Imagine you get twelve blood markers back. Some are green, some are amber, one is red. Is that good or bad? Is your overall health improving or declining? A single score that combines everything — adjusted for who you are — gives you an answer.
That is what the Health Score does. It compresses a full blood panel into a 0–100 number that tells you, at a glance, where things stand. But how does it actually work?
🧠The Health Score is not a diagnosis — it is a decision-support tool. It tells you where to focus your attention, not whether you are "healthy" or "unhealthy."
Three Layers of Logic
The score is not a simple average of your markers. It goes through three distinct processing layers, each adding a level of sophistication:
Layer 1 — Marker Statuses: Every marker is classified against athletic-adjusted reference bands. Optimal markers score full points, Review markers score near zero, and Context and Descriptive markers are removed from the calculation entirely rather than penalised.
Layer 2 — Contextual Adjustments: Your training status, AAS use, rest days before the draw, muscle mass, and other factors adjust how each marker is weighted. A high creatinine reading from heavy training carries less weight than the same reading in a sedentary person.
Layer 3 — Priority Weighting: More clinically significant markers contribute more to the score. A critically low eGFR moves the needle far more than a slightly elevated CK. This ensures the score reflects real priorities, not statistical noise.
Context Changes Everything
How Markers Are Classified
Every marker in your panel is assigned a status. These were renamed in 2026 to remove clinical-directive language, so older reports use different words. Here is the current set and how each affects your score:
OPTIMAL
SUBOPTIMAL
CONTEXT
DESCRIPTIVE
MONITOR
REVIEW
What Your Score Actually Means
The 0–100 scale maps to real-world health categories. Here is what each range looks like in practice:
78–100: Strong
No system is showing load. Where markers sit outside standard lab ranges, the context explains them — most of the panel reads Optimal or Context. This is a stable baseline to compare future panels against.
58–77: Moderate
One or two systems are carrying load beyond what context accounts for. This is the most common tier for anyone running above replacement doses. The value here is specificity — the findings say which system, and what would confirm it.
Below 58: Under Pressure
Several systems are showing load simultaneously, or one marker sits far enough out that context cannot account for it. The model reserves this tier for corroborated patterns — a lipid drift confirmed by both ApoB and non-HDL, a kidney signal confirmed by eGFR and cystatin C together. A single dramatic number does not land you here; a pattern does. This is a report worth taking to a doctor sooner than the next routine interval.
Score Is Relative to Your Baseline
What Different Scores Look Like
To make this concrete, here are three real-world scenarios and the scores they produce:
Score 91 — The Clean Runner
All markers Optimal or Context
Testosterone at 850 ng/dL on TRT, hematocrit 48%, eGFR 88, HDL 38 mg/dL, blood pressure 118/74. Everything sits in its athletic band. Nothing here needs a conversation beyond confirming the trend holds at the next retest.
Score 64 — The Moderate Blaster
Mixed Monitor and Context markers
500 mg test/week, hematocrit 53%, eGFR 72 (muscle artefact, cystatin C clean), HDL 22 mg/dL, ApoB 112 mg/dL, blood pressure 132/84. The eGFR leaves the score as Context. The lipid picture stays in, because ApoB corroborates the low HDL — that is the one specific thing this panel gives you to discuss.
Score 34 — Under Pressure
Multiple corroborated Review findings
1 g test + 600 mg tren/week, hematocrit 59% with blood pressure at 155/95, eGFR 51, AST 142, ALT 98, HDL 12 mg/dL. Three systems with internal corroboration, and the hematocrit here is not an isolated number — the blood pressure is moving with it, which is the combination that actually loads arteries and kidneys. This is a report to put in front of a doctor promptly.
The Three Adjustment Mechanisms
Not all abnormal markers are created equal. The engine uses three specific mechanisms to fine-tune how each marker affects the final score:
1. Priority Multipliers (0.0–1.0): These assign clinical importance to each marker. A mildly low HDL in an AAS user gets a priority multiplier of 0.10 — it barely matters. A critically high hematocrit at 58% gets a multiplier of 1.00 — it drives the score down hard.
2. Score Multipliers (0.0–1.0): These reduce the scoring impact of markers that are abnormal for contextual reasons. A training-related CK elevation of 800 U/L gets a score multiplier of 0.35 — reducing its impact because it is an expected training response, not a health problem.
3. Suppress Key Issue Flag: Some contextualized markers are removed from the "key issues" list entirely. They are explained by context and do not need your attention. A low SHBG in an AAS user is a perfect example — it is pharmacologically expected and clinically irrelevant.