Author: admin

Cost: $4.99 for 12 fluid ounces

Calories: 210 calories

Protein: 16 grams

Added sugar: 7 grams

The taste of the Remedy Organics Cacao Essentials Protein Shake was what I could best describe as healthy.

The date-sweetened drink is packed with plant-based ingredients, including adaptogens like ashwagandha and maca root powders as well as tapioca prebiotic powder.

But taste-wise, they weren’t as sweet-treat-like as some of the other shakes. It tasted strongly of cacao, but it felt a little chalky, and seemed saltier than it did sweet.

While I liked the drink’s ingredients, I really disliked the taste. If you’re looking for a plant-based, adaptogen-full drink that will also help you reach protein goals, this could be an option for you — but don’t go into it expecting a sweet chocolate milk type of drink.

Flavor rating: 1/10

Overall rating: 6/10

Cost: $3.99 for 14 fluid ounces

Calories: 170 calories

Protein: 25 grams

Added sugar: 0 grams

When I first poured the Muscle Milk Zero Sugar shake, I noticed just how dark and thick it was. Tasting it, I found that it was way too sweet for my taste. This, combined with the thick texture, made for a pretty interesting drinking experience — I had to wash down the shake with some water to follow up the sweet taste left in my mouth.

Although I couldn’t finish drinking the small taste I’d poured myself, it also had the fewest calories and grams of sugar in the ranking, the highest fiber, and I felt like the protein payoff was great, which made the overly sweet taste feel more like a trade-off.

If you’re trying to get half of your daily protein in as few calories as possible while also watching out for sugar content, this drink might be good to have on your radar … but you’ll have to remind yourself of the nutrients in every sip.

Do it for the protein, bro.

Flavor rating: 3/10

Overall rating: 6/10

Cost: $4.99 for 12 fluid ounces

Calories: 190 calories

Protein: 18 grams

Added sugar: 4 grams

Compared to some of the other protein drinks, I found Koia’s Cacao Bean protein shake to be very thin and light in color when I first poured it.

Its flavor, as the name would indicate, is very cacao-bean forward. To me, it tasted exactly like cacao nibs, which can lean more nutty and earthy than chocolate-y.

In a statement to Business Insider, Koia said the Cacao Bean protein shake is “crafted to highlight cacao’s naturally bold, slightly bitter profile rather than masking it with excessive sweetness or artificial flavoring,” resulting in a flavor that “may be less sweet than traditional protein shakes.”

The almond-based, monk-fruit-sweetened drink, which isn’t too sweet and packs in plant-based ingredients like rice, pea, and chickpea protein and a prebiotic blend, wasn’t one of my favorites for taste, although it was fairly competitive with the other options in terms of nutrients.

Flavor rating: 4/10

Overall rating: 5/10

Cost: $2.00 for 11 fluid ounces

Calories: 350 calories

Protein: 12 grams

Added sugar: 39 grams

I found the flavor of the chocolate Sport Shake to be one of the most enjoyable in the ranking, and it reminded me a lot of plain chocolate milk — it was very, very sweet. I also liked that it didn’t taste too much like dairy, something that bothered me with other drinks in the lineup.

However, the drink’s sweet and tasty flavor was overshadowed by its ultra-high added sugar content of 39 grams, or more than 9 teaspoons.

While the drink has some fiber in it, coming in with 3 grams, and it was the cheapest of the ranking, I couldn’t justify that much sugar. I will probably not reach for this again.

Flavor rating: 8/10

Overall rating: 1/10

Cost: $2.50 for 14 fluid ounces

Calories: 250 calories

Protein: 14 grams

Added sugar: 18 grams

I was shocked when I learned that Nesquik’s classic chocolate milk could be considered a nutritional drink.

At 14 grams of protein, as advertised on the bottle, the drink has more grams of protein per serving than other drinks labeled as protein drinks.

Tasting it was just as nostalgic as expected. Compared to some of the other drinks, however, I noticed it had a stronger dairy taste and was very sweet, with a total of 18 grams of added sugar.

I also noticed that the bottle recommended a portion of half a bottle, probably due to the drink’s high sugar content, which would also result in half the protein intake overall.

I probably wouldn’t have reached for this in adulthood if not to compare it here, and I probably won’t really reach for it again.

Flavor rating: 6/10

Overall rating: 4/10

Cost: $5.99 for 14 fluid ounces

Calories: 220 calories

Protein: 40 grams

Added sugar: 0 grams

Like its low-sugar version, the Muscle Milk Pro looked dark and thick. Taste-wise, the drink was sweeter than chocolate-y, and I didn’t love the flavor.

