back to milk

I've been using almond milk with my SlimFast and Soylent every morning. (These days, for breakfast, it's 460 ml of liquid and only one scoop of formula instead of two. This saves me 100 calories and allows me to eat more at lunch.) But I've found that while almond milk works okay with SlimFast, it's horrible with Soylent. So at the risk of adding calories (because low-fat milk has more calories than almond milk does), I'm switching to low-fat milk for breakfast. 

Now, low-fat milk isn't the same as skim: if I recall correctly, low-fat milk is at around 2%, which is fairly standard for US milk, while skim milk has well under 1% fat. This sounds good to most people stuck in the old way of thinking, but from a keto/Atkins perspective, skim is no good for you. The idea behind those diets is to jack up your dietary fat (it's been found that there's no connection between most dietary fats and body fat: it's the carbs that make you fat, so with fettuccine Alfredo, the problem isn't the sauce, it's the pasta), so you're actually better off consuming heavy cream rather than whole or skim milk, believe it or not. That said, I'm on the Newcastle Diet, which is calorie-restrictive, so I have to watch my calories. 

Which brings us back to skim milk. Skim milk has more calories than almond milk, but it's less calorie-packed than whole milk. That said, at least it tastes like milk. Almond milk's fake taste isn't bothersome until you add in the Soylent, which really brings out the artificial nature of almond milk. I'd almost rather have soy milk, but that, too, is packed with calories and carbs. (Overall, soy milk is not as healthy for you as you might think.) So, for the moment at least, low-fat milk it is. I might have to cut back a little at lunch, but I'd rather do that than suffer through hell for the next seven-and-a-half weeks.