially strangulated hernia and there was a microperforation (quite common and often missed) or bacterial translocation in the hernia sac mesh would almost certainly get infected. Even if not strangulated/perforated at time of surgery, if there are dense adhesions from recurrent/intermittent obstructions that may also increase operative complexity and a lysis of adhesions may contaminate the field. That said you could also just not use mesh.
In my description, it is conceivable that due to chronicity the field was contaminated at the time of second OR and/or a lysis of adhesions resulted in a contaminated field.
If the surgeon implanted mesh in a contaminated field this would be seeded and inevitably get infected.
This is not uncommon and why surgeons often don’t implant mesh in complex LOA or possibly dirty fields.
I’m not saying this is what happened, but delayed diagnosis of a complicated hernia can increase the risk of complications from repair.
The surgeon who performed the mesh repair did clearly state it was a possibility, but the hernia wasn't suitable for non-mesh repair, which would have been his preference.
There was no indication of infection or contamination at the time of the hernia repair, and the surgeon who performed the mesh believes the infection was most likely caused by poor aftercare, which was handled by the local hospital due to covid travel difficulties. Of course, he could just be saying that to cover his ass.
Mesh infection is a known risk, by your description you were appropriately consented for this.
It will be impossible to definitively identify the source of infection (I.e. was there an inadvertent enterotomy intraoperatively? Was it an inguinal hernia repair which is a relatively “dirty” region close to genitalia and a common location for surgical site infection? Did your mom develop a bacteremia for another reason and seed the implant?).
At the end of the day none of this really matters though because you were appropriately consented.
The only apparent angle for malpractice here would be if a reasonable and competent surgeon would disagree with the use of mesh and would have done a primary or two-stage repair (I.e. reduce the hernia under laparoscopy +/- small bowel resection. Bring the patient back several months later to repair the abdominal wall defect.)
If you saw a physician specializing in hernia care, I would assume that they follow best practices and this type of case was not amenable to the options I described.
If this is the case, it is incredibly unfortunate what happened to your mother. However, bad things happen and this is why we consent for complications (especially ones as devastating as mesh infection).
I wish everything I did worked and I never had complications but the only way to have no complications is to never see patients.
We are bothered by the hospital not diagnosing the hernia despite it being painfully obvious there was a hernia, which led to complications, and then ignoring the signs of infection until it got to the point where it nearly killed her.
When seen by a competent physician who appropriately consents patients understand complications.
Your issue is that your mother was misdiagnosed (at least by what was communicated on this thread) and by your description I agree.
I addressed this in further detail to one of your comments above, but for any readers I would like to also clarify this here.
Your original comment stated:
“There are quite a few incompetent doctors, sadly, and they stick together and support each other. While I'm generally reluctant to bring up identity politics, it does appear that women and people of colour tend to experience this worse than others”
You later clarified:
“Essentially my mum lives on an island nation where there is only a singular local hospital with a fairly poor reputation.”
I explained above why isolated locations such as this island with a singular hospital don’t attract recently trained/high quality physicians which is also obvious. Consequently the percentage of poor/incompetent physicians will be much higher. There are also fewer physicians for phyisican-physician consults and a singular hospital such as yours probably doesn’t have morbidity and mortality rounds and a QA program.
Therefore your experience, in an island nation with one hospital, is not representative of the modern healthcare experience and the physicians there are likely not on par with metropolitan centres.
With that said, you also choose to live in an island nation (irrespective of the reason this is a choice). That comes with the known disadvantage of poor access to quality healthcare just like every other white collar profession.
It is important to not generalize such an atypical practice setting to the general population as this is a heavily biased view.
I’m not sure what setting you practice in, I am personally in a ~1500 bed academic health sciences center.
At my institution, we have 3 general surgeons who are hernia experts (literally on their letter head). This is to say that their non ACS practice is heavily on hernia repair and they get the referrals for all complex hernia repairs from other general surgeons in the catchment area.
If you’re in a smaller setting you may not have a similar degree of sub-specialization amongst your general surgeons but hernia experts are definitely a real thing.
I appreciate your overall point and frustration, but I think you’re being a bit too dismissive here.
I also come from a large academic based health center.
Essentially my mum lives on an island nation where there is only a singular local hospital with a fairly poor reputation.
In order to get it looked at, we had to find a hospital in the UK, as that's where the private insurance covered treatment. The local hospital refused to even write a referral for further diagnosis as they considered it unnecessary as it "definitely isn't a hernia", so we had to find a surgeon that takes self-referrals. That rules out the normal NHS routes, even if attending privately.
So ultimately we found a team that specialise in treating hernias, who agreed to have my mum in after they saw a photo of her abdomen.
I think one thing to understand here is that a local hospital with a poor reputation isn't going to have the same standards as a large academic health centre. The reputation is such that good clinicians will avoid the local hospital, as they don't want to be seen to be associated with it.
