Soylent

Questions on how we spend our money and our time - consumer goods and services, home and vehicle, leisure and recreational activities
User avatar
SSSS
Posts: 1893
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2010 11:50 am

Re: Soylent

Post by SSSS »

Alex Frakt wrote:I had a roommate in college who said that he wished he had a flap on his stomach he could just shove generic food into occasionally and be done with it. I think I'll send him an e-mail and see if he's switched to soylent. I have to say this attitutde mystifies me because I consider eating good food to be one of life's great pleasures. I'm not voluntarily switching to food paste no matter the inefficiencies of old-fashioned (bricks and mortar?) food.
Why do you assume Soylent is not pleasant to drink (possibly even more pleasant than your current diet)? I love my DIY blend (flavored with cinnamon, xylitol, cayenne, and either vanilla, chocolate, or peanut butter depending on which protein powder I'm using), and the official blend is supposed to be even better (albeit out of my budget range). My blend is centered around corn flour (masa) and whey protein, which surprisingly go very well together. The taste isn't quite up to par with restaurant food (possibly correctable once I experiment with more flavorings), but it's vastly superior to at-home food.
111
Posts: 211
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 5:20 am

Re: Soylent

Post by 111 »

Protagonist, you said "food is more fun" and asked "why not just eat food?"

I, for one, have a problem that the foods that I like aren't good for me. I've tried multiple times to have a healthier diet, but I just don't like most healthy foods. I don't find them fun at all. For the most part, I'd rather have nothing at all rather than those foods that are typically considered healthy. If the taste isn't so bad that I won't drink it, something like soylent would be great for me. I think I would have a much better shot at success if I could find something super simple like "Drink one of these shakes every X hours."
Alex Frakt
Founder
Posts: 11093
Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 1:06 pm
Location: Chicago
Contact:

Re: Soylent

Post by Alex Frakt »

moneyman11 wrote:
Alex Frakt wrote:
moneyman11 wrote:
protagonist wrote:
And what is the other argument? I'm at a loss. I'm not here to argue, nor am I trying to be difficult, and I apologize if I came off as snarky. Not my intent. I just don't get it, and I am trying to understand the appeal.
Rapid, compact delivery of dense nutrition for Emergencies, disasters, famines...
These already exist: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therapeuti ... eutic_Food.
Of course, but research and development of something better continues ... that's how we progress.

How much have you read about Soylent and technologies like it, Alex?

To compare it to something like "Ensure" is pretty laughable.
You brought up RUTFs (emergency foods), not me. Soylent has a very different set of requirements than emergency foods. The primary issue with soylent is that it needs to be nutritionally complete. RUTFs do not, but they do need to be calorie dense, palatable to children, extremely inexpensive, shelf stable without refrigeration, require no end-user preparation nor the addition of water (which is likely contaminated in an emergency situation). A real RUTF is something like the peanut-based Plumpy'Nut, here's a representative newpaper article on it: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 83650.html

Soylent may be a solution for certain (mostly First World) problems, but it's not for "Emergencies, disasters, famines" as you posited.
protagonist
Posts: 6689
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 12:47 pm

Re: Soylent

Post by protagonist »

111 wrote:Protagonist, you said "food is more fun" and asked "why not just eat food?"

I, for one, have a problem that the foods that I like aren't good for me. I've tried multiple times to have a healthier diet, but I just don't like most healthy foods. I don't find them fun at all. For the most part, I'd rather have nothing at all rather than those foods that are typically considered healthy. If the taste isn't so bad that I won't drink it, something like soylent would be great for me. I think I would have a much better shot at success if I could find something super simple like "Drink one of these shakes every X hours."
Maybe. I just wonder if soylent is really healthy, just because it contains all the known building blocks with no additives or preservatives. There is no reason to assume that our bodies are constructed to survive and metabolize better on this artificial concoction of presumed perfection (by 2014 standards of knowledge), even over junk food, and it would take decades to amass the scientific evidence to even begin to confirm that they are. At this point it is a leap of faith.
Last edited by protagonist on Tue May 13, 2014 1:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Alex Frakt
Founder
Posts: 11093
Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 1:06 pm
Location: Chicago
Contact:

Re: Soylent

Post by Alex Frakt »

