Dr.NutriCornell said:Distribution matters less than total but it is not nothing.
I will push back on the powder-first advice. It works and it also trains people out of eating food, and when the drug stops the habits are what remain. Getting protein from meals is slower and holds up better afterwards.
Correct me if the detail matters more than I have assumed.
One concrete data point for the thread. One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number. A figure without its method cannot be checked, and an unchecked figure is how this community accumulates folklore.
Worth separating that from mood and mental health, which this thread keeps folding into the same question. They behave differently and the advice does not transfer.
amsterdam_pete said:I will push back on the powder-first advice.
Adding the part of the answer the thread has not reached. 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.
PeptideDetective — Independent Peptide Analytics
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsOne thing that is still open after Dr.NephBHM_UK’s answer:
How people are hitting a protein target on a genuinely suppressed appetite, because volume is the binding constraint rather than willingness?
OP 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.