Unfortunately, when you live there, you don't really have the same luxury.
I like to think I’m a good physician. At the very least I’m a highly trained subspecialty physician.
I could never work in a small community hospital with poor standards because it drives me insane to work with apathetic clinicians (100% a real thing). Additionally, given how much I trained I need to practice in a centre that can provide complexity (largely academic centres or major metropolitan non-academic sites)
This unfortunately does result in the bottom of the barrel staffing the “crappy local hospital”, but someone has to do it.
It’s unrealistic to expect high quality physicians to work on a small island nation. By choosing to live on a remote island you honestly have to accept that you’re not getting the same access to healthcare as someone in a larger city.
I’m not sure of any way to improve that.
Edit: I wanted to add that with the additional information cameronh90 has provided, in my professional opinion I can absolutely believe that his mother may have been misdiagnosed in such a practice setting.
Not uncommonly (forgive me for using this favourite word of doctors), I see egregious medical errors referred to my centre from very remote locations.
The issue in this story is not that the medical profession is apathetic, careless, negligent.
This is rather a good example of the issues in delivering quality care in remote locations. We can’t force people to move to islands and presumably an undesirable location for someone to migrate to so you end up with a higher percentage of incompetent physicians who can’t find jobs in better locations.
Most often the only times these types of practices get a recently trained physician are if the individual originally comes from there and wants to go back, a rare occurrence in my experience.
While I'm not a doctor, I'd imagine that if I was a good doctor, I'd rather work somewhere that I'm likely to get exposure to interesting cases, or hospital known for producing quality research, or a teaching hospital, or at least want to live somewhere that I could go to conferences and otherwise work with other smart people. Indeed, I moved to London for similar reasons in my career.
The way the local hospital tries to maintain some level of competence is by flying doctors over for a day or two a week, but even with that it's an uphill battle trying to attract anyone in the prime of their career. It's more of a place you go for an easy retirement, earning relatively good money but for boring work in poor facilities. Even then, the money isn't comparable to what a late stage career doctor could get working privately in Harley Street for example. We do know a few doctors (and nurses) working over there, and even if they start out enthusiastic, the system ultimately grinds them down until they're apathetic. Some leave, some just give into it.
I appreciate that you obviously can't have excellent doctors everywhere, but at the same time, I bet most individuals' interactions with healthcare are those local community hospitals and pre-retirement GPs with little enthusiasm for the job. I suppose that in healthcare, reaching the best physicians is usually a bad sign regarding your prognosis (or a very good sign regarding your bank balance).
Community hospitals can have very complex care and top talent, but not in cities with a singular hospital and island population.
Irrespective of geographic proximity, by your description this location appears to be a medical desert/medically remote. Most doctors, especially modern ones, don’t like practicing in places without a lot of other physicians for backup/support and somewhat easy access to subspecialists for referrals. Fortunately most hospitals and practice settings provide this (i.e. rural Wisconsin was UW-Madison for backup which is generally not that difficult for patient transport and is an excellent medical centre).
The issue here is not just local community hospital providing poor care. You’re taking about a very isolated practice that no one wants to work in, this is an outlier.
Ultimately, it could well have been the case that treating the hernia was not recommended, and that could have been discussed. But simply denying that there was even a hernia and refusing to perform any further investigation is clearly a failure.
As physicians were trained on the common and the deadly. We’re not that great at rare non-immediately life threatening conditions due to the nature of the discipline.
We’re trained that when you hear hooves, think horses not zebras. This does unfortunately mean that patients with zebras are often misdiagnosed for a while, but that’s because our approach isn’t intended to catch every zebra (which would be impossible).
The other element is to avoid unnecessary harm. Often the tests for zebras are nonspecific and overlap with other conditions (I.e. to be considered after exclusion of other aetiologies).
A late diagnosis of EDS fits in the zebra categories and probably wouldn’t have been picked up until you saw a rheumatologist or vascular specialist at a centre which deals with these.
In the UK there is a silent but serious case of people dying from cancers because GP's are refusing to refer anyone to the hospital for checks. The whole situation is deteriorating. It's not just cancers either, it's other types of conditions and even diseases these borderline incompetent GP's are either missing or simple refusing to listen to the patients. You can google any type of combinations of phrases, eg replace cancer with X condition and you'll get countless examples of that too.
For example: https://www.google.com/search?q=people+dying+from+cancer+gp+...
People are literally dying because some GP's just don't give a shit.
I have no idea if this is really what's going on, and it's interesting that this is not mentioned in the linked articles. The reduction of oxygen is really the final step for oxygen before it becomes a part of metabolic water, and throwing off the timing of binding oxygen atoms with protons will slow everything down.
Cytochrome C oxidase needs not only iron, but also copper. So any symptoms caused by an iron deficiency to it, presumably a decrease in the capacity for aerobic effort, should also appear in the case of a copper deficiency.
