GoodSwap Get notified
Muscle Milk Protein Shake
Photo: Open Food Facts contributors (CC BY-SA)

Beverages

Muscle Milk Protein Shake

14 oz

Poor out of 100 Medium confidence
  • Ultra-processed
  • Contains non-nutritive sweeteners
  • Contains emulsifiers studied for gut effects
  • Contains seed oils
  • Contains artificial flavors
Get GoodSwap

Why it scores 38

Muscle Milk Protein Shake scores 38 out of 100 (Poor) under GoodSwap’s published rules. What moved the score most:

  1. Ultra-processed (NOVA 4): Classified NOVA 4: made with industrial ingredients and additives. Strong
  2. 7 kinds of ultra-processing markers: Industrial additive classes found: bulking agent, emulsifier, flavoring, industrial protein, non-nutritive sweetener, sequestrant and thickener, stabilizer or gelling agent. Emerging
  3. Cellulose gum (carboxymethylcellulose): In a small randomized feeding trial, carboxymethylcellulose modestly increased abdominal discomfort and reduced gut microbiota diversity; in mice it promoted low-grade inflammation. Strong

Every line of the math is on The Receipt below, with its evidence tier and sources.

Better protein shakes

The same kind of product, at least 10 points higher, sold in the US. Never paid placements.

The Receipt

Protein Shake

START100

Ingredients

  • Cellulose gum (carboxymethylcellulose)
    Strong In a small randomized feeding trial, carboxymethylcellulose modestly increased abdominal discomfort and reduced gut microbiota diversity; in mice it promoted low-grade inflammation. [1][2][3][4]
  • Carrageenan
    Strong In the NutriNet-Santé cohort, higher carrageenan intake was associated with a higher risk of type 2 diabetes; cause and effect is not established. [5][2][6][7]
  • Sucralose
    Strong In a 2022 randomized study, sucralose and saccharin altered the gut microbiome and impaired glucose responses in some people; a 2023 lab study raised questions about its by-product sucralose-6-acetate. [8][9][10][11][12]
  • Acesulfame potassium (Ace-K)
    Strong In the NutriNet-Santé cohort, acesulfame-K intake was associated with higher cancer risk; cause and effect is not established. [13][14][11][12]
  • Milk protein concentrate / isolate
    Info An ingredient typical of ultra-processed foods (NOVA group 4). [15]
  • Caseinate
    Info An ingredient typical of ultra-processed foods (NOVA group 4). [15]
  • Soluble corn fiber (resistant dextrin)
    Info An additive class typical of ultra-processed foods (NOVA group 4). [15]
  • Sunflower oil
    Emerging High in omega-6 linoleic acid. [16][17][18][19]
  • Microcrystalline cellulose
    Info An ingredient class typical of ultra-processed foods (NOVA group 4). [15]
  • Natural and artificial flavors
    Strong The label does not disclose which flavoring substances are used. [20][12]
  • Potassium phosphate
    Strong EFSA (2019) set a group ADI for phosphates of 40 mg/kg body weight (as phosphorus) and noted that infants, toddlers and children may exceed it. [21]
  • Sunflower lecithin
    Info An additive class typical of ultra-processed foods (NOVA group 4). [15]
  • Sodium hexametaphosphate
    Strong EFSA (2019) set a group ADI for phosphates of 40 mg/kg body weight (as phosphorus) and noted that infants, toddlers and children may exceed it. [21]
subtotal−33

Processing

  • Ultra-processed (NOVA 4)
    Strong Classified NOVA 4: made with industrial ingredients and additives. [15]
  • 7 kinds of ultra-processing markers
    Emerging Industrial additive classes found: bulking agent, emulsifier, flavoring, industrial protein, non-nutritive sweetener, sequestrant and thickener, stabilizer or gelling agent. [15]
subtotal−26

Nutrition per 100 ml

  • Energy 39 kcal / 100 ml
    Info Energy-dense for its volume. [12]
subtotal−3
TOTAL 38Poor

100 − 62 = 38

GTIN 00876063002028 · 2026-05-05

score v1.3.0 · kb 2026.10.11

Medium confidence

Same product, same score. Every time.

