My trainer has no idea what GLP-1 is and it shows

Short answer first, then the reasoning. 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.

Dr.BariatricHTX said:

There is also a quality change that the scan cannot see.

Right, and protein targets should be set on a reference weight rather than current weight. Setting 1.6 g/kg on a starting weight of 130kg produces a target nobody hits on a suppressed appetite.

nick_newbie said:

Two DEXA scans eleven months apart: down 24kg total, of which the scan says 6kg was lean.

This matches mine closely enough to be worth saying so. 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.

Adding the clinical framing, because it changes how the question reads.

nick_newbie said:

...the muscle loss concern with lean mass...

This is a legitimate and well-studied concern. Let me put some numbers on it:

In STEP 1, approximately 39% of weight lost was lean mass. However, the Lundgren 2024 study showed that structured resistance training reduced this to ~25% lean mass loss.

Context matters: at BMI 35+, you're carrying excess lean mass to support the extra weight. Losing some lean mass is expected and not inherently harmful if you maintain adequate muscle function through exercise.

The solution isn't avoiding the medication — it's combining it with proper exercise and protein intake.