I don't like the term "chasing numbers" because the first thing we ask for when something is wrong is a for a full list of tank parameters. I wouldn't wait until I look sick to take a multi vitamin. It seems to me that if it is worth testing for, it is worth correcting even if you don't see any immediate effect of the bad numbers. If your numbers don't match nsw and nothing looks wrong, I wouldn't say it is a bad thing to go ahead and adjust the numbers anyway. It prevents something that looks like just numbers today from becoming a real world problem tomorrow. So I really don't see "number chasing" as an undesirable behavior as some people try and make it seem. Just don't kill your animals just to obtain a number.
But the assumption is that all of these parameters matter, and that there are forces at work pushing these parameters towards undesirable levels (wether too high or low). And even if that's the case, I still don't see how sending out a test several times a year and then specifically supplementing each of these elements to "correct" values which may or may not matter is easier than just changing some water every once in a while...
I guess my issue is, I don't see the problem that we are trying to solve. Everyone has their "reef idols", whose tanks they are trying to emulate... as far as I know, none of the tanks I drool over are individually testing and supplementing cobalt, nickel, vanadium, boron, chromium, sulphate, bromine, etc. Individually testing and supplementing each of these can't possibly be simpler or cheaper and certainly doesn't have the proven track record compared to just changing out some water?