Nutrition per 100 ml

Energy39 kcal
Fat1.1 g
Saturated fat0.2 g
Trans fat0 g
Carbohydrates1.9 g
Sugars0 g
Added sugars0 g
Fiber1.4 g
Protein6 g
Salt0.1 g

Serving: 1 bottle (414 ml)

Ingredients

High Moderate Not recognized Tap an ingredient for its evidence and rules.
Label text, as published

WATER, MILK PROTEIN ISOLATE, CALCIUM CASEINATE (MILK DERIVATIVE), CONTAINS LESS THAN 2% OF SODIUM CASEINATE (MILK DERIVATIVE), SOLUBLE CORN FIBER, HIGH OLEIC SUNFLOWER OIL, CELLULOSE GEL, NATURAL AND ARTIFICIAL FLAVOR, TRIPOTASSIUM PHOSPHATE, MIXED TRIGLYCERIDES, POTASSIUM CHLORIDE, SUNFLOWER LECITHIN, POTASSIUM PHOSPHATE, CELLULOSE GUM, SODIUM POLYPHOSPHATES, CARRAGEENAN, SALT, SUCRALOSE, ACESULFAME POTASSIUM, ASCORBIC ACID (VITAMIN C), SODIUM CITRATE, VITAMIN A PALMITATE, VITAMIN D3.

Allergens and diets

Contains: Milk

  • Not vegan
  • Palm-oil-free

Always check the package: recipes change.

More from Muscle Milk

Sources

  1. Randomized Controlled-Feeding Study of Dietary Emulsifier Carboxymethylcellulose Reveals Detrimental Impacts on the Gut Microbiota and Metabolome

    Gastroenterology · March 2022 · Peer-reviewed

    “Relative to control subjects, CMC consumption modestly increased postprandial abdominal discomfort and perturbed gut microbiota composition in a way that reduced its diversity.”

    doi.org

  2. Dietary emulsifiers impact the mouse gut microbiota promoting colitis and metabolic syndrome

    Nature · Mar 5, 2015 · Peer-reviewed

    “carboxymethylcellulose and polysorbate-80, induced low-grade inflammation and obesity/metabolic syndrome in wild-type hosts and promoted robust colitis in mice predisposed to this disorder.”

    doi.org

  3. Food additive emulsifiers and risk of cardiovascular disease in the NutriNet-Santé cohort: prospective cohort study

    BMJ · Sep 6, 2023 · Peer-reviewed

    “This study found positive associations between risk of CVD and intake of five individual and two groups of food additive emulsifiers widely used in industrial foods.”

    doi.org

  4. Re-evaluation of celluloses E 460(i), E 460(ii), E 461, E 462, E 463, E 464, E 465, E 466, E 468 and E 469 as food additives

    European Food Safety Authority · Jan 16, 2018 · Agency assessment

    “The Panel concluded that there was no need for a numerical ADI and that there would be no safety concern at the reported uses and use levels for the unmodified and modified celluloses”

    doi.org

  5. Food additive emulsifiers and the risk of type 2 diabetes: analysis of data from the NutriNet-Santé prospective cohort study

    The Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology · May 2024 · Peer-reviewed

    “We found direct associations between the risk of type 2 diabetes and exposures to various food additive emulsifiers widely used in industrial foods, in a large prospective cohort of French adults.”

    doi.org

  6. Re-evaluation of carrageenan (E 407) and processed Eucheuma seaweed (E 407a) as food additives

    European Food Safety Authority · Apr 26, 2018 · Agency assessment

    “However, the Panel noted uncertainties as regards the chemistry, the exposure assessment and biological and toxicological data.”

    doi.org

  7. Agents Classified by the IARC Monographs, Volumes 1–142 (List of Classifications)

    International Agency for Research on Cancer (WHO) · IARC

    monographs.iarc.who.int

  8. Personalized microbiome-driven effects of non-nutritive sweeteners on human glucose tolerance

    Cell · September 2022 · Peer-reviewed

    “As groups, each administered NNS distinctly altered stool and oral microbiome and plasma metabolome, whereas saccharin and sucralose significantly impaired glycemic responses.”

    doi.org

  9. Toxicological and pharmacokinetic properties of sucralose-6-acetate and its parent sucralose: in vitro screening assays

    Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, Part B · Aug 18, 2023 · Peer-reviewed

    “Sucralose-6-acetate significantly increased the expression of genes associated with inflammation, oxidative stress, and cancer”

    doi.org

  10. EFSA finds sucralose safe when used as currently authorised; cannot confirm safety of extending its use

    European Food Safety Authority · Feb 17, 2026 · Agency assessment

    “EFSA’s experts concluded that the sweetener sucralose (E 955) continues to be safe for consumers for its currently authorised uses as a food additive.”

    efsa.europa.eu

  11. WHO advises not to use non-sugar sweeteners for weight control in newly released guideline

    World Health Organization · May 15, 2023 · Agency assessment

    “The recommendation is based on the findings of a systematic review of the available evidence which suggests that use of NSS does not confer any long-term benefit in reducing body fat in adults or children.”

    who.int

  12. Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2025–2030

    U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and U.S. Department of Agriculture · January 2026 · Regulator

    “Limit foods and beverages that include artificial flavors, petroleum-based dyes, artificial preservatives, and low-calorie non-nutritive sweeteners.”

    cdn.realfood.gov

  13. Artificial sweeteners and cancer risk: Results from the NutriNet-Santé population-based cohort study

    PLOS Medicine · Mar 24, 2022 · Peer-reviewed

    “In this large cohort study, artificial sweeteners (especially aspartame and acesulfame-K), which are used in many food and beverage brands worldwide, were associated with increased cancer risk.”

    doi.org

  14. Re-evaluation of acesulfame K (E 950) as food additive (plain language summary)

    European Food Safety Authority · Apr 30, 2025 · Agency assessment

    “The acceptable daily intake (ADI) considered safe for all population groups was set at 15 mg/kg body weight (bw) per day.”

    efsa.europa.eu

  15. Ultra-processed foods: what they are and how to identify them

    Public Health Nutrition · April 2019 · Peer-reviewed

    doi.org

  16. Re-evaluation of the traditional diet-heart hypothesis: analysis of recovered data from Minnesota Coronary Experiment (1968-73)

    BMJ · Apr 12, 2016 · Peer-reviewed

    “replacement of saturated fat in the diet with linoleic acid effectively lowers serum cholesterol but does not support the hypothesis that this translates to a lower risk of death from coronary heart disease or all causes.”

    doi.org

  17. Use of dietary linoleic acid for secondary prevention of coronary heart disease and death: evaluation of recovered data from the Sydney Diet Heart Study and updated meta-analysis

    BMJ · Feb 4, 2013 · Peer-reviewed

    doi.org

  18. Dietary Linoleic Acid and Risk of Coronary Heart Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Prospective Cohort Studies

    Circulation · Oct 28, 2014 · Peer-reviewed

    “These data provide support for current recommendations to replace saturated fat with polyunsaturated fat for primary prevention of CHD.”

    doi.org

  19. Dietary Fats and Cardiovascular Disease: A Presidential Advisory From the American Heart Association

    Circulation · Jul 18, 2017 · Peer-reviewed

    doi.org

  20. 21 CFR 101.22 Foods; labeling of spices, flavorings, colorings and chemical preservatives

    Electronic Code of Federal Regulations (eCFR), U.S. Office of the Federal Register · Dec 19, 2016 · Law

    “whose significant function in food is flavoring rather than nutritional.”

    ecfr.gov

  21. EFSA issues new advice on phosphates

    European Food Safety Authority · Jun 12, 2019 · Agency assessment

    “We estimated that dietary exposure to phosphates may exceed the new ADI for infants, toddlers and children with average consumption of phosphates in their diet.”

    efsa.europa.eu

  22. Ultra-processed food exposure and adverse health outcomes: umbrella review of epidemiological meta-analyses

    BMJ · Feb 28, 2024 · Peer-reviewed

    “Greater exposure to ultra-processed food was associated with a higher risk of adverse health outcomes, especially cardiometabolic, common mental disorder, and mortality outcomes.”

    doi.org

  23. Ultra-Processed Diets Cause Excess Calorie Intake and Weight Gain: An Inpatient Randomized Controlled Trial of Ad Libitum Food Intake

    Cell Metabolism · July 2019 · Peer-reviewed

    doi.org