mike.trainer_LA said:On a suppressed appetite the winning strategy is protein density per unit of volume, not per calorie.
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.
If somebody has the primary source to hand I would rather cite it than paraphrase it.
One concrete data point for the thread. The boring version of this is the one that works, and the boring version is: measure a baseline, change one variable, wait, measure again under the same conditions. Nobody wants that answer and it is still the answer.
Ask again with the specifics and you will get a better answer than this one.
TrialTracker_MD said:I will push back on the powder-first advice.
Coming at TrialTracker_MD’s question from a different direction. The version of this that has an answer is narrower than the version being asked. Narrow it and it becomes tractable; leave it broad and the thread will produce nine confident and incompatible replies.
I would rather be corrected than agreed with, if it comes to it.
PeptideDetective — Independent Peptide Analytics
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsFollowing on from MarkLI_maint — and this may be the naive question:
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.
Update: two thirds of the target before midday. Same total, same appetite, and I am hitting it most days now.