PeptideChemSF said:

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…

Pushing back on PeptideChemSF here. I think this board over-worries about lean mass. Some lean loss is obligatory — you need less muscle to move a smaller body, and preserving mass you no longer need is not a health outcome. The question is whether strength and function held, and mine did.

Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. For anyone assembling their own picture: Tmax is one to three days, terminal half-life about 165 to 170 hours, steady state at four to five weeks, and subcutaneous bioavailability near 89%. Those four numbers explain most of the questions people ask about timing.

labquiet_amy said:

I think this board over-worries about lean mass.

Adding the part of the answer the thread has not reached. The mechanism that matters here is not stomach emptying, it is central. GLP-1 receptor agonism in the arcuate nucleus stimulates POMC neurons and suppresses AgRP/NPY signalling, which is why the effect is appetite and food salience rather than physical fullness. Delayed gastric emptying largely tachyphylaxes over the first months; the appetite effect does not.

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

Whether resistance training and protein change the ratio or only the absolute amount?

Reporting back.

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 hydration. Strength numbers were up throughout.