SSSS wrote:
Alex Frakt wrote:I had a roommate in college who said that he wished he had a flap on his stomach he could just shove generic food into occasionally and be done with it. I think I'll send him an e-mail and see if he's switched to soylent. I have to say this attitutde mystifies me because I consider eating good food to be one of life's great pleasures. I'm not voluntarily switching to food paste no matter the inefficiencies of old-fashioned (bricks and mortar?) food.
Why do you assume Soylent is not pleasant to drink (possibly even more pleasant than your current diet)?
Much of the pleasure in eating comes from the variety of textures, smells and flavors. My 8 month old daughter's primary food source is nutritionally complete, low cost, and (apparently) tastes great, yet even she shows great joy at being introduced to new flavors and textures of food.
The taste isn't quite up to par with restaurant food (possibly correctable once I experiment with more flavorings), but it's vastly superior to at-home food.
I'm going to have to disagree with your axiom that at-home food is necessarily vastly inferior to restaurant food.
protagonist
Posts: 6689
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 12:47 pm

Re: Soylent

Post by protagonist »

Alex Frakt wrote: You brought up RUTFs (emergency foods), not me. Soylent has a very different set of requirements than emergency foods. The primary issue with soylent is that it needs to be nutritionally complete. RUTFs do not, but they do need to be calorie dense, palatable to children, extremely inexpensive, shelf stable without refrigeration, require no end-user preparation nor the addition of water (which is likely contaminated in an emergency situation). A real RUTF is something like the peanut-based Plumpy'Nut, here's a representative newpaper article on it: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world ... 83650.html

Soylent may be a solution for certain (mostly First World) problems, but it's not for "Emergencies, disasters, famines" as you posited.
Very good point.
moneyman11
Posts: 593
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 10:09 am

Re: Soylent

Post by moneyman11 »

Alex Frakt wrote:You brought up RUTFs (emergency foods), not me.
No, a poster asked for other justifications for something like Soylent, and I provided a few.
Alex Frakt wrote:but it's not for "Emergencies, disasters, famines" as you posited.
Of course it's not yet, but as I said, it is a new technology. It will progress. At some point it could become a cheaper and more nutritious alternative to things like Plumpy'Nut.
Last edited by moneyman11 on Tue May 13, 2014 1:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
moneyman11
Posts: 593
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 10:09 am

Re: Soylent

Post by moneyman11 »

It's pretty clear there are people that think this new technology is an unnecessary, undesirable, expensive product only attractive to the rich and lazy.

However all new technologies start out that way. Including the very ones we're all using to discuss it on this forum.
lululu
Posts: 1378
Joined: Thu Apr 10, 2014 4:23 pm

Re: Soylent

Post by lululu »

linenfort wrote:
Does anyone know the origin of the "entire meal in one pill" meme?
That paragraph was a fun read, Nisi, but this is a powder. Therefore, you're setting up a Soy man argument. :wink:
(Truth be told, there is very little soy in soylent. I'm not sure about lentils).
protagonist wrote:If you can afford a laptop to do this, why not just eat food?
Probably a rhetorical question, but just in case: You haven't read up on soylent. Easier for you to read the New Yorker article or the official site than for me to explain.
According to wikipedia, the creator thinks regular food is boring and takes time to make. Perhaps he has no taste buds, just my thought.
Topic Author
linenfort
Posts: 2241
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2007 9:22 am
Location: #96151D

Re: Soylent

Post by linenfort »

SSSS wrote:[ I love my DIY blend (flavored with cinnamon, xylitol, cayenne, and either vanilla, chocolate, or peanut butter depending on which protein powder I'm using), and the official blend is supposed to be even better (albeit out of my budget range). My blend is centered around corn flour (masa) and whey protein, which surprisingly go very well together. The taste isn't quite up to par with restaurant food (possibly correctable once I experiment with more flavorings), but it's vastly superior to at-home food.
Is this blend posted on the forums? Same username?
I love whey. I discovered it because I have a nephew who is a very picky eater and apparently his whole baseball team eats whey blended with tasty stuff.
It'll be several more weeks before I get to try the official Soylent.
lululu wrote:According to wikipedia, the creator thinks regular food is boring
He's probably not the best cook. :happy

I haven't seen a good interaction about food between SSSS and Alex Frakt since the "Chicken & Waffles" potato chip thread.
http://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtop ... 4#p1621048
SSSS wrote:
Alex Frakt wrote:BTW, for the most part, both artificial and natural flavorings come in barrels from chemical factories

I see nothing wrong so far.
in New Jersey.
:| :shock: :x
:D
Last edited by linenfort on Tue May 13, 2014 1:33 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Alex Frakt
Founder
Posts: 11093
Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 1:06 pm
Location: Chicago
Contact:

