u/Hot_Resort9777

I'm not certain whether this is the right subforum to thematize that subject, because it might be more advanced, but anyway. My current scientific knowledge pledged myself that lipolysis during (prolonged) fasting is highly generous due to low insulin levels/elevated GH-levels. That should make an beneficial impact on body composition, resulting in an muscle-sparing effect. There have been many confusions between contractile muscle tissue and fat-free mass, that asserted higher catabolisms, but these claims were unstable. Many articles describe a rate of gluconeogenesis around 15-20gP/24h. I'm aware of modified fasts & the fear of muscle loss, which exists amongst athletes, which are packed with extensive amount of muscle mass and low body fat. I'm not covering these guys, but the average healthy John Doe at 15-20 % BF. So, my current conception was, that true muscle loss amongst most people during even prolonged fasts was minimal, if done properly. But recently, I came across a study (I didn't read, shame on me) considering a limit on energy transfer from fat stores. That would change the game. If there's a specific caloric limitation, catabolism would make an heavy impact, especially during fasting. Many people commented on the study as nonsense or botched - not taking weight lifting, activity, exogenous "things" (pls don't ban me) into account, but there wasn't an consensus. Thus, I just thought about asking about your opinion on the matter, especially if experienced in prolonged fasting (with accurate metrics). Cheers.

-- Sorry, English is not my native language --