🍪 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
ForumsExercise & Body CompositionCreatine kinase elevations on GLP-1 — exercise-induced or concerning?

Creatine kinase elevations on GLP-1 — exercise-induced or concerning?

Dr.Martinez Sun, Jun 7, 2026 at 4:38 PM 14 replies 204 viewsPage 1 of 3
Dr.Martinez
Medical Advisor
3,891
28,456
Nov 2023
Boston, MA
Online
Jun 7, 2026 at 4:38 PM#1

Read the primary source rather than the write-up and the two do not agree, so here is what is actually in it.

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.

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.
28 23AttorneyGrant, DebRD_ATL, KristenIndy and 25 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
Dr.ObesityMed
VIP Member
3,456
19,234
Nov 2023
Denver, CO
Online
Jun 7, 2026 at 4:56 PM#2
Dr.Martinez 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…

Dr.Martinez has the substance of this right. The condition it depends on is worth stating. 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.

Last edited: Jun 7, 2026 at 10:56 PM
27 22PharmacoVig_BOS, SurmountFan_IN, PeptideChemSF and 24 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
PharmD_Rodriguez
Senior Member
3,456
14,567
Jan 2024
Miami, FL
Jun 7, 2026 at 5:15 PM#3
Dr.Martinez 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…

Pushing back on Dr.Martinez 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.

Last edited: Jun 7, 2026 at 10:15 PM
26 21robert_kc, dan_philly, MeganSA_TX and 23 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
Dr.RaviCardio
VIP Member
2,890
15,678
Jan 2024
New York, NY
Jun 7, 2026 at 5:33 PM#4

This one has a reasonably settled answer, so here it is. 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.

25 20hans_munich, jason_sac26, chris_chi24 and 22 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
SaraMom3
Member
456
2,345
Aug 2024
Ohio
Jun 7, 2026 at 7:16 PM#5
Dr.ObesityMed said:
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…

Agreed, with the caveat that "exercise" for someone with mobility limitations is a different set of options, and the standard advice is written as though everyone can walk for an hour.

24 19ZaraB_AL, JakeSmashed95, NauseaFreeNow and 21 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report

Similar Threads

Resistance training prevents 73% lean mass loss on semaglutide — RCT review11 replies
DEXA scan longitudinal data — 12 months on GLP-1 + lifting18 replies
Zone 2 cardio + GLP-1: synergistic metabolic benefits — evidence18 replies
Body recomposition protocol: GLP-1 + progressive overload + high protein8 replies
Walking 10,000 steps/day impact on GLP-1 weight loss — pedometer study6 replies
ForumsNewTrendingMembersAccount

Log In

Forgot password?
No account? Register