Re: Soylent

Post by Alex Frakt »

moneyman11 wrote:It's pretty clear there are people that think this new technology is an unnecessary, undesirable, expensive product only attractive to the rich and lazy.
I don't believe the posts so far warrant this conclusion.
moneyman11
Posts: 593
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 10:09 am

Re: Soylent

Post by moneyman11 »

Alex Frakt wrote:
moneyman11 wrote:It's pretty clear there are people that think this new technology is an unnecessary, undesirable, expensive product only attractive to the rich and lazy.
I don't believe the posts so far warrant this conclusion.
Is there anything about Soylent (or food in general) that you've posted in this thread so far that doesn't fall into one of the categories I detailed above?:

"I have to say this attitutde mystifies me because I consider eating good food to be one of life's great pleasures." (Undesirable)

"These already exist" (Unnecessary)

"Soylent may be a solution for certain (mostly First World) problems" (unnecessary ... expensive ... for "rich first worlders")

"Much of the pleasure in eating comes from the variety of textures, smells and flavors." (Undesirable)
User avatar
SSSS
Posts: 1893
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2010 11:50 am

Re: Soylent

Post by SSSS »

linenfort wrote:Is this blend posted on the forums? Same username?
I love whey. I discovered it because I have a nephew who is a very picky eater and apparently his whole baseball team eats whey blended with tasty stuff.
It'll be several more weeks before I get to try the official Soylent.
I don't have my recipe set to public, but it's a variation of the most popular recipe, People Chow:

http://diy.soylent.me/recipes/people-ch ... perfection

Things I do differently from that recipe:

1. I use flavored Body Fortress whey protein, most frequently associated with Walmart (available in stores), but also available on Amazon and elsewhere. The only flavor I've disliked is the "Cookies and Cream", and I haven't tried their strawberry flavor (I like strawberries, but the thought of strawberry protein powder doesn't seem appealing), but the vanilla, chocolate, and peanut butter flavors have been good. Soon I'll probably switch to bulk unflavored whey such as from NovusLife (25 pounds of whey concentrate for $159.95) and flavor separately since it's quite a bit cheaper.

2. I use multivitamins instead of the vitamin powder mix and calcium/magnesium. I may reevaluate when my existing multivitamins run out, but I'm sticking with what I already have for now. I'm also taking a choline pill instead of powder since the pills were cheaper last time I was shopping for choline.

3. I'm using potassium chloride instead of potassium citrate, since I already had a huge stock of it.

4. I'm flavoring with 6 grams of cinnamon per day (also good for a few grams of extra fiber), 8 grams of xylitol per day, and 1 gram of cayenne (or more for a spicier taste).

5. The fiber RDA in that nutrient profile is incorrect, so I'm adding wheat dextrin (Benefiber or generic equivalent such as Optifiber) in order to meet the correct RDA.

6. Sometimes I replace some of the masa with oat flour, but I've stopped since I haven't been able to find a cheap source of oat flour. At some point I might consider buying a blender to grind oats with.
MoneyMythsSolved
Posts: 49
Joined: Thu May 03, 2012 5:14 pm

Re: Soylent

Post by MoneyMythsSolved »

First backers that have received their orders have reported Soylent has already started to change their lives in a positive way. It could be confirmation bias, who knows.

With that said, some have done detailed testing including:
- Comprehensive blood panels
- Body weight and body fat percentage
- Cognitive performance
- Resting heart rate
- Galvanic skin response
- Sleep

.... and everything that you'd want to improve, improved - cholesterol, resting heart rate, triglycerides, etc. They're also reporting they feel incredibly full, but not bloated. They have more energy, and more free time. The early problems have been fixed and with the 1.0 launch, it seems like a solid product.

My wife and I have always been of the opinion that we waste far too much time shopping for food, cooking food, and eating food. We'd rather be more active. If we had an option to down a quick drink and keep going, we would.

We were attracted to Soylent due not only to the convenience, but because we were constantly looking for things that didn't have sugar as its number one ingredient like most things at the grocery store. Soylent has lots of protein, lots of fiber, 2g of sugar per day, no cholesterol. I'm not a fitness expert, as evidenced by my growing scotch belly - but here's the nutrition label:

http://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0421/5 ... .jpg?27548
(Click on the image to zoom in)

We've each ordered a 1 month supply that we expect to arrive in a few weeks.

