The problem is that nutrition science is a battlefield. There are lots of interests involved by the food providers, and also of the many studies that are written, the media is happy to pick up the biased ones and write terrible articles like "Why butter is fine after all." And then, two months later, "Actually no, go high-carb." Or "You won't believe which three nutrients will Totally Transform Your Life." It's all just tendentious BS and it never seems to get to a single truth or objective reality re: what's healthy for us.
The truth is that the dose makes the poison
(Paracelsus). If your body had no copper, it would probably disintegrate. If you had heavy copper toxicity and no way to deal with it, your eyes would turn metallic brown and you'd die. Nutrients work synergistically - you want exactly as much as you need and the body knows how much to absorb and how much to pass. But when you take an isolated element like Copper as a colloid, the body has no way to say "no" - it's all absorbed because it is so pure and there are no factors like slow release through natural fibre.
It's the same with High fructose corn syrup. It's pretty much toxic because it comes in all at once. Yet fruits carry amazing health benefits. Is fructose good or bad now? Fructose is a powder. We don't eat powder, we eat food. Except when we do eat powder, as in supplements. And that's also the reason why I am arguing against these so much.
It's good that you stopped. I would just get a blood test so there's no guesswork as to deficiencies, if there are any. Usually it's just B12, sometimes zinc or iron. And ideally you'd still want to fix these with your food choices. This is also an empowering point of view that suggests that you have all the tools to be healthy at your disposal. You don't need pills, or jabs, or even colloids. Your body is literally a magic machine and your willpower's a wishing wand. That's the ideal, anyway. I don't snub medicines that work.