Tracking intake honestly when appetite is absent posts 91–116
This is a continuation of a long topic, addressed by post number rather than by page. Start at post 1 · go to the accepted answer.
Post #91 is the version of this I will quote in future. One addition.
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.
A guess, clearly labelled as one.
The strongest argument against my own position on tracking intake, stated as well as I can state it, since nobody else has yet.
The mechanism is not mysterious. Substantial energy restriction with inadequate protein and no resistance stimulus loses lean tissue as well as fat.
Post #91 put the caveat in the right place and I want to underline it.
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.
It cost nothing to check and would have cost something not to.
Collapsed as off-topic by two members at trust level 3 or above
This is the sort of exchange that makes the archive worth searching.
Nothing here is medical or dietetic advice, and a dietitian is the professional this subcategory most often recommends.
Self-reported intake is optimistic by a consistent margin in the published comparisons, which is worth applying to your own numbers.
Where somebody reports losing strength, intake and training stimulus are the first two things to look at rather than the compound.
Protein targets during weight loss: the standard recommendation is 1.6 to 2.2 grams per kilogram of body weight. Individual requirements vary but that range is a reasonable starting point.
Collapsed as off-topic by two members at trust level 3 or above
Everything in post #99 holds. The case it does not cover is the one I have.
Temperature and texture change what is tolerable for a lot of people during the first weeks, and that is worth experimenting with before concluding nothing works.
The short version is the first sentence; the rest is why.
Narrowing post #99, because the general version has more than one answer.
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.
Posted with less confidence than the sentence structure implies.
Tracking intake sits at the boundary between what this community can usefully discuss and what it cannot, and I think it falls on the discussable side, narrowly.
Clear enough that I do not think I have a follow-up, which is unusual.
Liquid sources are tolerated better than solid ones by many people here, and that is a practical observation rather than a nutritional principle.
This is the sort of thing the wiki should carry and currently does not.
Having read the whole tracking intake thread before replying: the question in the first post has not actually been answered yet, and three of us have answered a nearby one instead.
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.
It reads as pedantry until the day it does not.
Adding a null result on tracking intake. I looked, carefully, and found nothing, and null results deserve posting precisely because they never are.
Post #110 is right about the mechanism and I think understates the practical bit.
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.
Two sources, same conclusion, and I could not rule out that one copied the other.
Coming back to post #108, because the follow-up matters more than the original answer.
Tracking intake: I would want to see the raw numbers rather than the summary before agreeing. Summaries lose exactly the information that would settle this.
Quietly grateful for the plain phrasing. Not every thread gets that.
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.
Anyone with a larger sample, please post it.
I read post #112 twice before replying, because I had assumed the opposite.
The practical problem is that appetite suppression makes hitting a target genuinely hard, and "eat more protein" ignores the actual constraint.
I would want to see it done twice before believing it once.
Suggested topics
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Protein density versus volume when you cannot eat much
On the subject in the title: Protein density versus volume when you cannot eat much Working notes rather than a conclusion. Something about protein density versus volume does not reconcile and I would like a…
|
+89 | 105 | 20k | 18mo |
|
Micronutrient adequacy at low total intake
Micronutrient adequacy at low total intake — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Trying to work out what would count as evidence on micronutrient adequacy, before collecting…
|
+93 | 99 | 5.8k | 1mo |
|
Meeting a protein target on a suppressed appetite
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…
|
+39 | 44 | 11k | 7mo |
|
[2026 update] Whether protein timing matters at a large deficit
Whether protein timing matters at a large deficit — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. A follow-up question about Whether protein timing that I did not know to ask the first…
|
+4 | 8 | 46k | 7mo |
|
Meeting a protein target on a suppressed appetite — does this still hold?
Asking directly, because I could not find a straight answer: Meeting a protein target on a suppressed appetite — does this still hold? Posting a small dataset on Meeting a protein target. It is mine, it is…
|
+56 | 61 | 45k | 19mo |
Related topics — sharing the tags constipation, fatigue, micronutrients
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Vomiting: when it is expected and when it is a reason to stop
Posting this under the heading it deserves: Vomiting: when it is expected and when it is a reason to stop Everything below is what sits behind that. Reporting something rather than asking about it, in case…
|
+116 | 124 | 43k | 7mo |
|
Meeting a protein target on a suppressed appetite — one year on
Meeting a protein target on a suppressed appetite — one year on — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Asking about Meeting a protein target directly, because I have read four…
|
+15 | 19 | 19k | 22mo |
|
Bioimpedance and hydration: why the number moves
Bioimpedance and hydration: why the number moves — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. I have spent a fortnight trying to pin bioimpedance and hydration down and I want to set…
|
+62 | 70 | 13k | 23d |
|
Early satiety becoming a problem rather than a benefit
Early satiety becoming a problem rather than a benefit — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. A methods question rather than a substantive one, about early satiety. Everyone…
|
+20 | 24 | 2.5k | 6mo |
|
Two sessions a week versus four: what the evidence supports — a second dataset
Two sessions a week versus four: what the evidence supports — a second dataset — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Reporting rather than asking, and the method is stated so…
|
+28 | 32 | 579 | 2y |