If I never post again, then obviously it didn't work out. Give my scotch to Jack. :sharebeer
Alex Frakt
Founder
Posts: 11093
Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 1:06 pm
Location: Chicago
Contact:

Re: Soylent

Post by Alex Frakt »

moneyman11 wrote:
Alex Frakt wrote:
moneyman11 wrote:It's pretty clear there are people that think this new technology is an unnecessary, undesirable, expensive product only attractive to the rich and lazy.
I don't believe the posts so far warrant this conclusion.
Is there anything about Soylent (or food in general) that you've posted in this thread so far that doesn't fall into one of the categories I detailed above?:

"I have to say this attitutde mystifies me because I consider eating good food to be one of life's great pleasures." (Undesirable)

"These already exist" (Unnecessary)

"Soylent may be a solution for certain (mostly First World) problems" (unnecessary ... expensive ... for "rich first worlders")

"Much of the pleasure in eating comes from the variety of textures, smells and flavors." (Undesirable)
You seem determined to make a mountain out of a molehill. The only thing that I actually think that matches your list is that that a single dish diet is undesirable to me. I don't claim that is universally true. "Unnecessary" only applied to your claim that it's a step towards an emergency food. Besides, all individual foods other than breast milk are unnecessary, that's no reason to be for or against any particular food. I never addressed cost other than to say it's too expensive for an RUTF, something that is not going to change because of its requirement that it be nutritionally complete and thus require relatively expensive vitamin and mineral additives and I never addressed rich and lazy. FWIW, my actual thought is that Soylent is technically interesting which is reason enough to pursue it.
protagonist
Posts: 6689
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 12:47 pm

Re: Soylent

Post by protagonist »

Moneyman makes a good argument for research and development of inexpensive, healthy food substitutes like Soylent. I don't think anybody is disagreeing with that.

Currently it is not inexpensive (no more than a healthy, frozen, quick microwaveable meal from, say, Trader Joe's). And it is not proven to be healthy. Remember when everybody was spending their money on vitamin E and beta-carotene and other anti-oxidant supplements, heavily recommended by much of the medical community, based on theory and early research? All natural substances in our normal diet. Recent research has shown that the supplements may actually result in INCREASED mortality, and the medical establishment has stopped recommending this, reversing its position after what was probably a couple of decades. You can read about that in this New York Times article http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/09/opini ... .html?_r=0 , as well as multiple scientific/professional sources.

"In a study published in The New England Journal of Medicine in 1994, 29,000 Finnish men, all smokers, had been given daily vitamin E, beta carotene, both or a placebo. The study found that those who had taken beta carotene for five to eight years were more likely to die from lung cancer or heart disease.

Two years later the same journal published another study on vitamin supplements. In it, 18,000 people who were at an increased risk of lung cancer because of asbestos exposure or smoking received a combination of vitamin A and beta carotene, or a placebo. Investigators stopped the study when they found that the risk of death from lung cancer for those who took the vitamins was 46 percent higher.

Then, in 2004, a review of 14 randomized trials for the Cochrane Database found that the supplemental vitamins A, C, E and beta carotene, and a mineral, selenium, taken to prevent intestinal cancers, actually increased mortality.

Another review, published in 2005 in the Annals of Internal Medicine, found that in 19 trials of nearly 136,000 people, supplemental vitamin E increased mortality. Also that year, a study of people with vascular disease or diabetes found that vitamin E increased the risk of heart failure. And in 2011, a study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association tied vitamin E supplements to an increased risk of prostate cancer.

Finally, last year, a Cochrane review found that “beta carotene and vitamin E seem to increase mortality, and so may higher doses of vitamin A.”

Is soylent different? He claims it is balanced in proper proportions, but there may be synergistic effects in food that are lacking in soylent, or something critical missing, or ??? I have no idea what the verdict will be on Reinhardt's experimental cocktail in 2030 or 2040. If it is delicious, it would do no harm to enjoy once in awhile so long as you don't overdo it and make it your staple diet without knowing its effects. Like most things.
Last edited by protagonist on Tue May 13, 2014 2:25 pm, edited 4 times in total.
moneyman11
Posts: 593
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 10:09 am

Re: Soylent

Post by moneyman11 »

Alex Frakt wrote:You seem determined to make a mountain out of a molehill.
I thought I was just responding to your comments, which were, in turn, a response to mine. I.e. a discussion.

Alex Frakt wrote:my actual thought is that Soylent is technically interesting which is reason enough to pursue it.
On that we agree.
Alex Frakt
Founder
Posts: 11093
Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 1:06 pm
Location: Chicago
Contact:

Re: Soylent

Post by Alex Frakt »

MoneyMythsSolved wrote: The early problems have been fixed and with the 1.0 launch, it seems like a solid product.
Even granted this is open source*, betting your life on release 1.0 is more risk than I'd be willing to take. But thanks for being the guinea pig.

