hi emrs
b12 deficiency is an established one to rule out as part of the ms dx process for sure.
serum zinc is not a status quo request for an msddx, so you might want to ask for it strictly in the context of the recurrent canker sores.
i would suggest going in and just asking for an updated serum ferritin to check on the anemia, and a serum zinc to start, see if they go for it.
re supplementing or waiting, imho the most informative scenario would be:
no supplements right away BUT serum zinc and serum ferritin are successfully requested and tested in the immediate future.
this would provide clean baseline info, with no supplement contamination masking any issues with the your current pre-supplement status quo.
my 2cents, just a good idea to be able to make informed decisions on how to proceed, with some solid data.
if the doc says no to your verbal request for a zinc test, you can always be prepared with some science to give the doc in support of your request.
convincing abstracts will involve studies with lots of patients and controls, or multiple studies included in a meta analysis. statistical power and so forth. case studies are fairly useless when it comes to making a solid argument that something could feasibly apply to you as well.
here's an example of a good abstract, with extra detail from the full text to underline the point:
Bao, Z. X., Yang, X. W., Shi, J., & Liu, L. X. (2016). Serum zinc levels in 368 patients with oral mucosal diseases: A preliminary study. Medicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal, 21(3), e335.
Abstract
Background
The aim of this study was to assess the serum zinc levels in patients with common oral mucosal diseases by comparing these to healthy controls.
Material and Methods
A total of 368 patients, which consisted of 156 recurrent aphthous stomatitis (RAS) patients, 57 oral lichen planus (OLP) patients, 55 burning mouth syndrome (BMS) patients, 54 atrophic glossitis (AG) patients, 46 xerostomia patients, and 115 sex-and age-matched healthy control subjects were enrolled in this study. Serum zinc levels were measured in all participants. Statistical analysis was performed using a one-way ANOVA, t-test, and Chi-square test.
Results
The mean serum zinc level in the healthy control group was significantly higher than the levels of all other groups (p < 0.001). No individual in the healthy control group had a serum zinc level less than the minimum normal value. However, up to 24.7% (13/54) of patients with AG presented with zinc deficiency, while 21.2% (33/156) of patients with RAS, 16.4% (9/55) of patients with BMS, 15.2% (7/46) of patients with xerostomia, and 14.0% (8/57) of patients with OLP were zinc deficient. Altogether, the zinc deficiency rate was 19.02% (70/368) in the oral mucosal diseases (OMD) group (all patients with OMD). The difference between the OMD and healthy control group was significant (p <0.001). Gender differences in serum zinc levels were also present, although not statistically significant.
Conclusions
Zinc deficiency may be involved in the pathogenesis of common oral mucosal diseases. Zinc supplementation may be a useful treatment for oral mucosal diseases, but this requires further investigation; the optimal serum level of zinc, for the prevention and treatment of oral mucosal diseases, remains to be determined.
from Table 3. The basic parameters, zinc levels, and zinc deficiency in each group
Group..........Zinc level (Mean±SD, μmol/L)
Control.........16.47±2.10
RAS.............12.90±2.55
(recurrent
aphthous
stomatitis)
so, the canker sore (RAS) group had the lowest mean serum zinc of the whole study, and the control group had the highest mean serum zinc of the whole study. meanwhile both means were well inside the 'normal' range.
here's a full text link:
http://www.medicinaoral.com/pubmed/medo ... 3_p335.pdf
now as for 'what is 'normal' '
'normal' ranges are set up differently depending what lab you go to.
11.5-18.5 umol/l (75-120 µg/dl) is perfect by any stretch, but it's definitely way better than some of the lab to lab variation i've seen out there.
sources/entities using 11.5-18.5 umol/l (75-120 µg/dl):
american medical association:
http://bit.ly/1PdSF5K
manual of scientific style:
http://bit.ly/2iPL9Ww
council for continuing pharma ed:
http://bit.ly/2k60inE
lol worst reference ever, they'd be dead
http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/2172316-overview
Zinc: 70-100 µmol/L
units matter, medscape!
heeheehee 'wonderful think'

we've all been there
active members shape site content. if there is a problem, speak up!
use the report button to flag problematic post content to volunteer moderators' attention.