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.

Longitudinal report with the method stated, because a number without a method is not a measurement.

Same scale, same time of day, same conditions, 67 weeks. I have also recorded protein intake and resistance-training sessions, both self-reported and both therefore optimistic.

The reason I am posting is a pattern in the middle of the series that I cannot explain and that I suspect is measurement rather than signal.

Practical note that does not fit anywhere else. Whatever you conclude from this topic, write down what you did and when. The single most useful thing in your own records is not any individual result; it is that they are dated and consecutive.

post #2 is right about the mechanism and I think understates the practical bit.

Liquid versus solid: protein in liquid form (shakes) is easier to consume in volume but might not be as satiating as solid food. Using both together can help.

Worth separating two things that post #2 runs together.

Meeting protein targets on suppressed appetite: this is where the practical difficulty lies. Eating more protein when appetite is suppressed is genuinely hard. Front-loading the day, prioritising density over volume, and accepting this is a problem worth solving all help.

Picking up post #2: that is the part I would want checked first.

I disagree with the reply above, and I think the disagreement is substantive rather than terminological.

The distinction being drawn does not survive when you look at the published data for this specific question. I would be glad to be shown wrong on this, because the version I am arguing against is more convenient.

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.

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.

On post #4 — agreed on the reasoning, with one qualification.

Protein sources: animal sources (meat, fish, eggs, dairy) are denser and easier to hit targets with. Plant sources require higher volume. Neither is nutritionally superior; volume and personal preference matter.

I read post #8 twice before replying, because I had assumed the opposite.

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.

Worth separating two things that post #7 runs together.

Micronutrition alongside protein: eating protein foods that are also good sources of micronutrients (iron, B vitamins, zinc) solves two problems at once.

post #11 is right about the mechanism and I think understates the practical bit.

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.

Meeting protein targets on suppressed appetite: this is where the practical difficulty lies. Eating more protein when appetite is suppressed is genuinely hard. Front-loading the day, prioritising density over volume, and accepting this is a problem worth solving all help.

Thank you for the correction. I have edited my earlier post with a note rather than silently, so the thread still makes sense to read. The error was mine and it was the kind that comes from remembering a figure instead of looking it up.