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

Soylent: What Happened When I Stopped Eating For 2 Weeks

fourhourworkweek.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 372 posts

Re: Soylent: What Happened When I Stopped Eating For 2 Weeks

#41

Post by w1ntermute »

alphaoverlord wrote: post #9

I'm all for people having the freedom to eat whatever they want and I really like the quantified self aspect of seeing how diet affects how they feel and metrics of health, but I have to say the author grossly does not understand the medical tests he had done and misinterprets the data. I'm not going to comment on the drink, but rather on his misunderstanding of medicine. First, EGFR is not "Epidermal Growth Factor R…

One of the best parts about this whole Soylent debacle is getting to watch well-known people make complete fools of themselves by commenting on things that they clearly know absolutely nothing about, but still feel like they have the right to make authoritative statements on.

Re: Soylent: What Happened When I Stopped Eating For 2 Weeks

#42

Post by krrrh »

nbouscal wrote: post #8
bsbechtel wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>That’s not a good reason to not try to innovate. Innovation only really works if you're solving a problem. I don't really see much of a problem with our food/nutrition system as is. Yes, there are parts of the world where people are starving, so maybe there is an application for this there, but if the aim is to test this product out in the Bay Area, I don't really see it going anywhere. I could be wrong, but that's…

You may not see a problem, but over 10,000 backers (myself included) do. I'd be happy to go into more detail about why if you would like.

I'm curious. Specifically about what you think Soylent offers that the wide variety of MRPs rhat have been on the market dor decades don't.

Is it the concept of literally replacing all of your meals? To me it seems that there are dozens of existing MRPs that beat Soylent on price, flavor, and quality. But I have rarely seen any manufacturer claim that you can replace every meal with their product, and when they do its been controversial, and only suggested for limited times while convalescing or cutting.

What's the appeal?

Re: Soylent: What Happened When I Stopped Eating For 2 Weeks

#43

Post by mortenjorck »

mparlane wrote: post #29
TillE wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apparently the target market is lazy people who don't like food. And let's be honest, nearly everyone likes real food. Keto works great for weight loss, and moderation is usually sufficient for a healthy maintenance diet. Loaded with carbohydrates as it is, Soylent is particularly uninteresting for anyone trying to reduce body fat.

A lot of things were invented for "lazy" people so they could save time to do other more important things. Like my electric razor, I have my safety razor too, but it's so much faster to use my electric. A coworker has a beard so he can save 5 minutes in the morning, is it lazy to want time to do other things?

This to me is the real draw of Soylent: Not subsisting on it for weeks at a time, but rather using it as a "DVR for eating." In this way, Soylent could actually improve one's enjoyment of food by allowing one to focus on eating well only when time allows.

Imagine not having to eat most of the time, but always having two hours set aside every Wednesday night to cook a feast.

Re: Soylent: What Happened When I Stopped Eating For 2 Weeks

#44

Post by natrius »

cup wrote: post #6

Soylent aside, im amazed at how terrible his traditional normal days meal is? I mean hes eating a processed breakfast subsitute in the morning, take away mexican food with a soft drink for lunch and more take away for dinner. You don't need to be a nutritionist to know thats going to have a terrible impact on his life later down the track. Postnote: Now that Ive read the whole article, I wonder if all the benefits he…

Besides the sodium, Chipotle isn't that bad, especially if you skip the tortillas and sour cream.

Re: Soylent: What Happened When I Stopped Eating For 2 Weeks

#46

Post by jacques_chester »

md224 wrote: post #38
bsbechtel wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>That’s not a good reason to not try to innovate. Innovation only really works if you're solving a problem. I don't really see much of a problem with our food/nutrition system as is. Yes, there are parts of the world where people are starving, so maybe there is an application for this there, but if the aim is to test this product out in the Bay Area, I don't really see it going anywhere. I could be wrong, but that's…

I'll just say this: I hate cooking, and ordering delivery every night, while easy, isn't ideal (cost, etc.). Eating delicious, real food every once in a while is a great treat, but why the hell do I have to put so much energy into this ritual of choosing/preparing/acquiring meals every single day of my life ? Sometimes I just don't want to be hungry, and I don't really care how I get not-hungry. I'm withholding judge…

1. There are existing MRPs.

2. There are companies that will prepare and deliver meals for you. Usually lower in sodium than dining out / take-away.

3. Soylent is surrounded with controversy because of the deliberate avoidance of expert input leading to trivial but potentially life-threatening errors:

http://www.reddit.com/r/TrueReddit/comments/1jvsie/the_man_w...

Re: Soylent: What Happened When I Stopped Eating For 2 Weeks

#47

Post by graeme »

malbs wrote: post #35

The guy claim himself to be a "mildly out of shape 28 year old", and then state: "I consider myself a pretty health-conscious person. No alcohol. No meat. Slow-carbs when possible. Run three miles, three times a week. Pull-ups, push-ups on the days I don’t run" which indicates he's more active than 90% of the population (I just made that stat up) I was irritated from that point on-wards.

You can do all that and be 'mildly out of shape'.

It depends on what your model is. Compared to the average person, he's more fit, but the average person is rather unfit, so it's a poor comparison.

I think 'out of shape' out to be an objective measure, not a relative measure.

Re: Soylent: What Happened When I Stopped Eating For 2 Weeks

#48

Post by bsbechtel »

nbouscal wrote: post #8
bsbechtel wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>That’s not a good reason to not try to innovate. Innovation only really works if you're solving a problem. I don't really see much of a problem with our food/nutrition system as is. Yes, there are parts of the world where people are starving, so maybe there is an application for this there, but if the aim is to test this product out in the Bay Area, I don't really see it going anywhere. I could be wrong, but that's…

You may not see a problem, but over 10,000 backers (myself included) do. I'd be happy to go into more detail about why if you would like.

I am too.

Re: Soylent: What Happened When I Stopped Eating For 2 Weeks

#49

Post by jimbokun »

tocomment wrote: post #14
cup wrote: post #6

Soylent aside, im amazed at how terrible his traditional normal days meal is? I mean hes eating a processed breakfast subsitute in the morning, take away mexican food with a soft drink for lunch and more take away for dinner. You don't need to be a nutritionist to know thats going to have a terrible impact on his life later down the track. Postnote: Now that Ive read the whole article, I wonder if all the benefits he…

Is a protien shake for breakfast really that bad? I have not been able to find a breakfast food that's quick, tastes ok, and isn't high in carbs.

How about a banana?

Re: Soylent: What Happened When I Stopped Eating For 2 Weeks

#50

Post by typicalrunt »

ekianjo wrote: post #13
alphaoverlord wrote: post #9

I'm all for people having the freedom to eat whatever they want and I really like the quantified self aspect of seeing how diet affects how they feel and metrics of health, but I have to say the author grossly does not understand the medical tests he had done and misinterprets the data. I'm not going to comment on the drink, but rather on his misunderstanding of medicine. First, EGFR is not "Epidermal Growth Factor R…

> First, EGFR is not "Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor" I LOLed at that one. He clearly didn't get the acronym and went for one of the cancer mutation indicator seen in several lung cancers.

Even funnier, the first sentence in the Wikipedia entry for EGFR states:

This article is about a cell surface receptor. For estimated measure of kidney function (eGFR), see Glomerular filtration rate.

The author could have taken a few minutes to research both the EGFR for cell surface receptor and the kidney function measure and come to a reasonably good conclusion as to which one is used on the lab tests. Instead...

Post reply on HN