I just assume that every logical/plausible concept is at play and evolution does its best to balance everything. Rarely is anything absolute.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cytochrome
Whats really interesting to me is the above statement related to a longtime conspiracy-curriosity about the 'Russian kid from Mars' ala an 'Indigo Child' and when back in the ~1990s or some time when he was interviewed, he was ~10 years old and he said that "Humans came from Mars, and after we got to earth, is when we started to age - because Earth is oxigen based, and breathing oxygen is what makes you age."
And this crazy piece talks about the iron found in the martian atmosphere:
http://www.nuclearplanet.com/Martian%20Iron.html
>>The atmosphere of Mars is 95.7% carbon dioxide (CO2), which is available everywhere at the surface and which can readily be compressed. The Martian carbon dioxide can be, simultaneously, a source of carbon monoxide (CO) and a source of oxygen (O2) through the thermal decomposition reaction:
>>*2 CO2 → 2 CO + O2 (20.2)*
>>Reaction Eq. (20.2) requires a temperature of about 1100C. Note that the iron reduction reaction Eq. (20.1) can take place at about 700C, but a higher temperature, such as 900C, would be desirable.---
What happens if a Nuke goes off in the Martian atmosphere?
Note, if you aren't bleeding regularly, it's very unlikely you need it, and iron might be harmful. Make sure to test your ferritin levels before and regularly as you do it.
Oral iron is now recommended given only every other day to avoid GI side effects and there is evidence that the response is just as good to more frequent.
So which one is it?
But otherwise normal/daily supplements for a few months probably won't be negative and indeed, might even be beneficial for certain subpopulations, like athletes.
https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/hemochromatos...
https://www.webmd.com/men/features/too-much-iron-in-your-blo...
So don’t go gulping down the supplements all willy-nilly, either.
Just regularly donate, no problem.
Of course, if it hasn't been diagnosed and you're a regular donor, that's a happy accident.
They're not giving out leeches.
“your humours are imbalanced and you should be bled, you’ll feel better” is not far off from “your iron level is too high”, though…
My go-to for that is Iodine.
The difference is that now we have both empirical evidence that it works, when it works, what the side effects are, and generally why it works. As opposed to cargo culting, poor cost/benefit analysis, and inaccurate understanding of what's actually happening.
https://www.uhhospitals.org/Healthy-at-UH/articles/2020/03/h...
It’s important to remember that it’s just a different medium - you’ll find blogs, Reddit and Facebook posts, memes and infographics on this topic.
since I don't use twitter, I've set up a userscript to do it for me
I also use an app to check my haemoglobin levels. It is weird that an app can do this, but I've calibrated it against less frequent in-hospital blood tests and it checks out. See: https://sanguina.com/anemocheck-mobile/
You can have an iron deficiency, even if your hemoglobin levels are normal, because iron does more than just carry oxygen in red blood cells: It's a cofactor for many enzymes.
I'm curious if there's a third variable at play here; something preventing the iron from being accessible (since our bodies normally break down ferritin to access the iron), especially when hemoglobin levels are otherwise normal.
I suspect there might be.
https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/neurology_neurosurgery/cente....
Also recent research has shown evidence that taking iron every other day is better than taking it daily. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31413088/
But iron is not ferratin (it’s some kind of stored iron) and I’m not sure if it really had any affect. I was low ferratin but could I have been not low on iron?
Either way iron deficiency is common in vegetarians and vegans, but there are plenty who are just fine. They get iron from tofu and spinach which is different from the iron from meat and maybe affects their levels differently, but it seems to work out.
Whether or not consuming plant ferritin (when you buy "ferritin" supplements that is what you're getting - usually a pea plant) is an effective iron supplementation is another question entirely. And as far as I know there is no great evidence that it is non-inferior to typical oral iron products (salts and saccharide compounds). The ideal treatment for iron deficiency anemia is typically IV iron (or blood transfusion if the anemia is profound enough to warrant it - but IV iron replacement is one of those things coming back into fashion finally after many years of being feared for reasons with poor evidence.
[1] https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/9385-low-bloo...
I think you should do a blood test and ensure you're at least over 500 pg/ml.
I had folate anemia and the injection sorted me right out. Supplements didn't help particularly, perhaps because the root cause is poor absorption from EDS.
Anyway, 15mcg is way too low. You need at least 5000mcg daily. I would buy one of these: https://www.amazon.com/NOW-Methyl-B-12-000-Lozenges/dp/B00BH...
Taking a blood test now and after ingesting all the pills will be better to make sure it is doing something.
https://raypeat.com/articles/articles/iron-dangers.shtml
Ray Peat advice for men is to donate blood periodically to remove excess iron from our body.
Is there a reason Ray Peat advice should be treated differently than say, Mehmet Oz advice? Or Linus Pauling advice?
I couldn't seem to find much of anything published by him that was peer-reviewed.
Just. Write. An. Effin. Blog. Post.
Long form reading on Twitter is very cumbersome