Although the drink packs an impressive 40 grams of protein in 14 ounces and 220 calories, has the highest ratio of protein to fluid ounces, and also has the highest fiber content in the list, the taste was one of my least favorites, and I had to wash it down with some water after tasting, as it had such a lingering flavor on the tongue.

When considering the nutritional aspects of the drink, however, I felt like the taste was a solid trade-off for one of the most protein-efficient drinks in the ranking, having the second-highest amount of grams of protein in a single bottle.

But if you’re strictly going for the ultra-high-protein option, the Fairlife Core Power Elite — which comes later in this ranking — might be a better bet for flavor.

Flavor rating: 4/10

Overall rating: 7/10

Cost: $4.49 for 12 fluid ounces

Calories: 200 calories

Protein: 32 grams

Added sugar: 0 grams

When I first poured the OWYN — which stands for Only What You Need — Pro Elite Protein Shake, it looked much thicker than some of the other drinks in the ranking.

It tasted vastly different from the others, too. The ingredients gave some clues as to why: The main ingredients — water, pea protein, pumpkin protein, and flaxseed oil — were completely different from the other shakes.

The plant-based, dairy-, soy-, and wheat-free drink, which contains 3 grams of prebiotics, uses monk fruit extract to sweeten its cocoa-heavy flavor, and also has a greens blend that includes spinach, kale, and broccoli.

I figured that the odd flavor I experienced was perhaps due to some of its most health-forward ingredients, like the greens blend.

In a statement to Business Insider, OWYN said that the exclusion of artificial sweeteners and sugar alcohols in the formula “sometimes means a more natural, earthy taste profile,” when compared to their regular shake, which uses a blend of organic cane sugar and monk fruit.

Ultimately, I wasn’t a fan of the taste and probably wouldn’t reach for this drink again, although nutrition-wise, it was a solid ultra-high-protein plant-based option.

Flavor rating: 5/10

Overall rating: 6/10

Cost: $5.99 for 14 fluid ounces

Calories: 230 calories

Protein: 42 grams

Added sugar: 0 grams

One of three protein shakes in Fairlife’s line, the Core Power Elite shake was a bit thinner than many of the other drinks I tried.

It was less sweet than Fairlife’s regular chocolate milk, which I didn’t mind. However, it had a much stronger dairy taste — I don’t love the taste of dairy milk, so this worked against the drink for me.

Still, its insane amount of protein — as much as a whole chicken breast — earned it extra points in my ranking.

This drink was something I didn’t mind drinking, even if I wouldn’t usually go for it. Even as a non-gym-bro, I would probably reach for this drink if I were trying to get well over half of my needed protein for the day in a single serving.

Flavor rating: 5/10

Overall rating: 8/10

Cost: $2.50 for 11 fluid ounces

Calories: 330 calories

Protein: 15 grams

Added sugar: 29 grams

When I poured the chocolate Nutrament, I noticed its consistency was among the runniest in the ranking.

The drink, the second-cheapest drink in the lineup, tasted just like chocolate milk, although it was still a bit too sweet for me.

I also noticed it had a long ingredients list with many unfamiliar terms, but on closer inspection, some seemed to be added vitamins and minerals. The drink also had the second-highest added sugar content at 29 grams.

The high sugar and comparatively low protein knocked this drink down a few points for me, and although I enjoyed it, I probably wouldn’t reach for this.

Flavor Rating: 9/10

Overall Rating: 5/10

Cost: $3.29 for 14 fluid ounces

Calories: 250 calories

Protein: 23 grams

The second in Fairlife’s line, its chocolate ultra-filtered milk, was another nostalgic offering.

It was very sweet, but if I were craving chocolate milk, this is definitely the option I would choose.

While it’s not marketed as a protein drink, it contains 23 grams in a 14-ounce bottle and has the second-lowest cost per gram of protein.

Flavor rating: 7/10

Overall rating: 7/10

Cost: $18.99 for a six-pack of 8-ounce bottles (or $3.17 for 8 fluid ounces)

Calories: 360 calories

Protein: 14 grams

Added sugar: 18 grams

While some of the drinks in this lineup are aimed at the ultra-protein-efficient crowd and others are more directed at children, the Boost nutritional drink line is marketed toward adults with specific nutritional needs. The Boost Plus product, specifically, is aimed at adults hoping to gain or maintain weight.

Taste-wise, this was one of my favorites. The sweet and rich drink was very chocolatey, and it felt like a nice sweet treat.

