"Iodine sufficient", to me, is an indefinite statement. Unless and until it is specified "sufficient for what", merely stating "sufficient" says nothing.
There are various levels of sufficiency. For example, one level is "sufficient to live" and even the cretins have sufficient Iodine
Another level is "sufficient to develop more optimally than a cretin", which would be the tiny amounts many other people receive.
Another level is "sufficient to neurologically develop optimally" which in theory is the optimal amount.
Another level is "sufficient to cause forced detoxification of mercury, lead, and other heavy metals from the body" , which is in excess of the optimal amount.
Another level is "sufficient to present itself as a burden to one or more bodily organs"
So, there are many levels of sufficiency, and when the "sufficient for what" is not specified, the statement is indefinite. It is like saying "mineral balance" or other jibberish people toss around believing everybody else knows of what they speak, when the statements are indefinite.
With Dr. Abraham's "iodine sufficency", all they've done is determine the level of Iodine
administration necessary to cause a person to piss out 90% of whatever they're given, or whatever number is cited. In general it is probably true that people need more of many minerals than they are getting, Iodine
isn't unique or alone in that regard.
Shall we extend it to calcium sufficiency ? How much calcium do you have to eat before you piss out 90% of what you're given ? Extend it to sodium, too. Hell, why not everything at once ? Then be sufficient in everything, wow, what a concept