This is a continuation of a long topic, addressed by post number rather than by page. Start at post 1.
Post #29 put the caveat in the right place and I want to underline it.
Liquid sources are tolerated better than solid ones by many people here, and that is a practical observation rather than a nutritional principle.
Written quickly, so the reasoning may be tighter than the wording.
Offering a way to settle Shakes versus food rather than another opinion about it. Two measurements, taken the same way, a fortnight apart. If the difference is within the noise, the question was not answerable at this precision.
I have three months of notes on Shakes versus food and the honest summary is that the trend is real and the week-to-week numbers are noise. I nearly drew the opposite conclusion from the first fortnight.
The arithmetic in post #33 is right; the assumption feeding it is the part to check.
Self-reported intake is optimistic by a consistent margin in the published comparisons, which is worth applying to your own numbers.
One of those cases where knowing the mechanism does not help the decision.
Post #33 and I disagree about the size of the effect, not about the direction.
The arithmetic on Shakes versus food is the easy part and it is where the errors are, which is an uncomfortable combination. Show your working and someone will catch it.
Taking post #33 at face value and following it one step further.
My position on Shakes versus food is current rather than settled. I have revised it once already and I expect to again, so treat it accordingly.
Published guidance on protein during weight loss is reasonably consistent and is easy to find, which makes this one of the better-evidenced practical questions here.
Where the Shakes versus food discussion usually stalls is that nobody wants to say "I do not know" and everyone is willing to say "it varies". Those are the same sentence with different clothes on.
The claim about Shakes versus food upthread is stronger than its source supports. I have read the source. The source says "associated with" and the post says "causes".
Adding a note of thanks rather than an opinion. I did not know most of that.
Post #38 is the version of this I will quote in future. One addition.
Protein targets during weight loss: the standard recommendation is 1.6 to 2.2 grams per kilogram of body weight. Individual requirements vary but that range is a reasonable starting point.
Where I part company with post #41, and it is a narrow parting.
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.
Worth saying I have only my own numbers here, and n is small.
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Tracking intake honestly when appetite is absent
On the subject in the title: Tracking intake honestly when appetite is absent Working notes rather than a conclusion. I have spent a fortnight trying to pin tracking intake down and I want to set out where I…
|
+109 | 115 | 4.8k | 20h |
|
Fibre intake when total intake falls, and the constipation link
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…
|
+61 | 66 | 12k | 15mo |
|
[2026 update] Whether protein timing matters at a large deficit
Whether protein timing matters at a large deficit — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. A follow-up question about Whether protein timing that I did not know to ask the first…
|
+4 | 8 | 46k | 7mo |
|
Meeting a protein target on a suppressed appetite — one year on
Meeting a protein target on a suppressed appetite — one year on — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Asking about Meeting a protein target directly, because I have read four…
|
+15 | 19 | 19k | 22mo |
|
Fibre intake when total intake falls, and the constipation link — one year on
Posting this under the heading it deserves: Fibre intake when total intake falls, and the constipation link — one year on Everything below is what sits behind that. An honest uncertainty about Fibre intake…
|
+9 | 13 | 16k | 16h |
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
[2026 update] Constipation management, with a dietitian's contribution
Constipation management, with a dietitian's contribution — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Constipation management: what I expected, what I found, and the gap between them.…
|
+6 | 10 | 812 | 12mo |
|
Muscle cramps: the ordinary causes before the exotic ones
Muscle cramps: the ordinary causes before the exotic ones Writing it up because I had to work it out twice and would rather nobody else did. Proposing that muscle cramps deserves a maintained page rather than…
|
+80 | 90 | 27k | 6mo |
|
Follow-up: How much fluid is actually needed, and how you would know
How much fluid is actually needed, and how you would know — that is the question, and I have not found it answered plainly anywhere I have looked. Reporting what I changed and what happened, with the caveat…
|
+17 | 21 | 12k | 13mo |
|
Realistic expectations for strength while losing weight quickly — does this still hold?
Realistic expectations for strength while losing weight quickly — does this still hold? I have a specific reason for asking rather than idle curiosity, and the context is below. Working notes on Realistic…
|
2 | 11k | 10mo | |
|
About the Hydration & electrolytes category
Fluid intake, sodium, potassium and magnesium, and the very ordinary causes of week-two malaise. This post is a community wiki: any member at trust level 3 or above can edit it, and every edit is recorded…
|
4 | 3.6k | 18h |