WIRED article on (not Jake) meal replacements

Thulinma 2019-03-04 21:01:34 UTC #1

I found this article on WIRED earlier today:

The article basically claims all meal replacements suck. (Though not in as harsh terms...)

Reading such a description of meal replacements in general was quite upsetting to me, because I've found Jake (I haven't tried any others) to be quite the opposite. I noticed an immediate increase in my personal fitness once I drank it for a few days. I don't get tired of the flavor at all, and have had no problems whatsoever with eating/drinking Jake once a day since February 2016 without missing a single day since.

Since starting Jake, I feel like my health has never been better. Really, my only complaint is that the banana&cinnamon bars disappeared. Those were tasty!

Anyone else feel the same way? Am I an exception to the rule here..? Or is Jake just that much better than the competitors?

Eva 2019-03-05 10:46:11 UTC #2

We appreciate that you’ve been with us for such a long time now, Jaron! It’s great to hear how your health has improved since you started eating Jake.

Thanks for sharing the article. I believe that many people will always be a bit sceptical towards anything they aren’t used to. Seeing your experiences, I can only encourage you to keep on doing what feels good.

Whether Jake is better than competitors, is ultimately up to you. We believe Huel and Soylent are doing good jobs as well.

Feel free to share some more and I am curious to hear other experiences as well!

LaurenMcG 2019-03-05 13:13:29 UTC #3

I've seen hundreds of articles on meal replacements/complete foods, and around 90% are identical. The other 10% are written by actual users, and praise them, as you have.
That's why I don;t even bother reading them no hahaha there are a few interesting articles I recommending reading though, including these two by Huel -

As for Jake compared to other complete foods - hang around their forums (Huel, Queal, Jimmy Joy and Soylent) to get users views.