*If this were from Microsoft, I'd wait for version 3.1.
hiddensee
Posts: 419
Joined: Fri Feb 07, 2014 4:17 am

Re: Soylent

Post by hiddensee »

You know you could always have lived on nutritionally balanced sludge if you wanted?

Blend porridge oats with milk, and mash up a vitamin tablet in there if you really care about living past 80.

All necessarily calories for <2EUR/day. Paying someone megabucks to blend it for you and added some flavourings is not very Bogglish behaviour.
moneyman11
Posts: 593
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 10:09 am

Re: Soylent

Post by moneyman11 »

protagonist wrote: If it is delicious, it would do no harm to enjoy once in awhile so long as you don't overdo it and make it your staple diet.

Have you come across anyone, anywhere - other than in the strawmen arguments of those repulsed by it - arguing that Soylent (or something like it) should be used in any other way? If you do, I will join you in calling them nuts ... as likely would the developers of Soylent itself, as evidenced in many of the videos and interviews they've done.

Perhaps in the research and development of the product it was used in what could be characterized as an "excessive" way (though that is a highly subjective threshold). But that is the way all research and development is done.
User avatar
SSSS
Posts: 1893
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2010 11:50 am

Re: Soylent

Post by SSSS »

MoneyMythsSolved wrote:They're also reporting they feel incredibly full, but not bloated.
I can confirm this for my DIY mix. Slamming down 500 calories (zero sugar, high fiber) and a liter of water in less than 30 seconds is incredibly satisfying and staves off hunger for hours.

I haven't tried the official product yet. The only thing I don't like about the final recipe is that they reduced the oat flour & increased the maltodextrin in order to smoothen the texture and mask the taste of the fish oil. Oat flour actually ended up as the third ingredient (after maltodextrin and rice protein) when it was originally the first. I consider the flour (be it corn, oat, or whatever) to be the core of the recipe and prefer to have it as the largest ingredient. I've never tried maltodextrin, so maybe I'm judging it unfairly, but it just seems a little weird to have it as the largest ingredient.
hiddensee
Posts: 419
Joined: Fri Feb 07, 2014 4:17 am

Re: Soylent

Post by hiddensee »

moneyman11 wrote:
protagonist wrote: If it is delicious, it would do no harm to enjoy once in awhile so long as you don't overdo it and make it your staple diet.

Have you come across anyone, anywhere - other than in the strawmen arguments of those repulsed by it - arguing that Soylent (or something like it) should be used in any other way? If you do, I will join you in calling them nuts ... as likely would the developers of Soylent itself, as evidenced in many of the videos and interviews they've done.

Perhaps in the research and development of the product it was used in what could be characterized as an "excessive" way (though that is a highly subjective threshold). But that is the way all research and development is done.
Soylent is marketed as food replacement.

Whether anyone would actually want to do this is one question but that it should be possible is quite another and, if it is not possible, they are advertising their product fraudulently.

Bottom line though is there's nothing new here. Put porridge oats, milk, a vitamin tablet and maybe some whey protein in a blender and you have Soylent. It's all "real" food, no real research and development involved.

Through the power of crowdfunding thousands of twits have paid this man 3.5 megabucks to work out how to operate a blender for them.
moneyman11
Posts: 593
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2008 10:09 am

Re: Soylent

Post by moneyman11 »

hiddensee wrote: Bottom line though is there's nothing new here. Put porridge oats, milk, a vitamin tablet and maybe some whey protein in a blender and you have Soylent. It's all "real" food, no real research and development involved.

Through the power of crowdfunding thousands of twits have paid this man 3.5 megabucks to work out how to operate a blender for them.

[OT comment removed by admin LadyGeek]
Topic Author
linenfort
Posts: 2241
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2007 9:22 am
Location: #96151D

Re: Soylent

Post by linenfort »

protagonist wrote: He claims it is balanced in proper proportions, but there may be synergistic effects in food that are lacking in soylent, or something critical missing,
That's definitely something I think about. (Including people) animals and plants have evolved together for so long.
User avatar
SSSS
Posts: 1893
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2010 11:50 am

Re: Soylent

Post by SSSS »

hiddensee wrote:You know you could always have lived on nutritionally balanced sludge if you wanted?
How can you call it "sludge" if you haven't even tried it? Is it really that hard to believe that it's superior to most other foods in terms of taste?
Blend porridge oats with milk, and mash up a vitamin tablet in there if you really care about living past 80.

