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

Soylent Campaign

campaign.soylent.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 608 posts

Re: Soylent Campaign

#231

Post by GuiA »

Eliezer wrote: post #194

I'm in for $65, because I've run out of patience with everyone wisely nodding caution and not trying to solve the problem themselves. Like a lot of metabolically disadvantaged people, I feel betrayed and tossed off a cliff by a society that doesn't understand and doesn't care. You want to know how desperate we are? Read this: http://www.shaman-australis.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=35... That's the next alternative…

I'm confused by what you're trying to protest/demand.

What's "metabolically disadvantaged"? Are you suffering from a medical condition for which no satisfactory diet (in the proper sense of the term) has been developed?

I'm not sure I have all the background information necessary to properly understand all the intricacies of what the OP in the link you posted is describing; but it sounds like what he's going through is complex enough that it probably won't solved by something as straightforward as Soylent (which is basically "let's take everything current science says your body needs, and mash it all together in one solution").

Any light you can shed on this for the non-initiated would be appreciated :)

Re: Soylent Campaign

#232

Post by zipppy »

tokenizer wrote: post #208
w1ntermute wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In your boundless zeal for "innovation," you have completely failed to comprehend what I was saying. Putting someone in the hospital is no laughing matter. You can't just "iterate" and "learn from your mistakes" in biotech. We're talking about life and death here, not some filtered hipster cat photos.

Not get caught up in the hate/arguing, but if they're raising money for this, and will be apparently working within the FDA guidelines, wouldn't they have strenuous testing before they release this to market?

The facility is apparently FDA-approved -- this says nothing about the product itself.

edit: I will probably try it myself as a replacement for some meals, so I hate to simply sound like another voice piling on, but it seems pretty clear to me (whether it was intentional or not) that the "FDA-approved" comment is misleading.

Re: Soylent Campaign

#233

Post by volandovengo »

DanBC wrote: post #145
volandovengo wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really?? From all the comments about this idea/execution/etc, this is what you chose to focus your attention on?!

Soylent got a fact wrong. Either they deliberately misreported something; in which case they're lying while trying to raise money. Or they made a mistake. And if they get something this simple wrong why should I trust them when they're making something that I'm supposed to be able to live on?

I was mostly commenting on the state of commenting on hackernews.

Somebody comes out with an idea to drastically transform the way that we consume food + the top comment, at the time, was about one small detail in his vid.

Is it wrong to ridicule that kind of comment?

Re: Soylent Campaign

#234

Post by Paul_D_Santana »

DanielStraight wrote: post #213
Eliezer wrote: post #194

I'm in for $65, because I've run out of patience with everyone wisely nodding caution and not trying to solve the problem themselves. Like a lot of metabolically disadvantaged people, I feel betrayed and tossed off a cliff by a society that doesn't understand and doesn't care. You want to know how desperate we are? Read this: http://www.shaman-australis.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=35... That's the next alternative…

I appreciate what you're saying, but to be fair to those criticizing, this isn't the problem Solyent is advertised as solving. The stated problem that Soylent is advertised as solving is "food is a hassle", and it is also alleged to provide benefits for health and the environment. It's also being advertised as "perfectly balanced", "automatically [putting] you at an optimal weight", and "[improving] your focus and co…

I'm more interested in seeing Soylent succeed as a benefit to people around the globe who literally cannot afford (or don't have access to) a proper healthy diet.

Re: Soylent Campaign

#235

Post by vecinu »

garry wrote: post #203
vecinu wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a very good point and very observant. I too am highly skeptical of ALL of these claims. My main gripe with Soylent (ever since I first saw it here on HN a month ago) is that they are making cooking seem like a horrible chore that nobody wants to do. Shopping is convenient because I go whenever I have time and only buy exactly what I need. At the same time, I also ensure I only buy the best ingredients I can at…

Most people would regard riding a horse as a pleasant thing to do in leisure time, but most today would also balk at the idea of having to care, feed, and maintain a horse to get to work every single day. I realize this is anathema (I love food as much as anyone else) but there are moments in my life where I'd like to code or create things rather than worry too much about my next meal.

I'm sorry but I find that a poor example.

You have to maintain a car, feed it (oil/diesel/electricity) and care for it (regular washing), otherwise it will go the 'way of the horse' ...

I agree with you on your last statement but I don't think soylent is a solution to that problem. I don't think a formula will have the nutritious benefit of a manually prepared fresh meal.

Re: Soylent Campaign

#236

Post by cwilson »

Eliezer wrote: post #229
jckt wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you mind explaining why Soylent is the solution for metabolically disadvantaged people as opposed to a "traditionally balanced diet"?

Because we tried your traditionally balanced diet, the high-protein diet, the high-fat diet, the paleo diet, the improved paleo diet, the four-hour diet, and yes, exercise, and nothing worked. (Shangri-La resulted in 20 pounds of very easy weight loss then stopped working and never worked again.) Maybe Soylent won't work either, but the concept behind Soylent seems dissimilar to all of those diets along dimensions in…

I'm very optimistic about Soylent and just paid for a month, but saying exercise did not work for you is worrisome. Moving around heavy objects and maintaining a healthy diet (which Soylent may make easier to do) are the key to health, plain and simple.

What kind of exercise did you do, at what intensity, and for how long?

The creator of Soylent will be the first to tell you this (he works out quite a bit).

Re: Soylent Campaign

#237

Post by lholden »

DanBC wrote: post #195
marknutter wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you ever bought a red bull? Read the can. It says "vitalizes body and mind." I'm sure a lot of people read than and believe it's true. Heck, it may even be true. But it's not breaking any FDA rules, and it's not a harmful claim any more than the claims the Soylent folks are making. Do we not hold any responsibility for what we put into our bodies?

"vitalizes body and mind" is carefully constructed meaningless nonsense. "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 for you." is not carefully constructed. It has clear and specific meaning, but it is untested and not yet proved. Have Soylent really thought about that sentence?…

> Have Soylent really thought about that sentence? What happens when someone with a digestive disorder eats Soylent, thinking they're getting the nutrition they need and then they get even more ill?

I was having a hard time swallowing (ha) that sentence too. Many digestive problems have nothing to do with the lack of eating biologically correct nutrients. A good amount of acid reflux problems are caused by having a hiatal hernia for example.

Re: Soylent Campaign

#238

Post by Guvante »

fredsters_s wrote: post #187
w1ntermute wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone else in biotech, I agree with your sentiment. I would advise the guys behind this to go back to making social networking and photo sharing apps and leave biotech to those who know what they're doing. You can't just say "oops" and apologize when you put someone in the hospital, or worse. It's not like if someone hacks your Instagram account.

You are EVERYthing that is wrong with startups. I would advise you to quit criticising the audacity of a team that is trying to change the world for the better. How many startups can legitimately say that?!

How many startups if they obtained their stated goals on a global scale wouldn't impact the world for the better?

Risk vs reward. Very little risk in tech companies, quite a few in biotech.

Re: Soylent Campaign

#240

Post by chollida1 »

I think the biggest issue I see here is that they are selling a dietary supplement and they don't have a licensed or even a trained nutritionist or doctor on their startup team.

That's pretty scary to me. Who is the person who is certifying this as safe for meal replacement?

Where is the clinical study that was done before this was released to people?

Post reply on HN