With the product’s purpose in mind, the drink’s higher calories didn’t bother me, and I was pleased to see its nutrition label flooded with vitamins and minerals.

Out of many of the options, this is one I could see myself reaching for solely based on its taste, even though I wish it had a higher protein content.

Flavor rating: 9/10

Overall rating: 7/10

Cost: $3.00 for 14 fluid ounces

Calories: 290 calories

Protein: 23 grams

Added sugar: 18 grams

When I poured this drink, I was surprised by how runny it was compared to some of the other options. I really enjoyed the taste, even if it wasn’t exactly the same as the nostalgic chocolate-milk flavor of Nesquik’s classic option.

In fact, I actually liked this one more, even before factoring in the added nutritional value. It was adequately sweet, not too dairy-tasting, and it didn’t have the aftertaste that had put me off the classic option.

With 23 grams of protein, this drink could compete with some of its more nutrition-leaning counterparts. At $3 for a bottle, it was also one of the cheapest options with the highest protein content.

I could totally see myself reaching for this.

Flavor rating: 8/10

Overall rating: 8/10

Cost: $4.29 for 12 fluid ounces

Calories: 180 calories

Protein: 20 grams

Added sugar: 4 grams

Compared to the higher-protein drink on OWYN’s line, the regular protein shake wasn’t as dark or as thick when I poured it.

While the OWYN Pro Elite had a taste I didn’t like, the OWYN Dark Chocolate Protein Shake had a simpler flavor that reminded me of chocolate milk.

It was very tasty and chocolatey, and I liked that it also had 3 grams of fiber.

Overall, this felt like a very solid option that I could see myself reaching for. It was also my favorite plant-based drink.

Flavor rating: 8/10

Overall rating: 10/10

Cost: $4.99 for 14 fluid ounces

Calories: 170 calories

Protein: 26 grams

Added sugar: 0 grams

While this drink didn’t exactly feel like a dessert or chocolate milk since it leaned more chocolatey and cocoa-tasting than sweet — and it did have somewhat of a dairy taste — I still found it very enjoyable and a very nice pick for both taste and protein.

Tied with the Muscle Milk Zero Sugar for the lowest calories in the ranking, I found the Fairlife Core Power shake much more enjoyable and even winning by a gram in the protein category.

Overall, this drink had the best balance between flavor and nutrition, and I can see myself reaching for it whenever I need a quick post-workout pick-me-up or just want to get a significant portion of my daily protein on the go.

Flavor rating: 8/10

Overall rating: 10/10

Zermatt, Lauterbrunnen, Interlaken, and Lucerne are popular, jaw-dropping locations, but they’re not the only spots worth visiting in Switzerland.

Instead of only seeing the few places on every tourist’s list, consider branching out to smaller, lesser-visited ones for at least a day trip. Fortunately, many are easily accessible by public transportation out of some of the area’s main hubs.

For example, close to Interlaken are the mountain villages of Frutigen, Kandersteg, and Adelboden, which offer gorgeous alpine views combined with fewer crowds and more authentic experiences.

In Switzerland, dining out can seem expensive — in part because the cost of production, labor, and relevant service charges are typically already included in the price of the meal.

Personally, I find the prices easier to stomach when I remember you’re often paying for high-quality, regional fare, and restaurant staff here are typically earning a fair wage.

And although tipping servers 15% to 20% of a bill is standard practice in places like the US, it’s not the norm here. If you enjoyed the meal and the service, it’s customary to round up a few francs or leave a tip between 5% and 10%.

Switzerland is a popular travel destination throughout the year, and its major attractions can fill up quickly — especially seats on our world-famous scenic routes.

If you plan on riding the Glacier Express or Bernina Express, book your train tickets as far in advance as possible.

However, don’t fret if you realize it’s too late to book a seat on a scenic route. You’ll be just fine on our “regular” trains, which tend to run faster, not book up as quickly, and still offer beautiful views.

When traveling by train, it’s important to double-check your ticket class and location. (And, if you have a paper ticket, get it validated.)

Signage indicating first or second class can be found both outside and inside each car. Oftentimes, the class is also noted on the headrests of the seats themselves.

Ticketing agents on board will not hesitate to issue an on-the-spot fine for tourists seated in the wrong class. In addition to a fine of about 100 francs, you’ll also have to pay the difference in price for the ticket.

Also, pay attention to where your seats are before entering each car so you won’t have to lug an oversized suitcase through the entire train.

Switzerland is one of the smallest countries in Europe, at about 16,000 square miles. However, I’ve seen tourists mistakenly assume they can just zip through and see everything it has to offer in just three or four days.

