Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Soylent Thinks It Found What Was Making People Sick: Algae

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 341 posts

Re: Soylent Thinks It Found What Was Making People Sick: Algae

#161

Post by jacobolus »

cptskippy wrote: post #133
ng12 wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That's why they shouldn't be cut any more slack than any other manufacturer. I think it's the opposite, people are unnecessarily critical of Soylent. The problem is consumers weren't aware they were allergic to algae flour. It has nothing to do with Soylent's hygiene or formulation practices.

I think the attention received is relative to the attention solicited. Soylent has been everywhere in the news talking up their revolutionary product. It's not unlike Apple's Macbook debacle. They launched a product and made a big deal about it, it had a flaw and everyone latched onto it to complain.

> Apple's Macbook debacle

Are you talking about the machines that haven’t been released yet, that nobody outside of Apple has ever tried?

Can you explain how it’s a “debacle”?

Here’s a response from Bret Victor, who apparently worked on prototypes 8 years ago: https://twitter.com/worrydream/status/793508197336178688

Re: Soylent Thinks It Found What Was Making People Sick: Algae

#162

Post by philfrasty »

amelius wrote: post #143
darawk wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can say the same thing about the food in any restaurant. I really don't understand the hate that's directed towards this product. Nobody was seriously injured, it was a relatively small number of people that got sick. Soylent is trying to do something more ambitious than other packaged food manufacturers. It's not unreasonable to expect there to be some small hiccups. If you can't tolerate that, then don't buy it…

> You can say the same thing about the food in any restaurant. But Soylent is supposed to be consumable on a daily basis, so long-term effects are important. Remember the documentary Super Size Me, which tested long term effects of food from a certain fast-food restaurant? [1] [1] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0390521

„...long-term effects...“

Slightly OT: in regard to „long-term“ effects of food/diet, I am curious what you consider long-term? Is long-term a defined timeframe? Is it 1 year, 10 years, 1000 years (multiple generations)?

Re: Soylent Thinks It Found What Was Making People Sick: Algae

#163

Post by Mtinie »

codingdave wrote: post #91
squeaky-clean wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I ask this in every thread when it's brought up and almost never get a real answer. Are there any examples of drinks with a flavorless (or very mild) option, that don't focus on imbalanced amounts of protein and body-building? I like Soylent because it's relatively cheap (if I was just going for cost effectiveness, nothing beats bulk-buying beans and rice), I don't get sick of the taste after having it 3 times in a r…

https://myvega.com/vega-one-nutritional-shake?option_Flavor=... It has flavors, but is not a "gimme protein!" formula, so it is what I consume.

Anecdotal experience about Vega that might help others. I tried Vega 4 or 6 times during one month to see if I could use it as my protein shake replacement for the whey-based product I'd been using.

Every time I had a Vega shake in the morning I experienced abdominal bloating, digestive issues, and nausea two or three hours after consuming it.

The first couple of times I wasn't sure if the Vega was the cause or if it was something else going on, but after trying it in isolation (no other food products within 8 hours, only water and the powder) I was able to consistently replicate the issues.

Something in their formulation doesn't agree with me. I'm not 100% sure what it was.

Re: Soylent Thinks It Found What Was Making People Sick: Algae

#164

Post by ghaff »

trhway wrote: post #121
hacker_9 wrote: post #5

Clearly there is a market for this 'super convenience' food/drink if people are still willing to buy this product after it made them sick. Even when their own stomach is the guinea pig. The company could do with better marketing though, reading things like this: In 2013, he raised capital to turn his full attention to Soylent, which he named after the science fiction novel that served as the basis for the 1973 movie…

> The company could do with better marketing better?! you've just said yourself: >people are still willing to buy this product after it made them sick. you can't do better than that :) They basically hit the same "hi-tech/advanced/futuristic" bullseye in the heads of today youngsters that Campbell soup and other highly processed food industry hit 50+ years ago.

I find Soylent's marketing eye-rollingly annoying for all kinds of reasons--especially its targeting of (and success with) a Silicon Valley demographic that's too busy to eat because they're writing a social network for penguins that's going to change the world.

At the same time, let's not pretend that every meal is a leisurely repast shared with friends or that there isn't a massive industry to deliver pre-made food and prepared food at various levels going back decades. To the degree that Soylent replaces a Big Mac or a frozen burrito it's hard for me to see it as the end of civilization. Even if I also think that people should make the time to cook a relaxed meal at least some of the time.

Re: Soylent Thinks It Found What Was Making People Sick: Algae

#165

Post by nommm-nommm »

_23sd wrote: post #120
DanBC wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I have wished for such a meal replacer all my life. why aren't any of the very many other products that have existed for years been good enough?

What products would those be? Most meal replacement shakes marketed in the US are for people trying to lose weight, so they have far less calories and fat than a meal for people just trying to eat healthy.

Jevity?

Re: Soylent Thinks It Found What Was Making People Sick: Algae

#166

Post by Balgair »

Oh boy, another Soylent discussion.

Here is what all the off topic discussion will be:

Person1) "What is so hard to understand sheeple?! Soylent isn't for all your meals, just ones that you are too busy to eat. Also, it has all the vitamins you need not like all those thousand other bars/drinks!?"

Person2) "I'd rather move to the bottom of the ocean than buy Soylent. Why would you ever skip a meal?! Capitalism is the root of all evil including making me miss my dinner!"

