BethLabQueen said:The RDA is the wrong reference and it is worth understanding why.
I will push back on the powder-first advice. It works and it also trains people out of eating food, and when the drug stops the habits are what remain. Getting protein from meals is slower and holds up better afterwards.
One concrete data point for the thread. If you are comparing against somebody else’s result, check that you are comparing the same measurement taken the same way. Most of the apparent contradictions in these threads dissolve at that step.
LabKate said:I will push back on the powder-first advice.
Adding the part of the answer the thread has not reached. The honest answer is that the effect is real, the magnitude is contested, and the individual variation is larger than either. Those three things can all be true at once, and most arguments here are two people holding different parts of that.
Sigma-Aldrich — Research-Grade Standards
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsFollowing on from JenPlateau — and this may be the naive question:
How people are hitting a protein target on a genuinely suppressed appetite, because volume is the binding constraint rather than willingness?
Closing the loop on my own question.
Reporting back — setting the target on reference weight rather than current weight turned an impossible number into a boring one.