KevinCompounds said:On a suppressed appetite the winning strategy is protein density per unit of volume, not per calorie.
This is exactly what I could not find anywhere else. Adding it to my notes with a link back to this thread.
KevinCompounds said:On a suppressed appetite the winning strategy is protein density per unit of volume, not per calorie.
This is exactly what I could not find anywhere else. Adding it to my notes with a link back to this thread.
Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads. The honest answer is that the effect is real, the magnitude is contested, and the individual variation is larger than either. Those three things can all be true at once, and most arguments here are two people holding different parts of that.
Correct me if the detail matters more than I have assumed.
Dr.EndoIndy said:The useful move here is to separate what is established from what is widely repeated.
This is where I part company with the consensus forming above. The counter-case has not been addressed. Somebody upthread described the situation that does not fit, and the thread moved on rather than engaging with it, which is the failure mode this board is supposed to avoid.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsAdding the numbers, since they settle part of this. The boring version of this is the one that works, and the boring version is: measure a baseline, change one variable, wait, measure again under the same conditions. Nobody wants that answer and it is still the answer.
Moderator note: leaving this open. It is being argued well and the disagreement is the useful part. Thread quality here is what the rules are for. Keep it up.