151–160 of 235 posts
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?
Also the convenience could allow them to sell these as individual drinks in grocery stores and convenience stores.
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…
If anything, I don't understand the worries people have about replacing 95% of their entire diet with a well-engineered food. In the past people lived on a single or very small number of crops. In our current time we know people who live entirely on fast food or delivery pizza. The human body is more resilient than we give it credit for and having soilent is likely better than what we'd be giving it otherwise.
I wouldn't define myself "worried" of this, but I find utterly banal (infinitely misable, to be honest) that the existential end of all this optimization is (metaphorically) to have more time to produce and consume the next iPhone.
Talking on the strictly nutritional perspective, we can't compare the past. Infant mortality, in those times, was much higher. And the body may be resilient, yes, but don't forget that a very large percentage of people in USA is clinically obese, that is, sick.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Try http://www.joylent.eu It's the european clone. I love it.
I vastly prefer http://jakeshake.eu .
It's not a good full nutritional replacement, and it's caloric balance is for people who exercise daily and quite intensely.
If you want to take that then take just the normal gain shakes or better off buy a protein shake powder and a carb powder add to it some of those silly fiber powder drinks you buy at the wellness store and mix it yourself for a better balance with less calories per "meal" it will taste considerably better and be cheaper.
Mana is slightly better although I'm not sold on it's nutritional make up either, I've been using it to avoid eating total crap when I'm swamped or have to work late since it's better to chug down it than order another 10" pizza or a burger when you have to work late.
For any of these "replacements" to be valid they need to do 2 things a) develop a full diet regime with supplementary real food mixed in like week on week off or something, b) add actual non-liquid food products.
Eating a liquid diet even for a couple of weeks will really screw you up, humans didn't evolved to eat only liquid food heck the standing recommendation for babies is to actually skip or cut down the period of "baby food" for as much as possible. As soon as the baby can chew food he should be chewing it, the chewing action is actually a very important mechanism as it's a que for your body to release certain enzymes which are responsible for absorbing nutriments, it's also a mood stabilizer as chewing is a major mechanism in controlling serotonin production as well as other neurotransmitters.
Liquid meals also have a bad effect on the various tenants in our GI track, liquid food changes the PH level of your GI which makes it less hospitable, it is absorbed quicker and so our good friends from down below cannot get their portion of the meal, solid food also serves a role as a GI "cleaner" as it moves it scrapes dead tissue and bacterial cultures of the GI walls.
So yeah nice, cheap and very hipsterie, but if you don't want to have major GI issues don't rely on this as a sole source of subsistence, do not use it for long periods and go see a doctor before and during taking this crap.
I presume the biggest difference has already been discussed previously: the switch from powder to liquid? Liquid definitely seems more convenient but apparently more expensive (to ship as well). I suppose this was inevitable but surprised that the appears to be deprecating.
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015/08/soylent-2-0-is-coming...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Try http://www.joylent.eu It's the european clone. I love it.
I vastly prefer http://jakeshake.eu .
I've tried Joylent, Veetal, and Jake. In terms of palatability, Joylent is by far the best (especially banana), Veetal is pretty good, and Jake is a distant last.
Jake's single-meal packages are an advantage. But it's just not very pleasant to drink. And there's really no reason for them to include whole flax seeds, rather than grinding them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
I would argue that most vegan diets are unhealthy. You have to work damned hard to get the same nutrients that are readily available in animal products.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
I would argue that most vegan diets are unhealthy. You have to work damned hard to get the same nutrients that are readily available in animal products.
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.
An added bonus is that I can completely eliminate over-eating from my lifestyle (without feeling hungry all the time), which has allowed me to lose weight.
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…
As a more general principle, I certainly agree that Soylent might miss the mark on dose and accessibility of some nutrients. The early development history shows that they definitely have in the past.
It's definitely good to see someone trying. My only real concern is that they might miss a low-effect or slow-acting component. If they forget potassium, testing will happily reveal it in a month. If their calcium bio-availability is a bit low, maybe we don't see it until Rhinehart gets osteoporosis in 20 years.