Folks, we all come at food differently, it's a very personal thing. Just because you feel this way about food, does not mean we all do. It's like people that stand or sit when they are wiping after going #2. We all coexist just fine and none of us know that there is really any other way and are astounded when other people are different.

Chill, people, chill, it's food.

Re: Soylent Thinks It Found What Was Making People Sick: Algae

#167

Post by jacobolus »

DanBC wrote: post #93
67726e wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many products claim they're for everyone? Why not go after one-size fits all baseball caps too? It's just another round of marketing bullshit.

They made a specific, clear, medical claim: this product is okay for everyone, even those with allergies. They then made the product with known allergens. How is that okay?

Their product pages all clearly state that they are vegan, lactose-free, nut-free, but are not organic, not certified kosher, not GMO free, not allergen free (“contains soy & gluten”), not gluten-free (e.g. “less than 20 parts-per-million (ppm) of gluten but does not meet the Celiac Support Association gluten-free guidelines.”), and have a list of all ingredients.

Your complaint seems to be about one sentence on the marketing page for their original pre-order campaign in 2013 (as seen at the internet archive here https://web.archive.org/web/20140506133101/https://campaign....), which was based on a different formulation of their product without the current problematic ingredient, and didn’t list any detailed nutrition information at all, instead explicitly directing curious readers to their other web pages / blog posts for more information (including a full list of ingredients with the note that the product contained soy).

I don’t quite understand why you think their new product version in 2016 should be considered to retroactively make their (no longer existent) page from 2013 false advertising.

Re: Soylent Thinks It Found What Was Making People Sick: Algae

#168

Post by scdlbx »

_23sd wrote: post #144
catenthusiast wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you heard of Ensure?

Yeah, I even wrote a paragraph bashing it (or at least, people claiming that it's a product of serious medical research) last time we had a Soylent thread. It has a lot more sugar and carbs than most people would want to eat regularly, which makes it more suitable as a temporary food replacement or a snack than a lunch staple.

Try something like Glucerna. It's like Ensure but for diabetics, so it has a lot less sugar and carbs.

Re: Soylent Thinks It Found What Was Making People Sick: Algae

#169

Post by miranda_rights »

amelius wrote: post #143
darawk wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can say the same thing about the food in any restaurant. I really don't understand the hate that's directed towards this product. Nobody was seriously injured, it was a relatively small number of people that got sick. Soylent is trying to do something more ambitious than other packaged food manufacturers. It's not unreasonable to expect there to be some small hiccups. If you can't tolerate that, then don't buy it…

> You can say the same thing about the food in any restaurant. But Soylent is supposed to be consumable on a daily basis, so long-term effects are important. Remember the documentary Super Size Me, which tested long term effects of food from a certain fast-food restaurant? [1] [1] http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0390521

I'm not sure I'd consider 30 days to be "long term", but I do agree that long-term effects are important. I think deficiencies in important micronutrients take longer to have detectable effects and are harder to debug, in general though. It's why I am intrigued by Soylent but try to get my nutrients by just having a variety of foods in my diet.

Re: Soylent Thinks It Found What Was Making People Sick: Algae

#170

Post by DanBC »

artimaeis wrote: post #150
DanBC wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People are complex and sometimes have allergies or reactions to foods that they don't even know or understand. That's fine, but Soylent marketed the product as being suitable for everyone even if they had allergies. Soylent's words: > "For anyone that struggles with allergies, heartburn, acid reflux or digestion, has trouble controlling weight or cholesterol, or simply doesn't have the means to eat well, soylent is…

Link to Soylent's words there? I'm not finding anything with a Google search.

It was made during their crowdfunding. They used those words to raise money.

https://web.archive.org/web/20130816104921/https://campaign....

> What if you never had to worry about food again?

> For many people, on many occasions, food is a hassle, especially when trying to eat well. Suppose we had a default meal that was the nutritional equivalent of water: cheap, healthy, convenient and ubiquitous. Soylent will be personalized for different body types and customizable based on individual goals. It allows one to enjoy the health benefits of a well balanced diet with less effort and cost.

> For anyone who struggles with allergies, heartburn, acid reflux or digestion, has trouble controlling weight or cholesterol, or simply doesn't have the means to eat well, soylent is for you.

> Soylent frees you from the time and money spent shopping, cooking and cleaning, puts you in excellent health, and vastly reduces your environmental impact by eliminating much of the waste and harm coming from agriculture, livestock, and food-related trash.

> There are problems with the current state of food

> 50% of the food produced globally is wasted, and food makes for the largest component of municipal garbage. If not for this waste there would be plenty of food to adequately nourish everyone alive. 2 million people are killed annually by smoke inhalation from indoor cooking stoves alone. 70% of americans are overweight or obese. 1 in 7 people globally are malnourished, and 1 in 3 in the developing world suffer from deficiency. Countless others are living hand-to-mouth, subsistence farming, hindering economic development. Even in the developed world, agriculture is the most dangerous industry to work in by occupational injuries and illnesses, and obesity is on the rise.

> By taking years to spoil, dramatically reducing cost, and easing transportation and storage, soylent could have a dramatic effect on hunger and malnutrition. Proceeds from the purchase of soylent enable us to work with aid partners and reduce hunger and environmental impact both in the United States and the developing world.

> Think about what the future of food looks like. Imagine everyone having a customized, efficient, nutritious default diet and the freedom to eat for leisure as desired. It is a bright, healthy future indeed.

I have problems with a bunch of these claims ("takes years to spoil"), but Soylent do appear to have pulled back from some of them. And donating money to the WFP is always good.

Post reply on HN