🍪 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 CompositionBody recomposition protocol: GLP-1 + progressive overload + high protein — my results so far Page 2

Body recomposition protocol: GLP-1 + progressive overload + high protein — my results so far

HealthEcon_DC Sun, Mar 29, 2026 at 2:23 AM 21 replies 944 viewsPage 2 of 5
bri_stats
Member
789
3,456
May 2024
Seattle, WA
Mar 29, 2026 at 8:17 AM#6
HealthEcon_DC said:
Distribution matters less than total but it is not nothing.

DEXA scan update relevant to protein intake:

Scanned at months 0, 6, and 12. Here are the body comp numbers:

BaselineMonth 6Month 12
Total mass261 lbs226 lbs208 lbs
Fat mass111 lbs81 lbs43 lbs
Lean mass149 lbs148 lbs155 lbs
Body fat %38%34%22%

Lean mass preserved — actually GAINED 1-2 lbs thanks to progressive overload + 1.5g/kg protein. The protein intake discussion needs to include body comp data, not just scale weight.

50 20sarah_nash92, FitDadDave, RunnerRach and 47 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
tane_welly
Member
234
1,123
Sep 2024
Wellington, NZ
Mar 29, 2026 at 10:36 AM#7

Following on from pete_nash — and this may be the naive question:

How people are hitting a protein target on a genuinely suppressed appetite, because volume is the binding constraint rather than willingness?

Last edited: Mar 29, 2026 at 1:36 PM
49 19carl_compliance, DanielChem_CHI, marco_milano and 46 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
Dr.DermMIA
Member
456
2,123
May 2024
Miami, FL
Mar 29, 2026 at 12:55 PM#8
bri_stats said:
DEXA scan update relevant to protein intake: Scanned at months 0, 6, and 12.

Adding the part of the answer the thread has not reached. Whatever the answer turns out to be, the method for getting there is the same: state the assumption, do the arithmetic in public, and invite the correction. That is slower than asserting, and it is the only version that survives being wrong.

48 18A1cHero_PHX, Dr.RenalNash, LipidDoc_ATL and 45 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
HealthEcon_DC
Member
567
3,456
Apr 2024
Washington, DC
Mar 29, 2026 at 3:14 PM#9

Closing the loop on my own question.

Reporting back — setting the target on reference weight rather than current weight turned an impossible number into a boring one.

47 17TirzTom, TrialTracker_MD, JennaRN and 44 others
Reply Quote Save Share Report
DataDave
Senior Member
1,678
8,901
Apr 2024
Washington
Online
Mar 30, 2026 at 2:23 AM#10
Dr.DermMIA said:
Whatever the answer turns out to be, the method for getting there is the same: state the assumption, do the arithmetic in public, and invite the…

Agreed on the target, with the caveat that reference weight and current weight are different numbers. Using current weight at the start of a large loss produces a target that is both unachievable and unnecessary.

Last edited: Mar 30, 2026 at 3:23 AM
49 22Dr.GutHealth, amsterdam_pete, LondonLisa and 46 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
Creatine kinase elevations on GLP-1 — exercise-induced or concerning?14 replies
Body recomposition protocol: GLP-1 + progressive overload + high protein8 replies
ForumsNewTrendingMembersAccount

Log In

Forgot password?
No account? Register