If you don't have insurance, or if they won't cover something you would like tested there is pirvatemdlabs They are popular with the fitness crowd for their female hormone panel which is $60 and can be used by men.
Make sure you know what healthy levels actually are. Pro-tip: you are not the average of 400 million people.
Some examples where the range accepted by AMA guidelines are wrong:
Guidelines push total cholesterol under 200. Cholesterol under 200 is predictive of greater CVD in older adults.
Guidelines push low LDL. HDL:Triglyceride ratio is much more predictive of CVD than LDL levels.
Blood pressure has very high variability, making a high BP diagnosis problematic. BP lowering drugs often do more harm than good.
The accepted range for iron is from 15nm/dL all the way up to 300nm/dL IIRC, but there are indications the low end of the spectrum is significantly better.
Guidelines on salt do not take into account potassium consumption, which seem to have an effect on whether salt interventions are harmful or helpful to CVD risk.
These are not intended to be me imparting wisdom, they are intended as examples to demonstrate why you need to look into the details of longevity yourself. Almost no one bothers to collate evidence from studies correctly, including often the people conducting the studies -_-.
Unfortunately I am unaware of any sources with reliable epistemic hygiene.
Thanks for the placebo boost. I was unsure what to make of my Cholesterol (232 total, 69 Tri, 76 HDL, 142 LDL) and your interpretation is the most positive way of looking at it I've seen. I hope you are right.
I took part in a recent discussion in the current Open Thread about how instrumental rationality is under-emphasized on this website. I've heard other people say similar things, and I am inclined to agree. Someone suggested that there should be a "Instrumental Rationality Books" thread, similar to the "best textbooks on every subject" thread. I thought this sounded like a good idea.
The title is "resources" because in addition to books, you can post self-help websites, online videos, whatever.
The decorum for this thread will be as follows:
I think depending on how this thread goes, in a few days I might make a meta post on this subject in an attempt to inspire discussion on how the LessWrong community can work together to attempt to reach some sort of a consensus on what the best instrumental rationality methods and resources might be. lukeprog has already done great work in his The Science of Winning at Life sequence, but his reviews are uber-conservative and only mention resources with lots of scientific and academic backing. I think this leaves out a lot of really good stuff, and I think that we should be able to draw distinctions between stuff that isn't necessarily drawing on science but is reasonable, rational, and helps a lot of people, and The Secret.
But I thought we should get the ball rolling a little before we have that conversation. In the meantime, if you have a meta comment, you can just go ahead and post it as a reply to the top-level post.