A new trend has conquered supermarket shelves. After seeing protein-rich energy bars, multivitamin drinks, and other dietary supplements in a variety of formats, shakes that promise to “replace a meal” have arrived with the intention of staying. As they advertise, they are the product our busy lives needed. “Do you give up healthy eating when you don’t have time?”, “If life doesn’t give you time, give yourself a complete meal in a bottle”, “Crazy days? Your nutritional ally” are some of the claims these brands use to remind you that you don’t have time to rest, cook, or much less to share a table. The solution they offer is a drink that contains all your nutritional needs to drink on your way to work.
This format is not as new as it seems. Years ago, brands like HerbaLife popularized shakes for weight loss that promised to replace a full meal and allowed you to control the calories you ate in one meal. Today, the discourse is somewhat different, but the effect they can have on our relationship with food is just as conflicted.
Nutritionist Sofía Giaquinta (AND-01121), specialized in Eating Disorders (ED), warns how the normalization of this type of product affects the way we understand food, cooking, and the very act of eating. “In people who have a poor relationship with food or predisposing factors, it normalizes control over food. When you cook or go to a restaurant, you don’t know exactly what nutrients and calories your dish has, however, this product tells you it contains ‘the necessary amount of nutrients’. What happens if I’m hungrier? How do I then face the uncertainty of eating a plate of paella?”. The relationship between the growth of this type of solution and the rise of GLP-1 medications should not be dismissed. In fact, one of the first campaigns by the brand Alpro to promote its Meal to Go product stated: “GLP-1 took away your appetite, not the need to nourish yourself.” And then, “1 bottle = 1 meal.”
“And if we talk about the general population, an important gastronomic and cultural part is lost in that intake.” The existence of these drinks and their advertising promotion in commercials, social media videos, or bus shelters also normalizes lack of time and hyperproductivity. You don’t need to stop to eat, cook, or socialize during your midday break. Saving time prevails over enjoyment, flavor, and rest. “Choosing one of these bottles instantly eliminates the cultural aspect that cooking entails,” says Sofía. And it is interesting to consider everything we lose when we stop cooking and opt for ready-made solutions.
Primarily, stopping cooking means losing autonomy. The ability we have to think about and organize meals gradually diminishes as we rely on precooked food or shakes that fit in your bag. Tasks that seem normal, like making a shopping list, setting aside some time during the week to shop where you want, designing a menu, choosing ingredients, and preparing them, become increasingly difficult for new generations. And that lack of knowledge generates dependence. Because faced with clumsiness, fear of not knowing how something will turn out, or the inability to prepare a quick dinner with four things from the fridge, we resort to the most immediate solution. This inevitably leads to a decrease in our ability to choose wisely and an increasing dependence on large multinational food companies.
Another effect is that we stop understanding food as a meal, and see only nutrients. When we sit in front of a plate of stew soup or lentils with rice, we establish a relationship with those we are going to eat with. We connect with our appetite, what we like and don’t like, and relate what we are eating to a social context. However, a shake alienates. It doesn’t matter if you are in Spain or Greenland, if it’s morning or afternoon, if you are having breakfast or lunch, the experience is the same in every case.
By stating that a bottle contains a complete meal, people’s needs are also standardized. “It’s a whole issue regarding the relationship with food, the perception of flavors, and the perception of quantities,” Giaquinta states. “If you only have a shake for a meal and you’ve been told that’s enough, you can’t consider if it was enough for you, if you’re full, or if you’re still hungry, because they don’t give space for that reflection.” Not all people need the same nutritional intake, nor does each person need the same depending on the time of year. Climate, physical effort, the moment of the menstrual cycle, or even the stress you experience influence what we need at the end of the day. Also, claiming to contain all the nutrients you need in one bottle does not mean they are good nutritional options. “Many of them contain sweeteners, which will always have an impact on digestion.”
Beyond whether or not the option to drink your meal exists and that for some people it may be a punctual solution to a busy day, what we may need to do is a reflection exercise to consider what kind of life we want to promote. One in which saving time is the predominant value or one that prioritizes pause, care, and food culture.
