It would seem that these studies nail down the real nutritional requirements for each nutrient so studied.
- An apparently healthy person who is not in fact healthy may be unhealthy precisely because he is not in nutrient balance. He is excreting more or less than he should be of one or more nutrients. At the very least, we would want these studies to be done with a smaller number of people who have aced every health test we can devise.
- Nutrients must be balanced simultaneously, though the experiments become cumbersome. For example, we know that excess Zinc depletes Copper. Excess Copper depletes Manganese. Etc. In a Zinc balance study, done on a less than healthy population, the optimal level of Zinc to achieve balance may in part deplete Copper. These studies do not take this into account.
- Nor do these studies consider Noise. Noise = Toxicity. The optimal level for balance may in fact have some toxic side effects. Signal/Noise, not absolute Signal, must be optimized.
- Accessory or V3 nutrients. These studies are artificial. They are done with supplements with a background food-based nutrition that is if anything questionable. With a background of whole foods, rich in accessory nutrients, the amount we need for balance may be quite different. For example how much vitamin C we need may be vitally dependent on how rich is the supply of cofactors.
- None of these studies takes into account the real variability from person to person.
Therefore, while it is obvious to others that the amount of Zinc we need has already been accurately determined by balance studies, I am not sure that we have the correct number for Zinc or any other nutrient determined by such studies.