All necessarily calories for <2EUR/day. Paying someone megabucks to blend it for you and added some flavourings is not very Bogglish behaviour.
"Megabucks" may be applicable to the official Soylent product, but DIY can be done for $2 per day, and gives you much more flexibility and customization options.

I think you've grossly underestimated the amount of work required to make a decent recipe. Go on http://diy.soylent.me/ and try it for yourself. You have 40+ different nutrients you have to try to balance, keeping them within a certain (sometimes rather narrow) range. I tried inputting your suggestion & came out with a dangerous Manganese overdose, and deficiencies in several nutrients (some nutrients are not typically included in multivitamins, or are not included in sufficient amounts). Also, I think your proposed recipe would be grossly inferior to most DIY recipes in terms of taste, texture, and hunger mitigation (not to mention that milk & oats are both known to cause gastrointestonal distress in many people). The price of your proposed recipe also came out more expensive than many DIY recipes including mine.

FYI on what your proposed recipe would cause:
Manganese overdose can cause impotency and nervous system disorders similar to Parkinson's disease. It can also lead to "manganese madness", characterized by irritability, hallucinations, and violent acts. Excessive levels of manganese tend to deplete copper and iron.
Look at some of the popular DIY recipes; you can't pull it off with just a few ingredients. 6-8 ingredients is about the bare minimum you'll be able to get away with.
Last edited by SSSS on Tue May 13, 2014 3:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Topic Author
linenfort
Posts: 2241
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2007 9:22 am
Location: #96151D

Re: Soylent

Post by linenfort »

Re the official Soylent, $85÷21 meals is not bad, by the way. $4.04 is less than I would spend on a meal at Shake Shack (burger & fries) so I will definitely try it for lunch once in a while to see if it makes me feel full and whether or not I can easily digest it.

EDIT: I should note, though, that a week's worth of meals was only $65 the first time I peeked, not $85.
Last edited by linenfort on Tue May 13, 2014 3:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
diasurfer
Posts: 1845
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 8:33 pm
Location: miami-dade

Re: Soylent

Post by diasurfer »

linenfort wrote:
protagonist wrote: He claims it is balanced in proper proportions, but there may be synergistic effects in food that are lacking in soylent, or something critical missing,
That's definitely something I think about. (Including people) animals and plants have evolved together for so long.
This was my first reaction. As noted in an earlier post, a lot of recent studies have shown that taking vitamins has no positive effect on health. Perhaps the whole is greater than the sum of the parts? Interesting to see how this develops.
billern
Posts: 1079
Joined: Fri Dec 07, 2007 4:08 pm

Re: Soylent

Post by billern »

linenfort wrote:Re the official Soylent, $85÷21 meals is not bad, by the way. $4.04 is less than I would spend on a meal at Shake Shack (burger & fries) so I will definitely try it for lunch once in a while to see if it makes me feel full and whether or not I can easily digest it.

EDIT: I should note, though, that a week's worth of meals was only $65 the first time I peeked, not $85.
The price hike relates to the bottle and other hardware they ship with a new order. They include some gear so that customer don't have to go out and buy it separately. I believe the re-order price is either $65 or slightly higher.
Runner01
Posts: 291
Joined: Thu Dec 12, 2013 7:14 pm

Re: Soylent

Post by Runner01 »

The only thing I would worry about in subsisting solely on Soylent is the huge lack of knowledge that we still have about human nutrition. We are constantly learning new things and revising past information. Choline is a good example of a vitamin that previously was consider non-essential. It turns out however that dietary choline is essential and a deficiency takes quite a while to manifest itself in the body. However even though we now know that dietary choline is essential we really don't know how much people should be consuming on a daily basis (a study did find that less than 50 mg caused decreased liver function).
hiddensee
Posts: 419
Joined: Fri Feb 07, 2014 4:17 am

Re: Soylent

Post by hiddensee »

SSSS wrote:
hiddensee wrote:You know you could always have lived on nutritionally balanced sludge if you wanted?
How can you call it "sludge" if you haven't even tried it? Is it really that hard to believe that it's superior to most other foods in terms of taste?
I mean it not necessarily pejoratively. As a gym user I often supplement my diet with nutrient sludge drinks; I don't find the taste that bad though of course nor do I see them as a substitute for a night out at a good trattoria.
Blend porridge oats with milk, and mash up a vitamin tablet in there if you really care about living past 80.

