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

Soylent 2.0

blog.soylent.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 235 posts

Re: Soylent 2.0

#61

Post by jobigoud »

xutopia wrote: post #39
feld wrote: post #13

My first thought whenever I see soylent is that we have studies proving that we can't replace breast milk with baby formula. Some of that is due to immune system being passed on to the infant, but we haven't yet mastered the nutritional content of real food to the point where we can confidently say it's safe to eat Soylent or another similar product regularly. It takes me back to the whole issue with processed dog fo…

I can't trust them. They have 0g of cholesterol yet it's an important part of a healthy diet. This rings of "marketing diet" to me.

Cholesterol is produced by your own body just fine.

In food, it only comes from animal products, so you are basically saying that any and all vegan diets are unhealthy/marketing. Dietitians (and millions of vegans) beg to differ.

Re: Soylent 2.0

#63

Post by thomnottom »

tom_usher wrote: post #22

Can someone explain to me the appeal of this product? Why would anyone choose to drink a nondescript sludge over the plentiful ways we can get good, enjoyable & healthy food? I can certainly appreciate the science behind it - this would be a great boon to helping feed those that are less fortunate, but from what I can see that doesn't appear to be the aim of the company.

Personally I'm interested in it because I feel like we (as in my family) often waste too much time simply thinking about food. When are we going to eat? What are we going to make? Do we need to pick some things up? Should we go out? We've gone out too much this month and it's getting expensive... It sure would be nice to cut that out for a few meals each week.

Friends of mine who do a really good job prepping meals for the week tend to sacrifice the better part of a day just for that process. On top of that we're dealing with more and more restrictions on our diets due to health issues (cutting back on dairy and gluten).

Re: Soylent 2.0

#65

Post by easytiger »

fizzbatter wrote: post #45
tom_usher wrote: post #22

Can someone explain to me the appeal of this product? Why would anyone choose to drink a nondescript sludge over the plentiful ways we can get good, enjoyable & healthy food? I can certainly appreciate the science behind it - this would be a great boon to helping feed those that are less fortunate, but from what I can see that doesn't appear to be the aim of the company.

I feel like i'm in the opposite camp. Every time i see a Soylent post in any non-Soylent corner of the web (HN, non-Soylent Subreddits, etc), there's always 1 (x100) posts of: "Why would you do this!?" I feel like i need someone to describe this to me. Why is it so hard to grasp? "Fast food" makes its living off of ease and price. You could argue taste, but many (most?) people feel that a good homecooked meal tastes…

Fast food makes its living off having predictable product available everywhere you go.

Re: Soylent 2.0

#66

Post by Wintamute »

Why spend energy producing and transporting heavy water and plastic bottles with this pre-mixed Soylent? Everyone already has plentiful water and receptacles at home. Seems like a retrograde step, unless I'm missing something?

Re: Soylent 2.0

#67

Post by normloman »

feld wrote: post #13

My first thought whenever I see soylent is that we have studies proving that we can't replace breast milk with baby formula. Some of that is due to immune system being passed on to the infant, but we haven't yet mastered the nutritional content of real food to the point where we can confidently say it's safe to eat Soylent or another similar product regularly. It takes me back to the whole issue with processed dog fo…

I'm also skeptical that one can live well on soylent alone. There's nothing bad in soylent AFAIK, but there's no way of knowing whether soylent is missing anything vital. With this in mind, I wouldn't be worried if someone replaced one or two meals a day with soylent. But I'd hesitate to replace all meals. I think it's irresponsible that the makers of soylent keep pushing the idea that one nutrient drink can replace all your meals, though I have nothing against the product itself.

Re: Soylent 2.0

#68

Post by tom_usher »

fizzbatter wrote: post #45
tom_usher wrote: post #22

Can someone explain to me the appeal of this product? Why would anyone choose to drink a nondescript sludge over the plentiful ways we can get good, enjoyable & healthy food? I can certainly appreciate the science behind it - this would be a great boon to helping feed those that are less fortunate, but from what I can see that doesn't appear to be the aim of the company.

I feel like i'm in the opposite camp. Every time i see a Soylent post in any non-Soylent corner of the web (HN, non-Soylent Subreddits, etc), there's always 1 (x100) posts of: "Why would you do this!?" I feel like i need someone to describe this to me. Why is it so hard to grasp? "Fast food" makes its living off of ease and price. You could argue taste, but many (most?) people feel that a good homecooked meal tastes…

Thanks for the answer (and to everyone else that replied) - it's always good to hear the other side of the debate.

I could never imagine myself in a situation where I'd consider it so important to be constantly busy that I wouldn't be able to find the time to throw a few vegetables in a pan - but I understand different people have different priorities (and demanding jobs).

It just seems to me like this is an odd way to solve the problem, maybe because I'm extrapolating a bit and seeing it as trying to replace one of the things that makes us human; the ability to prepare and cook food.

I'd be interested to see if any research comes up as to the long term psychological effects of this sort of product. Do people who replace the varied textures and tastes of different foods (if only partially) with a liquid supplement notice any adverse effects or cravings?

Out of interest, is Soylent more interesting than offerings from companies like Graze/Naturebox?

Re: Soylent 2.0

#69

Post by gabemart »

tom_usher wrote: post #22

Can someone explain to me the appeal of this product? Why would anyone choose to drink a nondescript sludge over the plentiful ways we can get good, enjoyable & healthy food? I can certainly appreciate the science behind it - this would be a great boon to helping feed those that are less fortunate, but from what I can see that doesn't appear to be the aim of the company.

> Can someone explain to me the appeal of this product? Why would anyone choose to drink a nondescript sludge over the plentiful ways we can get good, enjoyable & healthy food?

Perhaps this is something you would never consider using yourself, but I find it hard to believe you can't imagine why it appeals to some people. Lots of people - huge numbers of people - find it very inconvenient to source healthy, palatable food twice or three times per day, every day. Even lots of people who really enjoy eating or cooking find it inconvenient or limiting to have to eat as often as is necessary.

Re: Soylent 2.0

#70

Post by easytiger »

normloman wrote: post #52
mahouse wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If your lifestyle does not give you time to cook, you should try to change it, instead of inventing that mud.

Right! Even if you don't like to cook, not having the time to is symptomatic of overwork.

Or a desire to feel like you are overworking like a superhero
Post reply on HN