A narrower follow-up, since the general answer is now clear:
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?
PedsEndoPhilly said:Second scan under matched conditions came back with the lean number nearly a kilogram higher than the first, so a chunk of what I panicked about was…
I read this differently from PedsEndoPhilly, on substance rather than tone. Pushing back on the consensus forming here. Consistency is not the same as correctness, and a board that agrees with itself quickly is usually agreeing with the first person who sounded certain.
PedsEndoPhilly said:Second scan under matched conditions came back with the lean number nearly a kilogram higher than the first, so a chunk of what I panicked about was…
No disagreement, though it depends on where somebody is starting from, and this thread has been assuming a starting point nobody stated.
That is the short version; the long version is somebody else's post.
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View ResultsPedsEndoPhilly said:Second scan under matched conditions came back with the lean number nearly a kilogram higher than the first, so a chunk of what I panicked about was…
Thank you for spelling out the reasoning rather than just the conclusion. I will report back once I have actually tried it.
Clinical perspective, offered as context rather than as advice. 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.