I can't think of anything better for a runner than Slim Fast. You can drink it before a run and the 4-1 carb to protein ratio is identical to endurox. Tastes good, easy on the stomach and it's dirt cheap....even the generic brand at Walmart and Target tastes good.
If there's a negative I'd like to hear it.
as seen on tv wrote:
it's dirt cheap....even the generic brand at Walmart and Target tastes good.
If there's a negative I'd like to hear it.
Chocolate milk is cheaper and tastes better.
as seen on tv wrote:
You can drink it before a run and the 4-1 carb to protein ratio is identical to endurox.
Nice math skills.
http://www.calorie-count.com/calories/item/85183.htmlIt has natural laxatives in it. Great!
Doesn't it make you shit your pants?
http://www.calorie-count.com/calories/item/107697.htmlanother idiot wrote:
Nice math skills.
http://www.calorie-count.com/calories/item/85183.html
I didn't say Slim Fast Optima jackass...4 to freakin 1...eat it
another idiot just got B*#$% Slapped
i drink it alot
A guy I used to run with often swears by it, so I tried it once. In the middle of a 12 mile run, I had to take a quick run into the woods...in a hurry!
No one has come up with a negative...no it doesn't make me shit myself...I said EASY ON THE STOMACH. I have never drank it in the middle of a 12 miler but I have drank it 20 minutes before a long run. Chocolate milk has less calories and doesn't have the 4:1 ratio and you can buy it for well under a buck a can. Choco milk isn't a meal replacement, slim fast will curb my appetite for a couple of hours. Protein is just as important as carbs after a workout.
Nice pwn!!
Has anyone tried the weight loss shakes from costco (Kirkland brand)? The cans actually have a little more, and they're not as thick/creamy as slimfast, so I think they actually taste a lot better.
I generally have one as a snack, or as a quick breakfast for pre-morning runs, and even as dessert sometimes. They are so good when ice cold.
Why is it that so many runners think that anything that has a 4:1 ratio of carbs to protein is as good as endurox?? This is like saying that every shoe with rubber on the bottom is the same as asics, brooks, adidas, etc
If there's a negative, I'd like to hear it:
-There's 5g of fat which will slow the absorbtion. You don't want fat in your recovery drink
-Way fewer antioxidants
-Gum Arabic, Canola Oil, Cellulose Gel. Canola oil is awesome for a runner especially right after a hard workout
-Cost? As far as I can tell it's the same cost as endurox at around $1 per every 200 calories
Of course if the above makes no difference to you, then yeah, its the same thing.
Cousin Johnny wrote:
If there's a negative, I'd like to hear it:
-There's 5g of fat which will slow the absorbtion. You don't want fat in your recovery drink
-Way fewer antioxidants
-Gum Arabic, Canola Oil, Cellulose Gel. Canola oil is awesome for a runner especially right after a hard workout
-Cost? As far as I can tell it's the same cost as endurox at around $1 per every 200 calories
Of course if the above makes no difference to you, then yeah, its the same thing.
OK, it's not identical and its not better than Endurox (after a run) but do you have Endurox handy all the time? Do you drink Endurox between meals or to curb your appetite for an hour or so? 95% of the runners take nothing after they run, a slim fast is easy and not a bad substitute. Slim Fast is superior to Endurox because it has so many more uses...last time I checked Endurox has one.
your other points:
Slim Fast has 2 - 3 grams of fat, not 5. Endurox has more antioxidants to combat all those free radicals? Talk about drinking the kool aid. There is no canola oil in slim fast. Your argument has more errors than facts.
I actually drink the Kirkland stuff at Costco, hated it at first but it actually tastes better. 24 cans for 18 bucks...do the math.
The Costco version definately tastes much better and is cheaper.
Agreed, slimfast is better than nothing, but for god's sakes, don't start telling me it's the same thing.
Slim Fast has 2 - 3 grams of fat, not 5
There is no canola oil in slim fast. Your argument has more errors than facts.
Really:
I actually drink the Kirkland stuff at Costco, hated it at first but it actually tastes better. 24 cans for 18 bucks...do the math.
Kirkland Slimfast 'Stuff':
24 cans @ $18 (4560 calories /case) = $2.50 per 100 calories
Endurox:
1 can @ $40 (7560 calories /can) = $1.14 per 100 calories
Yes, $2.50 per 100 calories (Slimfast) vs $1.14 per 100 calories (endurox). What was it you said, do the math??
Your only argument is endurox is better than slim fast for after a run...I agree but only marginally. The other 22 hours of the day Slim Fast is better, that was my point. If you want to really crunch the numbers I could mix the powder slim fast like you have to do with endurox and it would be cheaper but another point was slim fast is freakin simple. And for a price point shouldn't you really be comparing the carbs & protein content and not the calories per $? After all you're not drinking endurox for the calories. This wasn't a thread to compare slim fast to endurox. I asked for something negative and you brought up couple of minor arguments for an after run drink - slim fast still has so many uses that it trumps endurox for its many uses.
I like it as an easy substitute for a recovery drink. I don't like the walmart branded though--tastes too sugary/fakesugary to me. I've had problems on my stomach with some foods/drinks, but I haven't had any with slimfast before or after a run. I really like to use it at the end of the work day about 15 minutes before I head out to run or as a quick lunch substitute when I can't break away to eat (otherwise I wouldn't eat anything).
The OP brought up endurox, hence replies regarding it as a recovery drink. If someone says I like porsches and says it has 4 wheels just like a hummer, i think it's important to point out the differences between a porsche and a hummer and not just pretend like the original comparison is the same thing.
YOU brought up price and told another poster to do the math....nothing about convenience - you said price and your errors have been pointed out.
Now you're saying to compare the carbs vs carbs and pro vs pro, considering the ratios of carbs:pro of the 2 are very similar, the facts would still be the same regarding price....you're paying a lot more for an inferior product. Do the math.
You asked for negatives, those were pointed out.
You said to do the math as it's much more expensive, I pointed out it's considerably less expensive.
What else do you need?
The OP has posted under about 5 different names on this thread.