I didn't need to read much of that thread to see that it's just the MILK that 'can' benefit. It also says that it's as effective as a post-workout recovery drink - like what, lucozade? Lucozade and most others are rammed with your RDA of sugar and is absolutely no good for you anyway.
Chocolate milkshakes / milkshakes are NOT an ideal source of nutrition, sorry. Yes, milk contains good nutrition. It also contains a fair amount of sugar on its own. A milkshake contains tons more sugar as does any 'low-fat' product - hence my point about UK food advice being retarded. Everyone is happy to buy and seeks out low-fat cereals, low fat drinks, low fat snacks, without realizing that the fat content is replaced with copious amounts of sugar which is almost always MORE HARMFUL to you than fats.
Haven't you wondered why the most fit, well-built gym-goers drink protein shakes without milk (just water) pre and post-workout? Because the milk adds empty calories from the sugar that your body (by and large) can do nothing with. Though I'm not that anal, milk is milk and the sugar content in milk is never going to put me off it personally.
Anybody arguing in favour of drinking chocolate milkshakes as a viable supplement to cycling are being silly. A good, fibrous carb (whole wheat pasta / bread / porridge oats / oatbran) win every time. I'm just about to have a home-made shake of semi-skimmed milk, oatbran, peanut butter and protein powder - packed full of energy (fats, fibre, carbs), to get you through a good cycle or workout.