All necessarily calories for <2EUR/day. Paying someone megabucks to blend it for you and added some flavourings is not very Bogglish behaviour.
"Megabucks" may be applicable to the official Soylent product, but DIY can be done for $2 per day, and gives you much more flexibility and customization options.
Agreed, and as I said, the bodybuilding community knew that for years.

However people did pay the Soylent person 3.5 megabucks of venture capital to develop his product.
I think you've grossly underestimated the amount of work required to make a decent recipe. Go on http://diy.soylent.me/ and try it for yourself. You have 40+ different nutrients you have to try to balance, keeping them within a certain (sometimes rather narrow) range. I tried inputting your suggestion & came out with a dangerous Manganese overdose, and deficiencies in several nutrients (some nutrients are not typically included in multivitamins, or are not included in sufficient amounts).
Let's be reasonable here, nor are most peoples' actual diets precisely balanced in trace nutrients. Nor, frankly, is there much solid evidence which of these trace nutrients are even helpful or harmful, or why, beyond very gross deficiencies or excesses of a few of them (vitamin C, cyanide). The notion that one should even try to precisely balance these things, when no one even knows the optimum, or the importance of any deviation other than that it is small, is in my view ill-founded.
FYI on what your proposed recipe would cause:
Manganese overdose can cause impotency and nervous system disorders similar to Parkinson's disease. It can also lead to "manganese madness", characterized by irritability, hallucinations, and violent acts. Excessive levels of manganese tend to deplete copper and iron.
Danger: Non-FDA approved claim.

This is what severe heavy metal poisoning causes, not eating two bowls of porridge a day.
Topic Author
linenfort
Posts: 2241
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2007 9:22 am
Location: #96151D

Re: Soylent

Post by linenfort »

billern wrote:
linenfort wrote:Re the official Soylent, $85÷21 meals is not bad, by the way. $4.04 is less than I would spend on a meal at Shake Shack <snip>

EDIT: I should note, though, that a week's worth of meals was only $65 the first time I peeked, not $85.
The price hike relates to the bottle and other hardware they ship with a new order. They include some gear so that customer don't have to go out and buy it separately. I believe the re-order price is either $65 or slightly higher.
I see! Seems like quite a markup for a bottle and scoop, but it's better than nothing.
Thanks!
catchup
Posts: 251
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2008 12:15 pm

Re: Soylent

Post by catchup »

Hello. Has anyone tried Soylent 2.0?

Seems like a good cost-efficient means of nourishment.
User avatar
whatusername?
Posts: 639
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2015 6:08 pm

Re: Soylent

Post by whatusername? »

MoneyClip wrote:Is it better with red or white wine?
With some fava beans and a nice Chianti.
User avatar
SSSS
Posts: 1893
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2010 11:50 am

Re: Soylent

Post by SSSS »

catchup wrote:Hello. Has anyone tried Soylent 2.0?

Seems like a good cost-efficient means of nourishment.
The taste is rather strange and (to me) kind of off-putting, but most people seem to really like it and I'll probably get used to it. Despite not containing any milk, it tastes quite a bit like milk plus a bit of a cereal taste. It's a lot more smooth and liquid-like compared to the powder versions, especially comparing to the weird slime texture that 1.4 had. 2.0 is not thick at all, so it's easy to slam an entire bottle down in a couple seconds.

Keep in mind that with 2.0 you'll need 5 bottles a day for 2000 calories.

1.5 is a considerably better value, especially considering the recent price drop. It's also a lot easier to add flavor when mixing an entire day in a pitcher. Unflavored 1.5 is kind of bland, not as good as 1.0-1.3, very similar to 1.4 except without 1.4's gross slime factor.

Keep in mind that 1.5 and 2.0 both have reduced fiber compared to previous versions, lower than RDA, on the premise that fiber needs are lower if most of your food is liquid. I have mixed feelings about this, but it seems to have considerably improved the flatulence situation.

I'm probably going to mostly stick with 1.5 or DIY, but I'll keep some 2.0 around for travel & other situations where the convenience of the bottles is worth the additional cost.
Topic Author
linenfort
Posts: 2241
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2007 9:22 am
Location: #96151D

Re: Soylent

Post by linenfort »

Many thanks for that update, SSSS (and for asking, catchup).

