Protein requirements on GLP-1: systematic review of RDA vs optimal intake — my results so far

Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. A quick sanity check on any figure quoted here: is it mean or median, is it intention-to-treat or completers, and what was the comparator. Three questions, and they resolve most disagreements in these threads.

A narrower follow-up, since the general answer is now clear:

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

TirzTom said:

A quick sanity check on any figure quoted here: is it mean or median, is it intention-to-treat or completers, and what was the comparator.

Coming at TirzTom’s question from a different direction. Read four things before the headline number. The population, because trial populations are selected and supported in ways that real cohorts are not. The comparator, because "better than placebo" and "better than the current standard" are different claims and get reported identically. The primary endpoint as pre-registered, because a secondary endpoint promoted after the fact is a hypothesis rather than a finding. And the completion rate, because a large effect in the half of participants who finished is a different result from a large effect in everybody enrolled.

OP back with an update, since a thread like this is useless without one.

Front-loading was the answer. Same total intake, same drug, but two thirds of the protein before midday and I am hitting the target most days now.

Dr.KarenChen said:

Read four things before the headline number.

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.