Earlier quoted context omitted.
[deleted]
So is baby formula not food?
Baby formula has rigorous research behind it.
Soylent Campaign
451–460 of 608 posts
Re: Soylent Campaign
#452"Soylent is perfectly balanced and optimized for your body and lifestyle, meaning it automatically puts you at an optimal weight, makes you feel full, and improves your focus and cognition." Bull-fucking-shit. This is a product made by four twenty-somethings, none of whom appears to have a background in nutrition or any kind of health studies. To trust your health to these people would be fucking stupid. Jesus. Also:…
The FDA has an entire document on allowable amounts of rat feces and insect parts that manufacturers can have in their food: http://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceRegulation/GuidanceDocuments....
I'll listen to what the kid has to say.
Re: Soylent Campaign
#453Ever since I heard about this project I've been trying to make my own version. I've found it's surprisingly hard to make something healthy that doesn't make me gag. So far I tried egg protein powder mixed with chia seeds, olive oil, plain yogurt and a banana. I'm now thinking I'd be better off with something solid that I could eat on the go. I haven't seen a good recipe though.
Why don't you try the existing liquid feeds?
I like the idea of gettin more olive oil in my diet. Also the existing ones have too many carbs and aren't filling.
Re: Soylent Campaign
#454[deleted]
I'm sitting this one out for a year. I expected Rob to run longer and more detailed trails than it appears he has. As in a few hundred people eating nothing but Soylent for a year. There will be problems with the initial manufacture, and he highlights them in the risks section. But I notice the lack of anyone from say a pharma QC background who would be able to control the risk of overdosing on an ingredient by prope…
As far as debunks go the Business Insider article wasn't much of one sadly. Also calling this a diet doesn't seem that accurate to me in the way that most people think of diets (something transitory); it feels like they're using the term as a pejorative.
One of the things which has interested me about this whole affair since it was first posted was the reactions of people who put timeframes on their interest "I'll be interested to see what happens after a month", "...after three months", "...after a year", "...after a decade". I wonder at what point people are going to say "well ok, that's long enough, I've seen enough".
I think this is interesting from the point of view of someone who doesn't enjoy cooking most of the time and most of the stuff I cook when I'm in work mode is probably deficient nutritionally. I also think as a portable, storable and efficient food source the potential is pretty amazing, and I don't think the fact he's not a biochem or nutrition guy is an excuse to ignore the principle of what he's trying to do here. I would definitely like to see some more critical appraisal (and there certainly seems to be some in some of the comments here).
Re: Soylent Campaign
#455Earlier quoted context omitted.
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_hormesis
Wow! You telling me that working as a jumper at a Nuclear Plant might have been good for me? The mind boggles.
It depends on how slowly you got the radiation.
The same dose delivered fast does much more damage than the dose delivered slowly.
At least that's the theory. The NRC works on the principle that the speed doesn't matter - it's just the cumulative that counts.
It's not a settled matter, although the research does seem to point in that direction.
Re: Soylent Campaign
#456A request for those who might go on the Soylent diet, starting in july (a month before the estimated shipping date), during your Soylent diet:
1. Record your current height
2. Record daily: weight + timestamp, sleep start time, sleep stop time,
food consumption (http://www.livestrong.com/thedailyplate/ perhaps to help
or alternatives), exercise,
and how you feel physically (tired, energetic, sleepy...).
3. Blog about your experience and contribute the data to science.
Disclaimer: I will not be participating in this experiment, but am interested in the results. =D
Re: Soylent Campaign
#457Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
> 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. This is a silly thing to say, honestly. It's unscientific in every possible way, and honestly sounds like saying "I don't think there's any way there's not a god" to defend religion. It's worth giving it a shot, or doing research to prove or disprove it, but wild speculati…
Did you just describe Soylent?
Re: Soylent Campaign
#458Earlier quoted context omitted.
More to the point, bifocals and lightning rods are not intended for internal consumption. Nor are either of them biochemistry, a subject considerably more complicated than optics or basic electro-magnetism.
If Franklin was wrong about lightning rods, maybe it would have burned down your house. He also experimented with dieting etc... The point is that someone can study a lot on a topic and be more informed then someone who has gone to school for the subject. The Soylent guy isn't just mixing random stuff together, he's doing a lot of research, experimenting, and not suggesting you make it your only source of food.
> If Franklin was wrong about lightning rods, maybe it would have burned down your house.
Yes, and that is a physical system which has very clear delineated results. Hypothesis: Might burn down houses. Did any houses burn down over a 5 year period? Y/N?
Biology is way more complicated than that. There are many more possible outcomes, and its not as simple as "am i healthier now or not?"
> he's doing a lot of research, experimenting
Oh, is he? Where's his data? What's the statistical significance of his results?
Re: Soylent Campaign
#459If you want to see why this is a terrible idea if you care about your health, with plenty of cites to peer-reviewed science, read "In Defense of Food" by Michael Pollan.
May as well put a Michael Pollan quote in here with some simple, sane ideas for eating: "Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants."
Re: Soylent Campaign
#460Only one individual and only three months is far from enough to claim that works.
I bet you can go better (and safer!) with military rations.
Pretty sure the army/air force would have those experiments nailed down in the 50'