Dr.RaviCardio 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.
One concrete data point for the thread. If you are comparing against somebody else’s result, check that you are comparing the same measurement taken the same way. Most of the apparent contradictions in these threads dissolve at that step.
Dr.NateNeph said:I will push back on the powder-first advice.
Coming at Dr.NateNeph’s question from a different direction. Order of operations matters more than any single choice here: establish a baseline, change one thing, wait long enough for it to express itself, then measure again under the same conditions.
PeptideDetective — Independent Peptide Analytics
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsFollowing on from jason_paloalto — 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?
Reporting back.
Reporting back — setting the target on reference weight rather than current weight turned an impossible number into a boring one.