Jimmy Joy forum

Disappointment in the recent lowering of protein content


We are confident that this is the most healthy product on the current market. This formula has been in development for quite some time so we did a lot of tests with our Jimmy Joy Test club :slight_smile:

We follow the latest scientific research so if something new comes up we will of course adjust our recipe.


the World health organization recommends 10-15% protein. The regular line is supposed to be for 'everyday peopl’e and not for athletes. For our most active plenny shakers we have the Active line.

What exactly don’t you like about the new macro split? i’d love to hear :slight_smile: New macro split: 65% carbs/18% protein/17% fats. The macro nutrient split is formulated according to the latest scientific research.


When we start brainstorming about new formulas or products we always put health on the first spot.

in the past, we had the sport formula but it was not really that much different from the original formula. We looked at scientific research instead of bro-science. For our active customers we made the Active line (more flavors will be launched ASAP). 135g protein per day is more than enough for muscle growth and recovery.


Our goal is to offer plenny at a competitive price and i think we are not doing too shabby of a job :slight_smile: at €1.04 per 400kcal meal we are still one of the most affordable complete shakes out there.


We look at 2000kcal per day on average. 400kcal is easier to split up in 5 meals.

All products aim to provide 400kcal per meal.


Created an account just now, solely to echo the complaint over the lowered protein content. The removal of whey protein from the ingredients list is very disappointing. I only recently became a customer (purchased a large order with the opening of the new US site) and as of this change will no longer be a customer. I look forward to the re-production of a whey-based formula, but will not be a customer until that date.


Yeah, I like that you have the active line, with a reasonable protein level, it’s great and all, and banana is a solid flavour. Glad to hear new flavours will launch soon (strawberry and vanilla hopefully included).
May I ask though, please can you provide details of how much creatine is in 100g of Plenny Active. While I trust it is minimal considering you guys think things out, creatine can have complications/side effects in uncontrolled doses and if mixed with NSAIDs. As you can’t know how much Plenny Active people are consuming it could be good to know for self regulation.


Wanted to order again but I was surprised by the new formula.

Just a message to echo the complaints over the lowered protein content, higher carbes and suger ratio’s.


I do a little gym and I eat 1800 calories a day, but with the new formula the proteins are too few …
i don’t like the banana taste so I discarded the active formula, so, sadly, I just postponed my subscription and ordered huel to try it after more than 3 years of loyalty.


I’m not happy with the lower protein level but I respect the plan to differentiate between the regular and the active version. I’m not an expert in the nutritional field but isn’t the biological value of the protein also something to keep in mind?

Oats have a BV of 60 while for whey its about 110. Removing whey in favor for oats and keeping the protein level the same would still reduce the amount of protein the body can actually put to good use. Right?

No matter how you spin it, for active people this new formula is worse than the old one. And if you really did plan to have active people buy the active formula then it’s not the best idea to limit them to just one flavor. You’ve been promising new flavors for the active version for quite some time.


Hmm… It’s pretty shitty that I would have to do it, but can’t I just had a little whey protein when I mix the drinks?


I made my first order in August and I’ve been using the Plenny shake for several weeks now and I really like it. I might be a boring person but I like to read different scientific studies in my spare time, it stuck with me since university. Several people more knowledgeable than me have already pointed out how the new protein content is too low or on the border of being too low and I agree.

With the new formula, I will not be placing a new order and as a friend of mine recently introduced me to JimmyJoy and the entire concept, it will not be hard to switch to Huel. To be honest, I didn’t even know that Huel exists before the new formula was published and everyone on Reddit mentioned Huel as their new choice.

I would pay more for the old formula with whey protein. Going vegan should be a choice and in certain (minor) aspects, protein from vegan sources (necessary amino acids) isn’t as good. I want to eat healthy and eating a limited amount of protein from non-vegan sources is an integral part of it.


Going from a whey-based formula to an all-vegan lineup was an awful decision. I could deal with having just the one flavor because this is just a once or twice daily food for me (I drank plain Soylent for years), but I specifically switched to plenny shake because it had a better protein profile. Losing that as an option, even as the “active” option, means losing me as a customer. And they only recently acquired me as a customer, so it’s extra frustrating but also an easy decision.


With all this outrage, I really hope that they bring back a “legacy edition”. I would be happy to pay more for a better product. I know your goal is to produce full nutrition at a low cost. But sometimes you have to sacrifice cost in order to create the best in full nutrition.

Please consider resurrecting the old formula with a higher protein. Until then, I’m sad to say, that I’m going to have to start shopping your competitors. I thought I had come onto a company, after some research, that I had hoped to trust to get my nutrition for years to come.

It’s sad and I think a bit of a betrayal. You have not given us much notice to look for alternatives.


Technically Huel is a vegan product and therefore it does not contain any whey protein. Their protein sources are pea protein, oats, brown rice protein and flaxeed.

That said, I would not say their a.a. profile is incomplete or lacking. I actually think is pretty strong and rounded up due to them using different sources for the blend. E.g. pea protein is low in methionine, but rice protein can balance it.

So that said if you want to look for whey you would have to look elsewhere (Queal, Runtime (EU)).

But Huel does offer a good Jimmyjoy alternative, although a bit more expensive.


Absolutely, but with all the choices on the market you really don’t have to. Huels formula has been better from the get go, but the taste is awful compared to the penny shake IMHO.


What’s the new aminoacid profile of the active product @karel/@nino? I noticed that in the previous vegan version you used both soy, rice and hemp proteins, but in the new formula only soy. Why reduce sources of protein? Thanks.


I also made an account to express my disappointment in the new formula. I placed an order earlier in the week without realizing that the had changed the formula. Just ordered some of the old formula they have on sale, but after that Jimmy Joy will see no more of my business. I fel that the WHO citation felt very condescending, expecting us to believe that cutting a fair share of protein from the formula is anything else but a way of cutting costs. And paying more than I did before for the active formula? No thank you.


Hi @Zranz,

The current Active formula provides a well-rounded amino acid profile. Soy is not the only source of protein. Every ingredient also delivers its fair share of protein.

Amino acid per bag Active

  • Histidine 4717 mg
  • Isoleucine 8461mg
  • Leucine 14690mg
  • Lycine 12101mg
  • Methionine and cystine 5519mg
  • Phenylalanine and Tyrosine 16149mg
  • Threonine 7594mg
  • Tryptophan 15221mg
  • Valine 9107mg


Sorry to hear you feel this way but i can guarantee you we did not cut the protein because we wanted to save a few bucks. The new formula is actually more expensive to produce.

We quote the WHO because we follow their scientific research. We try not to be condescending.