The Peptide CommonsEst. May 2024
Independent. We sell nothing and are affiliated with no manufacturer or pharmacy. Every moderation action is logged in public
Nutrition & Training · Protein & intake

Meeting a protein target on a suppressed appetite

JN
j.nwosuTL211 May 2025#1

Meeting a protein target on a suppressed appetite Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did.

I have spent a fortnight trying to pin meeting a protein target down and I want to set out where I have got to, because I suspect the honest answer is duller than the thread this will produce.

What I have: a consistent observation across a small number of cases, collected the same way each time. What I do not have: any controlled comparison, or any reason to think my cases are representative.

The specific question is whether the pattern survives once the obvious confounder is removed. I cannot remove it with what I have.

23 likes 15mo
AT
a.thorneTL2Wiki editor23 May 2025#2

Micronutrition alongside protein: eating protein foods that are also good sources of micronutrients (iron, B vitamins, zinc) solves two problems at once.

The strength of my opinion here exceeds the strength of my evidence.

4 likes 14mo
PT
p.trevinoTL231 May 2025#3

Where intake has fallen a long way, protein is usually the first thing to fall because it is the least appealing macronutrient when appetite is reduced.

0 likes 14mo
H
HadjipaterasTL1Member8 Jun 2025#4

The opening post is the version of this I will quote in future. One addition.

Maintenance changes the calculation and almost nobody revisits their target when they get there.

26 likes 14mo
AZ
an.zamoraTL215 Jun 2025#5
Hadjipateras, post #4: The opening post is the version of this I will quote in future. One addition. Maintenance changes the calculation and almost nobody revisits their target when they get there. Go to post

That matches what I have seen, for whatever a single anecdote is worth.

8 likes in reply to #4 13mo
R
RodriguesTL3Regular22 Jun 2025 · edited#6

The arithmetic in post #4 is right; the assumption feeding it is the part to check.

Eating anything at all: on substantial appetite suppression, eating enough total calories to maintain lean mass is the priority. Protein comes second to total intake.

That distinction has done more work for me than anything else in this category.

2 likes 13mo
KO
k.ogunleyeTL228 Jun 2025#7
S
SHermansenTL2Member5 Jul 2025#8

Fibre and fluid tend to fall alongside protein when intake drops, and the constipation reported here follows from that as much as from the mechanism.

19 likes 13mo
DF
d.ferreiraTL211 Jul 2025#9
Rodrigues, post #6: The arithmetic in post #4 is right; the assumption feeding it is the part to check. Eating anything at all: on substantial appetite suppression, eating enough total calories to maintain lean mass is the priority. Protein comes second to total intake. That distinction has done more work for me than anything else in this category. Go to post

The mechanism is not mysterious. Substantial energy restriction with inadequate protein and no resistance stimulus loses lean tissue as well as fat.

4 likes in reply to #6 13mo
BV
bias_varianceTL4Biostatistician16 Jul 2025#10

A target that is not being met is worth adjusting downward to something achievable rather than being missed indefinitely.

0 likes 12mo
TD
t.demirTL222 Jul 2025 · edited#11

Fair, and the limits you put on it are the part I will remember.

16 likes 12mo
TN
t.ndiayeTL228 Jul 2025#12
Hadjipateras, post #4: The opening post is the version of this I will quote in future. One addition. Maintenance changes the calculation and almost nobody revisits their target when they get there. Go to post

The practical problem is that appetite suppression makes hitting a target genuinely hard, and "eat more protein" ignores the actual constraint.

The right answer here may simply be that it has not been measured.

32 likes in reply to #4 12mo
AF
a.friskTL22 Aug 2025#13
k.ogunleye, post #7: Adequate protein during a substantial deficit is the part of this conversation that gets least attention and probably deserves most. If that is already documented somewhere, ignore me and link it. Go to post

This follows post #10 rather than contradicting it.

Liquid versus solid: protein in liquid form (shakes) is easier to consume in volume but might not be as satiating as solid food. Using both together can help.

I keep a log of this specifically because memory is unreliable about it.

1 like in reply to #7 12mo
PM
p.mbekiTL27 Aug 2025#14

Worth separating two things that post #12 runs together.

Fibre: adequate fibre intake supports fullness and gut motility, both of which matter during the gastrointestinal effects of these compounds. High fibre on top of appetite suppression requires attention to hydration and gradual introduction.

