Firstly, I report that the .pdf for the vegan version has an error. If you look at the “neutral” flavor label on page 2, you see the ingredients tab is for… cappuccino instead of neutral (and it contains whey even if these are labels for vegan products). I don’t know if there are other errors:
Secondly, the standard diet is built around 2000 calories, not 2100. That was ■■■■■■■’s choice to provide a little extra, but it’s entirely subjective.
If loosing 100 calories each bag is the price to pay to keep current prices and improving the recipe, then I’d be all for it. Though it would be nice if they opened a bit the process and discussed more with the community what could be considered an improvement.
Jimmyjoy has some weak spots. Mainly too many carbs due to maltodextrin, and a probable too high GI as a result. Protein is also already quite high, and there’s not enough fat. So in my opinion an improvement could be reducing maltodextrin/carbs overall, change the ratio within carbs by replacing at least SOME maltodextrin with isomaltulose, then lower the amount of soy/protein (just 15-20g total, nothing crazy), and replace what’s missing in those carbs and protein by adding some healthy fats instead.
That would produce a better macro profile overall, and lowering soy protein might also mitigate some excesses in the micros as well. Also, by giving a second look at the fats and increasing them, they’d also have the possibility of improving the omega3/6 ratio.
(the slower absorption of carbs due to reduced maltodextrin/addition of isomaltulose, plus the increase of good fats would also likely compensate the “filling” aspect due to the decrease of protein)
Then remove added fluoride that is completely pointless. And maybe push up some of those vitamins and other micros that are known to be too low in the guidelines, like vitamin D, calcium and potassium (for example).
That’s something I’d consider an “improvement”, but looking at the changes for example for the new chocolate caramel I’m not sure that’s a good direction (protein and fibre pushed to insane levels, but at least it seems the label shows isomaltulose now, so that’s good).
I just wish there was more of an open conversation about where the product is going, or the risk is that the, much delayed, upcoming changes might even not be good ones (at least subjectively or for the knowledge I have).