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.
I lifted three times a week throughout and still lost lean mass. Not as much as I expected to, but the idea that training prevents it entirely is not what my scan says.
The narrow version of the question is whether resistance training and protein change the ratio or only the absolute amount.
Practical detail welcome, however dull — the duller the better.
MikeFit_NJ 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.
Sigma-Aldrich — Research-Grade Standards
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsDr.NutriCornell said:I lifted three times a week throughout and still lost lean mass.
Same position here, arrived at the long way round. 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.
Clinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice.
Body composition tracking via bioimpedance on lean mass (InBody scan every 3 months):
| Metric | Baseline | Month 3 | Month 6 | Month 9 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Skeletal Muscle (lbs) | 72 | 72 | 71 | 74 |
| Body Fat (lbs) | 99 | 78 | 62 | 46 |
| Body Fat % | 42% | 35% | 27% | 21% |
| Visceral Fat (cm²) | 149 | 124 | 84 | 59 |
Note: skeletal muscle mass dipped initially then recovered with consistent resistance training + high protein. The visceral fat reduction is where the metabolic magic happens.