6 likes 12mo
NM
n.moreauTL213 Aug 2025#15

Meeting protein targets on suppressed appetite: this is where the practical difficulty lies. Eating more protein when appetite is suppressed is genuinely hard. Front-loading the day, prioritising density over volume, and accepting this is a problem worth solving all help.

I would want the raw data before agreeing with my own summary of it.

11 likes 11mo
JN
j.nascimentoTL218 Aug 2025#16

Renal considerations around higher protein intake apply to people with existing renal impairment and are frequently generalised beyond that population.

Worth saying I have only my own numbers here, and n is small.

24 likes 11mo
CB
c.bakkerTL223 Aug 2025#17
t.demir, post #11: Fair, and the limits you put on it are the part I will remember. Go to post

Taking post #14 at face value and following it one step further.

Density matters more than quantity when total intake is limited. The same protein in a smaller volume is the whole game.

0 likes in reply to #11 11mo
MB
m.brobergTL228 Aug 2025#18

Timing of protein: spreading protein intake across the day, with some at each meal, is more practical than trying to hit the whole target at one sitting on suppressed appetite.

3 likes 11mo
AN
a.nascimentoTL22 Sep 2025#19

Protein sources: animal sources (meat, fish, eggs, dairy) are denser and easier to hit targets with. Plant sources require higher volume. Neither is nutritionally superior; volume and personal preference matter.

Someone will know this better than I do and I hope they say so.

0 likes 11mo
DB
d.bramleyTL3Regular7 Sep 2025#20

This is the first time the answer has come with its own limits attached. Appreciated.

4 likes 11mo
HM
h.mbekiTL212 Sep 2025#21

Grateful for the specificity. Vague answers to this question are what sent me looking.

13 likes 10mo
BS
b.solbergTL217 Sep 2025#22

Adding the measurement that post #19 says would settle it.

Distribution across the day appears to matter less than total for most outcomes, and it matters practically because a single large meal is harder when appetite is reduced.

That has been true for the cases I have seen and I have not seen many.

4 likes 10mo
JS
j.steinerTL221 Sep 2025#23
n.moreau, post #15: Meeting protein targets on suppressed appetite: this is where the practical difficulty lies. Eating more protein when appetite is suppressed is genuinely hard. Front-loading the day, prioritising density over volume, and accepting this is a problem worth solving all help. I would want the raw data before agreeing with my own summary of… Go to post

Where I part company with post #22, and it is a narrow parting.

Micronutrient adequacy becomes a real question at very low total intake and is much less discussed than protein.

It is the sort of thing that seems obvious in retrospect and was not at the time.

0 likes in reply to #15 10mo
KR
k.radichTL226 Sep 2025#24
t.demir, post #11: Fair, and the limits you put on it are the part I will remember. Go to post

Protein supplements: whey, casein, and plant-based protein powders can help hit targets when whole-food intake is limited by appetite. Protein quality (all essential amino acids) matters more than form.

0 likes in reply to #11 10mo
LS
l.salinasTL21 Oct 2025 · edited#25

The reports here that describe what actually worked, in specifics, are far more useful than the ones stating a target.

8 likes 10mo
AR
a.reyesTL4 Admin5 Oct 2025#26

Leucine and MPS: leucine stimulates muscle protein synthesis at a threshold of roughly 2 to 3 grams per meal. That influences how much protein per meal matters, but total daily protein still matters most.

2 likes 10mo
NS
n.silvaTL210 Oct 2025#27
j.nascimento, post #16: Renal considerations around higher protein intake apply to people with existing renal impairment and are frequently generalised beyond that population. Worth saying I have only my own numbers here, and n is small. Go to post

Post #25 put the caveat in the right place and I want to underline it.

Published guidance on protein during weight loss is reasonably consistent and is easy to find, which makes this one of the better-evidenced practical questions here.

A modest claim, modestly supported.

0 likes in reply to #16 10mo
SL
s.leclercTL414 Oct 2025#28
YA
y.adebayoTL219 Oct 2025#29
j.nwosu, post #1: Meeting a protein target on a suppressed appetite Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. I have spent a fortnight trying to pin meeting a protein target down and I want to set out where I have got to, because I suspect the honest answer is duller than the thread this will produce. What I have:… Go to post

Worth separating two things that post #25 runs together.

Density matters more than quantity when total intake is limited. The same protein in a smaller volume is the whole game.

The interesting part of this is the exception, and I do not understand the exception.

26 likes in reply to #1 9mo
MH
ms_hollowayTL423 Oct 2025#30