I loved the taste of 1.3, rather like slightly sweet & oaty pancake batter. I think it was 1.4 that tasted like library paste to me. I canceled because I haven't been keeping up with my subscription and therefore have too much soylent in the cupboard. Whichever version started putting the oil right in the powder instead of having us mix it in manually, that's the one I don't like the taste of.
Nicolas
Posts: 2221
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 7:41 am
Contact:

Re: Soylent

Post by Nicolas »

Edward G's last film role, what a great actor he was! Sorry, couldn't pass up a tribute.
bagle
Posts: 93
Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2011 5:59 am

Re: Soylent

Post by bagle »

Taste: "like someone wrung out a dishtowel into a glass" (Gawker)

I've heard v3 will be pre-loaded injectable to avoid the unnecessary hassle and time wasting of swallowing.
Topic Author
linenfort
Posts: 2241
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2007 9:22 am
Location: #96151D

Re: Soylent

Post by linenfort »

Would you guys mind knocking it off with the snide comments? It's already been done in previous pages, and if you really have nothing useful to say because you haven't tried it, it's better that you vent somewhere else, otherwise the thread will be overwhelmed.
Thanks.
Rodc
Posts: 13601
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 9:46 am

Re: Soylent

Post by Rodc »

Very interesting.

While (yes off topic personal information!) on a continuum from "Just give me a pill" to I am "an extreme foodie" (eat to live vs live to eat) I am over somewhere right of center (live to eat) I can see some value even for me, so thanks for posting.

I can see keeping some powered form in my desk at work for the rare day I get slammed and something quick would be useful.

As I get older, but still like to hike and climb mountains, going very light has major advantages. Something that packs small and light and does not need to be cooked is good. Of course a bag of nuts, chocolate chips, and dried cranberries works well, as do some other items. But some DYI soylent tossed into the rotation might have value.
We live a world with knowledge of the future markets has less than one significant figure. And people will still and always demand answers to three significant digits.
catchup
Posts: 251
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2008 12:15 pm

Re: Soylent

Post by catchup »

True, this thread doesn't relate specifically to investing, however soylent may be the index fund of nutrition-- a little bit of everything in a low cost form.

Some of us spend a lot more than 8-12 dollars a day consuming less than ideal nutrition, so the topic does relate to personal finance issues.

I personally don't mind the humorous comments, especially as someone who does not like cleaning out the pitchers.
Last edited by catchup on Tue Sep 22, 2015 4:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
catchup
Posts: 251
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2008 12:15 pm

Re: Soylent

Post by catchup »

Rodc,

Tastes better cold. Might not be great for hiking. Bottled form in the fridge or on the shelf seems ideal for drinking on a busy day at work, hassle free.
Topic Author
linenfort
Posts: 2241
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2007 9:22 am
Location: #96151D

Re: Soylent

Post by linenfort »

catchup wrote:I personally don't mind the humorous comments, especially as someone who does not like cleaning out the pitchers.
I love jokes, and it's good we got so many out of our systems -- ok, digestive metaphor intended -- early on.

However, while it sounds grouchy, I have to say it's kind of frustrating to see that the thread has been replied to and then to come here only to find that one more person has no idea what Soylent is, hasn't read the thread, doesn't care to, and thinks it might be fun to chime in with one more negative comment about Soylent being weird. If enough people do that, it gets hard to find the substantive posts in the crowd.

EDIT: ok, ok, who has the right to stop anyone? Only the mods. Let the jokes (and the soylent) flow freely...
Ybsybs
Posts: 549
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2014 4:28 pm

Re: Soylent

Post by Ybsybs »

It's bland but extremely convenient.

If your pre-Soylent diet included a reasonable amount of fiber, you'll get to skip the gas. If you've been eating poorly and want to improve your health through Soylent, the first shipment includes advice on gradually easing into the diet.

I consume at most two meals of Soylent a day and have no interest in changing to a 100% Soylent diet. A friend with obesity-related health problems was able to use Soylent to healthily lose weight and keep it off. He's been on a mostly Soylent diet for over a year. The simplicity of the product has been very helpful for him. I have not done any calorie restriction, and so my weight has been stable. The only real change for me is that I drink more water and have more time.

Soylent is not for everyone, but it has been very useful for me.
Rodc
Posts: 13601
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 9:46 am

Re: Soylent

Post by Rodc »

catchup wrote:Rodc,

Tastes better cold. Might not be great for hiking. Bottled form in the fridge or on the shelf seems ideal for drinking on a busy day at work, hassle free.
Thanks
We live a world with knowledge of the future markets has less than one significant figure. And people will still and always demand answers to three significant digits.
Post Reply