[Discussion] we are measuring lean mass at the wrong time and calling it noise
we are measuring lean mass at the wrong time and calling it noise. Change my mind, genuinely — I have no stake in being right about this. Reduced appetite makes hitting a protein target a logistics problem rather than a motivation problem, which is why the practical advice here is about timing and food choice rather…
Two scans on the same machine 15 months apart. Lean mass held better than I expected and the lifts told the same story for free.
Two scans on the same machine 15 months apart.
This is the whole intervention. Protein and resistance training.
This is the whole intervention.
Disagreeing with this line: rate alone does not preserve lean mass. The training does.
resistance training first, cardio if there is time left
nothing on this board is a training or nutrition prescription
Some lean mass loss accompanies weight loss in any deficit. Resistance training and adequate protein intake are the two interventions with the best evidence for limiting the proportion.
Three scans over eighteen months, same machine, same conditions. Only the third one made the first two interpretable.
lean mass loss during weight loss is expected, the question is how much
lean mass loss during weight loss is expected, the question is how much
first_pen_fear is right that protein becomes a logistics problem when appetite drops.
first_pen_fear is right that protein becomes a logistics problem when appetite drops.
Adding the free proxy — track a few lifts monthly. It costs nothing and it is longitudinal.
Correction: those scans are from different machines, and the difference you are describing is within the measurement error.