Fibre intake when total intake falls, and the constipation link — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable.
Trying to establish the boundary conditions on fibre intake. The general claim is fine; I want to know where it stops holding, because that is where I am operating.
Three edge cases below, in increasing order of how far outside the usual range they sit.
Worth separating two things that the opening post runs together.
Tracking intake for a week rather than permanently is usually enough to find out whether there is a problem. Permanent tracking has its own costs.
The uncertainty is in the assumption, not in the calculation.
Protein supplements: whey, casein, and plant-based protein powders can help hit targets when whole-food intake is limited by appetite. Protein quality (all essential amino acids) matters more than form.
The short version is the first sentence; the rest is why.
I had written a reply contradicting post #3 and deleted it. Here is what survived.
Density matters more than quantity when total intake is limited. The same protein in a smaller volume is the whole game.
Posted with less confidence than the sentence structure implies.
Confirming post #3 from a second method, which matters more than confirming it from a second person.
Fibre: adequate fibre intake supports fullness and gut motility, both of which matter during the gastrointestinal effects of these compounds. High fibre on top of appetite suppression requires attention to hydration and gradual introduction.
A partial answer, offered because a partial answer beats none.
I had read the opposite somewhere and cannot now find where, which tells me something.
Self-reported intake is optimistic by a consistent margin in the published comparisons, which is worth applying to your own numbers.
Eating anything at all: on substantial appetite suppression, eating enough total calories to maintain lean mass is the priority. Protein comes second to total intake.
I would put a moderate confidence on that and no more.
Adding the measurement that post #11 says would settle it.
Renal considerations around higher protein intake apply to people with existing renal impairment and are frequently generalised beyond that population.
Post #10 describes the usual case. This is about the unusual one.
Timing of protein: spreading protein intake across the day, with some at each meal, is more practical than trying to hit the whole target at one sitting on suppressed appetite.
Where intake has fallen a long way, protein is usually the first thing to fall because it is the least appealing macronutrient when appetite is reduced.
Reading it back, the second half matters more than the first.
Where somebody reports losing strength, intake and training stimulus are the first two things to look at rather than the compound.
I would want to see it done twice before believing it once.
Micronutrition alongside protein: eating protein foods that are also good sources of micronutrients (iron, B vitamins, zinc) solves two problems at once.
That is the honest state of it as of this week.
Taking post #16 at face value and following it one step further.
An update on my earlier fibre intake post: the pattern held for another six weeks and then stopped, which I did not predict and cannot explain.
Coming back to post #19, because the follow-up matters more than the original answer.
Since fibre intake keeps coming up, it should probably be a maintained page rather than a recurring thread. I am happy to draft it if someone with more direct experience will review it.
Micronutrient adequacy becomes a real question at very low total intake and is much less discussed than protein.
A single observation, in a thread that deserves better than single observations.
I would call the community position on fibre intake likely rather than established, and I would be comfortable defending that hedge.
Confirming post #23 from a second method, which matters more than confirming it from a second person.
Distribution across the day appears to matter less than total for most outcomes, and it matters practically because a single large meal is harder when appetite is reduced.
Marking that as an opinion rather than a finding.
Tracking intake for a week rather than permanently is usually enough to find out whether there is a problem. Permanent tracking has its own costs.
Protein supplements: whey, casein, and plant-based protein powders can help hit targets when whole-food intake is limited by appetite. Protein quality (all essential amino acids) matters more than form.
Leucine and MPS: leucine stimulates muscle protein synthesis at a threshold of roughly 2 to 3 grams per meal. That influences how much protein per meal matters, but total daily protein still matters most.
I checked the source rather than the summary, and they differ.