🍪 The GLP Lounge uses cookies to improve your experience, analyze traffic, and personalize content. By continuing to use this site, you agree to our Cookie Policy.
Evidence-based GLP-1 & peptide discussion since 2023
ForumsDosing & ProtocolsHas anyone dealt with oops i think i injected into muscle - panicking?

Has anyone dealt with oops i think i injected into muscle - panicking?

ZaraB_AL Sun, Jan 4, 2026 at 1:25 AM 26 replies 1,353 viewsPage 1 of 6
ZaraB_AL
Member
456
1,678
Jan 2025
Alabama
Jan 4, 2026 at 1:25 AM#1

Posting this because the summary going around does not say what the paper says, and the difference matters for how people here are using it.

There is also a quality change that the scan cannot see. Weight loss shifts fiber-type distribution toward Type I and improves mitochondrial density and insulin-stimulated glucose uptake per fiber — so the muscle you keep is metabolically better even though there is less of it. That does not make the loss irrelevant, but it explains why function often holds up better than the number suggests.

Where I think it is weakest: the comparator does most of the work in how this gets reported, and it is not the comparator most people think they are citing.

What I am trying to establish is what fraction of loss being lean mass is actually normal, because the numbers quoted here range from 10% to 40% and cannot all be right. I have searched first, so if this is covered somewhere point me at it and I will read it.

Note on sourcing:
Figures above are from the primary publication rather than the press summary. If a number here disagrees with one you have, post yours and we will work out which of us is reading a secondary source.
35 5JessicaH_TX, KevinCompounds, TirzTom and 32 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
MikeFit_NJ
Senior Member
1,567
6,543
Apr 2024
New Jersey
Jan 4, 2026 at 1:33 AM#2
ZaraB_AL said:
There is also a quality change that the scan cannot see.

ZaraB_AL has the substance of this right. The condition it depends on is worth stating. The intervention that works is boring and well evidenced: resistance training two to three times a week at a genuine effort, protein at 1.4 to 2.0 g/kg of reference body weight, and not making the deficit larger than the training can support. Cardio does not protect lean mass and in a deep deficit competes with recovery.

34 4marcus_mpls, DeniseRN_TPA, SandraNC_45 and 31 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
Dr.AddMedPHL
Senior Member
1,234
6,234
Mar 2024
Philadelphia, PA
Jan 4, 2026 at 1:41 AM#3
ZaraB_AL said:
There is also a quality change that the scan cannot see.

Pushing back on ZaraB_AL here. I think this board over-worries about lean mass. Some lean loss is obligatory — you need less muscle to move a smaller body, and preserving mass you no longer need is not a health outcome. The question is whether strength and function held, and mine did.

33 3mike.trainer_LA, sarah_nash92, FitDadDave and 30 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report

Sigma-Aldrich — Research-Grade Standards

Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.

Shop Reference Standards
MASHdoc_SA
Member
456
2,345
Aug 2024
San Antonio, TX
Jan 4, 2026 at 1:49 AM#4

This one has a reasonably settled answer, so here it is. The honest range is roughly 20 to 40% of total loss as lean mass without deliberate resistance training, and roughly 10 to 20% with it plus adequate protein. Both numbers need a caveat that matters: "lean mass" on a DEXA is not muscle. It includes water, glycogen and the lean fraction of organs, and glycogen alone carries about three grams of water per gram. A large early lean drop is mostly the glycogen and water going, which is why the first scan flatters and the second is the honest one.

32 2LabKate, kate.chem, DataDave and 29 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
pam_columbus
Member
312
1,345
Aug 2024
Columbus, OH
Jan 4, 2026 at 2:32 AM#5
MikeFit_NJ said:
The intervention that works is boring and well evidenced: resistance training two to three times a week at a genuine effort, protein at 1.4 to 2.0…

Mine went the same way, slower.

31 1emma_london, tammy_FL, Dr.LipidDallas and 28 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
1236

Similar Threads

Micro-dosing semaglutide — is sub-therapeutic dosing effective?16 replies
Injection technique: subcutaneous depot formation and absorption8 replies
Semaglutide PK modeling — when to time your injection12 replies
Reconstitution calculator — compounded peptide dosing math7 replies
Half-life implications for missed doses — PK-based guidance5 replies
ForumsNewTrendingMembersAccount

Log In

Forgot password?
No account? Register