PeptideSynthNJ said:The RDA is the wrong reference and it is worth understanding why.
DEXA scan update relevant to protein intake:
Scanned at months 0, 6, and 12. Here are the body comp numbers:
| Baseline | Month 6 | Month 12 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Total mass | 259 lbs | 229 lbs | 206 lbs |
| Fat mass | 109 lbs | 79 lbs | 56 lbs |
| Lean mass | 162 lbs | 146 lbs | 153 lbs |
| Body fat % | 44% | 32% | 25% |
Lean mass preserved — actually GAINED 1-2 lbs thanks to progressive overload + 1.6g/kg protein. The protein intake discussion needs to include body comp data, not just scale weight.
One thing that is still open after MASHdoc_SA’s answer:
How people are hitting a protein target on a genuinely suppressed appetite, because volume is the binding constraint rather than willingness?
PharmacoVig_BOS said:DEXA scan update relevant to protein intake: Scanned at months 0, 6, and 12.
Coming at PharmacoVig_BOS’s question from a different direction. The mental-health dimension is under-measured in the trial literature and the reports here are consistent enough to take seriously. On the positive side: reduced anxiety around food, better self-image, more confidence. On the difficult side: grief for the years lost, identity disruption, relationships built around eating, and the loss of food as a coping mechanism with nothing put in its place. Rarer but real: anhedonia and emotional flatness. Regulators have started asking for validated patient-reported outcomes in this class; the existing data gap is not evidence of absence.
Sigma-Aldrich — Research-Grade Standards
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsOP back with an update, since a thread like this is useless without one.
Reporting back — setting the target on reference weight rather than current weight turned an impossible number into a boring one.
LipidDoc_ATL said:The mental-health dimension is under-measured in the trial literature and the reports here are consistent enough to take seriously.
Agreed on the target, with the caveat that reference weight and current weight are different numbers. Using current weight at the start of a large loss produces a target that is both unachievable and unnecessary.