Root Cause Assessment

Clinical Interpretation

• Racing heart is too much sodium
• Pounding heart is too much calcium
• Irregular heart is too little potassium
• Heart palpitations is insufficient magnesium or magnesium loss
  

Scoring & Interpretation

0–1 (Low stress exposure): No significant recent life stressors

2 (Moderate stress exposure): Single major event; monitor coping and recovery

3 (High stress exposure): Cumulative stress load; increased risk of stress-related symptoms

4 (Very high stress exposure): Chronic or overwhelming stress; high priority for support and intervention

Higher scores may contribute to fatigue, sleep disturbance, mood symptoms, immune dysregulation, or exacerbation of chronic conditions.

ACUS-5 Score Interpretation

Score 3–4 (High avoidant coping):
You tend to cope with stress by avoiding or numbing it, which can increase stress load over time.

Score 2 (Moderate avoidant coping):
You may avoid stress emotionally or mentally, even if it remains unresolved.

Score 1 (Mixed coping):
Stress initially feels overwhelming, but you usually re-engage and take action.

Score 0 (Low avoidant coping):
You tend to face stress directly using problem-solving or support.

Clinical Notes

Screens primarily for avoidant coping, not resilience or distress severity

High scores often correlate with:

• HPA-axis dysregulation
• Procrastination, emotional eating, substance use
• Chronic stress, fatigue, insomnia

Useful as a baseline measure to track change after behavioural or nervous-system-based interventions

Energy Score Interpretation

1 = Optimal energy
2 = Mild fluctuation
3 = Moderate fatigue
4 = Significant fatigue
5 = Severe or pathological fatigue

Clinical Interpretation

4–5 → Consider sleep quality, copper-iron metabolism, circadian alignment, inflammation, mood, and endocrine contributors.

3 → Common in stress load, suboptimal sleep, or nutritional mismatch.

1–2 → No action required unless discordant with patient narrative.

Iron-Fortified Foods Intake Screen

Clinical Interpretation

0–5 | Minimal exposure

Little to no intake of iron-fortified foods.
6–11 | Incidental exposure

Fortified foods consumed occasionally but unlikely to meaningfully contribute to iron intake.
12–17 | Regular exposure

Iron-fortified foods are a consistent dietary contributor.
18–24 | High / intentional exposure

Maximum score: 24

Iron-fortified foods are a deliberate or dominant source of iron intake and may be clinically relevant in iron dysregulation.

High fortified-food exposure may be relevant in patients with fatigue, elevated ferritin, inflammatory states, functional iron deficiency, or iron-sensitive GI symptoms.

Sleep Score Interpretation

0–5 → GREEN
Healthy sleep. Low likelihood of sleep-related hormonal, iron, or metabolic disruption.

6–10 → AMBER
Mild–moderate sleep dysfunction. Commonly associated with fatigue, low ferritin, cortisol dysregulation, insulin resistance, or PMS.

11–16 → RED
Clinically significant sleep disturbance. Strongly associated with:
• Iron sequestration
• HPA-axis stress
• Thyroid suppression
• Cycle irregularity
• Impaired glucose control

17+ → DEEP RED
Severe sleep pathology. Consider circadian disorder, sleep apnea, inflammatory illness, or medication-induced sleep disruption.

Circadian Rhythm Score Interpretation

Total Score Range: 0–48

Bands

0–9 | Circadian Well-Aligned
Your sleep, light, and meal timing are working with your body clock.

10–18 | Mild Circadian Drift
Your rhythm is mostly stable but could benefit from small timing adjustments.

19–28 | Moderate Circadian Misalignment
Your internal clock and daily timing cues are noticeably out of sync.

29–38 | Significant Circadian Dysregulation
Key circadian signals (sleep, light, meals) are misaligned, affecting energy and sleep.

39–48 | Severe Circadian Disruption
Your body clock is highly dysregulated and likely needs targeted support.

Optional Clinical Flag (Meal Timing)

Weak Morning Anchor: Q11 ≥3

Late Feeding Pattern: Q12 ≥3

Circadian Eating Misalignment: Q11 ≥3 AND Q12 ≥3

Phenotype Interpretation (Copper–Iron Lens)

Predominantly A responses
→ Low-reserve / copper-dependent phenotype

Often sensitive to iron demand
May show iron “deficiency” symptoms despite normal ferritin
Common with low ceruloplasmin activity or poor iron mobilisation

Predominantly B responses
→ Balanced mineral phenotype

Generally efficient copper–iron handling
Resilient under moderate stress

Predominantly C responses
→ High-reserve / iron-loading–prone phenotype

May tolerate higher iron intake but be inflammation-sensitive
Watch for copper imbalance or oxidative stress

Predominantly D responses
→ Stress-responsive / dysregulated phenotype

Iron availability often shifts with cortisol, inflammation, or hormones
Functional iron deficiency common despite adequate intake

Clinical Notes

• A + D patterns often correlate with iron trapped in storage, not true deficiency
• Skin, hair, nail findings may reflect copper bioavailability, not intake alone
• Menstrual pattern adds key context for iron demand vs mobilisation capacity

Physical Trait Clinical Interpretation

Lighter pigmentation patterns may correlate with lower baseline copper demand
Darker or red pigmentation reflects higher copper utilisation
Variability can indicate stress or inflammation-related mineral shifts