SlimFast 3-2-1 Low Carb Shake
My routine is to have a protein shake each morning for my breakfast. How does the SlimFast 3-2-1 chocolate shake fit into a low carb diet?
The first thing that strikes me as odd is that there's no real "name" on this shake. Nowhere that I can see does it say chocolate, or protein shake, or anything like that. The main title says SlimFast 3-2-1 plan, but that's their overall plan that encompasses shakes, bars, and other items. It does say "for use as part of a low carb diet" but that's hardly a name. It has a picture of brownish liquid and a few hunks of brownish material. So you have to infer from that that this is chocolate, and guess by the 20g protein and 2g net carbs on the front that it's primarily a protein shake.
Very odd.
The nutrition for one bottle / 295ml is 180 calories. There are 4g total carbs, minus 2g fiber leaves you with 2g net carbs. There is 9g fat with 1.5g being saturated and 0g trans fats. 15mg sodium, 550mg potassium, 20g protein. Plus a ton of nutrition - Vitamin C 100%, Vitamin E 100%, calcium 40%, and so on.
The flavor is reasonably good. I tend to like the darker chocolate flavor of the EAS protein shakes, but I can see how this one would appeal to milk chocolate fans. It's smooth, creamy, and tasty. If I hadn't found the EAS one first, I might have been drinking this one every morning.
Also, they get kudos for a recyclable plastic container. The EAS ones come in squarish foil containers that get thrown out. That's a shame. These can be recycled which is great.
Looking at the SlimFast and EAS head to head, you get less fluid in the SlimFast - 295ml vs 330ml. You also get more calories - 180 calories vs 110. You get 3 times the fat. You do get 2g fiber in the SlimFast vs only 1g in the EAS. You also get 3g more protein. On the vitamin side, the SlimFast provides more vitamins. 100% Vitamin C vs 45%, 100% Vitamin E vs 40%, 40% calcium vs 20%. So the SlimFast seems to be a more complete "vitamin supplement".
So it's probably a toss-up depending on which appeals to you more. In my case, I'll stick with the EAS. I'd rather have less calories, more liquid to keep me full, and the dark chocolate flavor. I don't mind less vitamins because I also take a multi-vitamin every morning to ensure I get my 100%. But that being said, I do wish the EAS shakes would come out in a recyclable container.
Lisa Shea's Library of Low Carb Books
The first thing that strikes me as odd is that there's no real "name" on this shake. Nowhere that I can see does it say chocolate, or protein shake, or anything like that. The main title says SlimFast 3-2-1 plan, but that's their overall plan that encompasses shakes, bars, and other items. It does say "for use as part of a low carb diet" but that's hardly a name. It has a picture of brownish liquid and a few hunks of brownish material. So you have to infer from that that this is chocolate, and guess by the 20g protein and 2g net carbs on the front that it's primarily a protein shake.
Very odd.
The nutrition for one bottle / 295ml is 180 calories. There are 4g total carbs, minus 2g fiber leaves you with 2g net carbs. There is 9g fat with 1.5g being saturated and 0g trans fats. 15mg sodium, 550mg potassium, 20g protein. Plus a ton of nutrition - Vitamin C 100%, Vitamin E 100%, calcium 40%, and so on.
The flavor is reasonably good. I tend to like the darker chocolate flavor of the EAS protein shakes, but I can see how this one would appeal to milk chocolate fans. It's smooth, creamy, and tasty. If I hadn't found the EAS one first, I might have been drinking this one every morning.
Also, they get kudos for a recyclable plastic container. The EAS ones come in squarish foil containers that get thrown out. That's a shame. These can be recycled which is great.
Looking at the SlimFast and EAS head to head, you get less fluid in the SlimFast - 295ml vs 330ml. You also get more calories - 180 calories vs 110. You get 3 times the fat. You do get 2g fiber in the SlimFast vs only 1g in the EAS. You also get 3g more protein. On the vitamin side, the SlimFast provides more vitamins. 100% Vitamin C vs 45%, 100% Vitamin E vs 40%, 40% calcium vs 20%. So the SlimFast seems to be a more complete "vitamin supplement".
So it's probably a toss-up depending on which appeals to you more. In my case, I'll stick with the EAS. I'd rather have less calories, more liquid to keep me full, and the dark chocolate flavor. I don't mind less vitamins because I also take a multi-vitamin every morning to ensure I get my 100%. But that being said, I do wish the EAS shakes would come out in a recyclable container.
Lisa Shea's Library of Low Carb Books
Related Articles
Editor's Picks Articles
Top Ten Articles
Previous Features
Site Map
Follow @LisaLowCarb
Tweet
Content copyright © 2023 by Lisa Shea. All rights reserved.
This content was written by Lisa Shea. If you wish to use this content in any manner, you need written permission. Contact Lisa Shea for details.
