Accepted answer
Start with the diagnostic criteria, because the term is used loosely here and precisely in the literature, and the two usages disagree.
Gait speed below about 0.8 metres per second is the usual severity marker and is the measure most strongly associated with adverse outcomes.
Protein target arithmetic
| Body mass | 1.2 g/kg | 1.6 g/kg | 2.0 g/kg | Per meal at 1.6 (÷3) |
|---|
| 62 kg | 74 g | 99 g | 124 g | 33 g |
| 74 kg | 89 g | 118 g | 148 g | 39 g |
| 88 kg | 106 g | 141 g | 176 g | 47 g |
| 103 kg | 124 g | 165 g | 206 g | 55 g |
| 124 kg | 149 g | 198 g | 248 g | 66 g |
At roughly 4 kcal per gram, 141 g of protein is about 564 kcal — a substantial fraction of a 900 kcal budget, which is the real constraint.
Age-related loss runs at roughly one per cent of muscle mass per year after the fifth decade, accelerating later, so a superimposed deficit-related loss compounds an existing trajectory.
Grip strength predicts mortality and disability more strongly than muscle mass in longitudinal cohorts, which is the empirical basis for that reordering.
Nothing here is medical advice.
Grip strength is the cheap screening test and it is genuinely informative.
Thank you — reframing progression as maintained performance was genuinely useful. – kelvin_lam 8 months ago add a comment