For example, Zurich may seem close to Geneva on a map, but they are actually about three hours apart by train. Sure, you could also opt for a one-hour flight — but my point is that trying to see so many cities in a short period won’t allow you to truly get a feel for each.

Travel is about experiencing a place, not just visiting to check it off a bucket list. If you’ve only got a week in Switzerland, I suggest you limit yourself to exploring two or three cities instead of trying to cram six or seven single-night stays in new places into your itinerary.

Switzerland is composed of 26 cantons, and each of these administrative regions has its own distinct culture, government, and history. They also don’t all speak the same languages.

Although you’ll find English speakers throughout the country — especially in popular tourist areas — Switzerland actually has four official languages: German, French, Italian, and Romansh.

It’s helpful to learn a few basic greetings in those major languages and ensure you use them in the appropriate region.

Also, it’s handy to become familiar with some of the commonly used symbols — especially when it comes to trash cans.

The Swiss are conscientious recyclers, so take a beat to look up the symbols printed on the bins before tossing something in them if you are confused. Your mindfulness will be appreciated

Leavitt’s parents owned an ice cream stand where she worked during the summers.

She attended Central Catholic High School in Lawrence, Massachusetts.

“Having a Catholic education really formed who I am,” she said on an episode of The Catholic Current podcast in 2021.

She continued, “It taught me discipline, it brought me closer in my own relationship with God, and it also taught me the importance of public service and giving back to your community.”

Leavitt was admitted to Saint Anselm College on a softball scholarship and played as an outfielder on the women’s softball team, the Saint Anselm Hawks.

Leavitt’s extra-curricular activities included founding the Saint Anselm Broadcasting Club, volunteering at the New Hampshire Institute of Politics, and writing articles for the college newspaper, The Saint Anselm Crier, defending Trump’s travel ban and criticizing the “liberal media.” She also spent a semester studying abroad at John Cabot University in Rome.

In 2018, she interned at the White House during Trump’s first presidency as a presidential writer in the White House Office of Presidential Correspondence.

She was the first member of her family to earn an undergraduate degree.

From 2019 to 2021, Leavitt worked as an assistant press secretary, helping McEnany prepare for briefings.

Stefanik served as the House Republican Conference Chair from 2021 to 2025.

“I could no longer sit back and watch as our conservative principles — that make America the greatest country in the world and New Hampshire the best state in the union — fall under attack,” Leavitt wrote on her campaign website of her decision to run for office.

Leavitt won the Republican primary, but lost the general election to the Democratic incumbent, Rep. Chris Pappas, who is the first openly gay man to represent New Hampshire in Congress.

Leavitt held press conferences outside Manhattan Criminal Court during Trump’s hush-money trial. Trump was found guilty on all 34 felony counts, but was not sentenced with any punishment due to the US Supreme Court ruling granting presidents criminal immunity protections.

Trump maintained his innocence throughout the trial and often referred to it as a “witch hunt.”

Leavitt had a TV studio built in her home so that she could appear on television shortly after giving birth.

“I felt compelled to be present in this historic moment,” she told The Conservateur. “The president literally put his life on the line to win this election. The least I could do is get back to work quickly.”

As press secretary, Leavitt established a “new media seat” in the White House briefing room reserved for podcasters, social media influencers, and other independent content creators who, “despite being some of the most viewed news websites in the country, have not been given seats in this room,” she said at a briefing.

Leavitt was introduced to Riccio, a real-estate developer, at a campaign event by a mutual friend during her 2022 run for Congress.

They announced their engagement on Christmas in 2023 and welcomed a son, Niko, on July 10, 2024.

Leavitt and Riccio wed on January 4, 2025, days before Trump’s second inauguration. Leavitt spoke about their 32-year age gap in a February 2025 interview on The Megyn Kelly Show.

“I mean, it’s a very atypical love story, but he’s incredible,” she said of Riccio, adding, “He’s the father of my child, and he’s the best dad I could ever ask for. And he is so supportive, especially during a very chaotic period of life.”

In a November interview with Miranda Devine on the podcast “Pod Force One,” Leavitt spoke about her parents’ reaction to her “unusual” relationship with Riccio, who is older than her mother.

“It’s definitely a challenging conversation to have at first,” she said. “But then, of course, once they got to know him and saw who he is as a man and his character and how much he adores me, I think it became quite easy for them.”

On December 26, Leavitt announced that she and Riccio are expecting a baby girl in May, making her the first-ever pregnant White House press secretary.

“My husband and I are thrilled to grow our family and can’t wait to watch our son become a big brother,” she wrote in an Instagram post.