21–30 of 70 posts
I don't live on exclusively on anything else. It's a cool idea and I hope it replaces "some" meals because occasionally I just don't have the time and it has to be better (and more convenient) than fast food. Why do we have to take good things to extremes and set up unnecessary "all or nothings"?
I assume if you subsist on a diet of liquids alone that your teeth get upset due to complete underuse. Anyone know if that's true?
Not a doctor, but I'm wondering what you mean by "upset"? Teeth are calcified body tissue, if I'm remembering HS biology correctly, and I don't know how having them not mashing down on things could damage them. Curious to hear other thoughts on this.
Stephan Guyenet had a series of rather interesting blog posts on malocclusion. One of the factors he mentioned in conclusion was the toughness of food.
http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.dk/2009/12/malocclusion-di...
There are three main factors that I believe contribute to malocclusion in modern societies:
1. Maternal nutrition during the first trimester of pregnancy. Vitamin K2, found in organs, pastured dairy and eggs, is particularly important. We may also make small amounts from the K1 found in green vegetables.
2. Sucking habits from birth to age four. Breast feeding protects against malocclusion. Bottle feeding, pacifiers and finger sucking probably increase the risk of malocclusion. Cup feeding and orthodontic pacifiers are probably acceptable alternatives.
3. Food toughness. The jaws probably require stress from tough food to develop correctly. This can contribute to the widening of the dental arch until roughly age 17. Beef jerky, raw vegetables, raw fruit, tough cuts of meat and nuts are all good ways to exercise the jaws.
However, this covers development up to age 17. What would happen to the teeth of a grown up man if he stops using them, I'd also be interested to know (from sheer curiosity)
1. There are a lot of (nonessential) nutrients that you get from plants that you won't get from this drink. 2. Our idea of "everything the body needs" can change. 3. We don't know the long term effects of relying solely on it. The author spends a lot of time on stupid counterarguments. Seriously, do your homework.
I still wouldn't want to be the guinea pig to exclusively live off of Soylent.
2+3. Having said that, there is plenty of research on "Total Parenteral Nutrition" and "Enteral Nutrition" for those that cannot consume regular foods for medical reasons. It isn't exactly a solved problem however, there are still issues.
Personally, I would rather drink from a bag all day and then throw a fiesta for dinner to make up for bag time.
Other people eat because they are hungry. I eat because I know I have to sustain my body. It is often hard for me or even annoying to eat food and I have difficulties getting my calories every day. Yes, I would buy this drink.
Generally, I'm pretty confident that my diet is "healthy."
But, when thinking about Soylent, people seem to be comparing it to perfection.
Why not compare it to some other things.
For example, would it be healthier to have a burger, fries, and a milkshake from McDonalds, or to drink Soylent?
Isn't the answer obvious?
Even as someone that regularly eats healthy meals, I still occasionally find it hard to have a healthy meal.
Whether or not Soylent should be a complete replacement for food, it's probably a great replacement for so much of the garbage junk food that many people eat very, very, regularly.
Maybe someday Soylent will put fast food out of business. The benefits would be obvious.
I've been enjoying my first week of Soylent. I eat "regular" dinner, but the rest of the day I drink a cup of soylent every couple hours. The best part about Soylent is it's hackable. I'm looking to gain weight, so I use whole milk instead of water, and add 4 eggs and 1/4 cup heavy whipping cream which also dramatically improves the taste (for me at least). It's almost like drinking melted ice cream, to be honest.
What's your poop like?
I assume if you subsist on a diet of liquids alone that your teeth get upset due to complete underuse. Anyone know if that's true?
Not a doctor, but I'm wondering what you mean by "upset"? Teeth are calcified body tissue, if I'm remembering HS biology correctly, and I don't know how having them not mashing down on things could damage them. Curious to hear other thoughts on this.
Well, this is the part that excites me a lot. Industrial scale production and distribution of a nutritionally sufficient meal could do wonders in the developing world. As of now, even though there are food subsidies for the poor, there are additional expenses (gas, stoves) and wastage involved. And the saved time could be put to work.
A different incarnation of solyent could change the world.
Last time I said this [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7765697], I was surprised I got downvoted into oblivion. I was genuinely curious why this isn't a good idea to take up at the governmental level.