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

Two Months of Soylent

robrhinehart.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 247 posts

Re: Two Months of Soylent

#231

Post by DanBC »

markerdmann wrote: post #142
johnchristopher wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I was actually surprised by how hard it was to fit all of the daily nutrient requirements into a recipe with about 2000-2500 calories (while also avoiding nutrient overdoses). It would be great if someone would create a website for "nutritionally complete" recipes, especially recipes that are cheap and easy to make with a good blender or crockpot. I hit the same wall when I overturned my eating habits and tried to…

Yeah, I was wondering the same thing as I was making the recipe. That brings up an interesting question: Is it fine to get 200% of your daily requirement for Vitamin A on one day and 0% the second day and let things average out, or will you be healthier if you get a steady stream of your daily requirements throughout the day? Maybe there are some nutrients that are easily stored in the body (like fat-soluble vitamins…

Vitamin A & D are fat soluble, so in theory your body can store it. (Some vitamins are toxic in overdose!)

Re: Two Months of Soylent

#232

Post by DanBC »

XorNot wrote: post #204
lilsunnybee wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah except you might be deficient in some vitamin, and in that case you're screwing yourself over by not taking a multivitamin that has just 100% of the RDA's. Not everyone can afford to eat a world-class, healthy diet, and obtain all nutrients sans a multivitamin.

It is medically very difficult to be vitamin deficient. Modern food is fortified in so many ways that its now almost impossible unless you do something like eat exclusively exactly 1 food product. Even then. It's not about a healthy diet - it's about the fact that vitamins are trace components that your body holds onto what it needs and discards the rest. This is very different to the general nutritional needs of the…

> Very very few people need them.

Women who want to become pregnant, or who are already pregnant, should be taking 400 micrograms of folic acid (from before conception to at least 12 weeks conception) and 10 micrograms vitamin d, but avoiding anything with vitamin a.

(http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/pregnancy-and-baby/pages/vitami...)

Re: Two Months of Soylent

#233

Post by schiffern »

sp332 wrote: post #111
samstave wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

False. My mother just passed of cancer, she was on a feeding tube for 8 months consuming this Abott liquid food. It was shipped in cases just like anything else - cardboard boxes - and delivered via foil-boxes just like the portable milk that you see at any starbucks, though it required no refrigeration. However, this substance was not made for taste buds and it smelled fairly bad. They have different types depending…

As stated in Steko's quote above, that costs ~4x as much as soylent. Note also that the numbers for soylent don't include packaging or shipping. If you made a commercial version with preservatives etc. the price might be comparable.

>Note also that the numbers for soylent don't include packaging or shipping.

Sure they do. He says he's buying them in personal-size containers, and the price includes shipping. Someone is already buying the ingredients in bulk and reselling them in smaller containers, it's just not the soylent guy. Once he's buying in bulk I would expect costs to drop, even with the added expense of packaging and shipping.

Re: Two Months of Soylent

#234

Post by illuminate »

Retric wrote: post #226
illuminate wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Vitamin deficiency to the point of ill health effects is not "fairly common". The persons who claim this are usually trying to push nutraceuticals at the same time.

By common I mean it's something that your average General practitioner doctor will encounter. Pregnant and Nursing mothers are often told to take supplements with good reason. Also of note absorption issues are just as important as diet which is one of the reason B12 shots for example are used to treat deficiency. With that said, taking a daily multivitamin is often overkill taking it weekly is often just as useful.…

"By common I mean it's something that your average General practitioner doctor will encounter"

Well, sure, but that's during specific cases where the person knows that there's something wrong with them. It's not commonly "accidentally" discovered during the course of your regular physicals.

Re: Two Months of Soylent

#235

Post by onan_barbarian »

LaGrange wrote: post #66
onan_barbarian wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is also patently wrong; a paleolithic human could not have subsisted on a diet of tubas, as they were not invented until the mid-19th century.

Parent said "modern", not "paleolithic". You are not a paleolithic human, and if you are, welcome, time traveller.

Nonsense.

I stand by my point; that while copper and zinc are both important trace elements, paleolithic man could not practically have gotten them through consumption of tubas.

Re: Two Months of Soylent

#236

Post by reycharles »

juiceandjuice wrote: post #59
vinceguidry wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is that implausible? He's an engineer by trade, mathematics is close enough to computer science that most half-way decent programmers should be able to read that level math casually given a good 'brain day'. I spent most of my twenties neglecting math, decided one day to learn calculus, found it pretty easy.

Comparing basic calculus to number theory is like comparing long division to calculus. Saying "oh I know how to take the derivative" is a bit different than knowing how to take the derivative of a complex expression by applying a taylor expansion to estimate the rate of change within .01%. For number theory, there's a few things you could pick up fairly easily, like understanding what 1 and 3 mod 4 primes are, but th…

How does »acing real analysis« help understanding number theory? As far as I'm aware they're not really related at all.

Re: Two Months of Soylent

#237

Post by eru »

juiceandjuice wrote: post #59
vinceguidry wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is that implausible? He's an engineer by trade, mathematics is close enough to computer science that most half-way decent programmers should be able to read that level math casually given a good 'brain day'. I spent most of my twenties neglecting math, decided one day to learn calculus, found it pretty easy.

Comparing basic calculus to number theory is like comparing long division to calculus. Saying "oh I know how to take the derivative" is a bit different than knowing how to take the derivative of a complex expression by applying a taylor expansion to estimate the rate of change within .01%. For number theory, there's a few things you could pick up fairly easily, like understanding what 1 and 3 mod 4 primes are, but th…

I agree.

One thing: How does acing real analysis help with number theory?

Re: Two Months of Soylent

#238

Post by eru »

jaggederest wrote: post #38
geoka9 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Firstly, you don't read a textbook (especially a math textbook) in one sitting. If nothing else, books like that have problems that the authors expect you to go through. They are also often based on lectures for courses that take at least a semester to absorb. Secondly, number theory is not calculus; it requires you to be familiar with college-level math courses (e.g. abstract algebra) before you can even start makin…

Well, clearly nobody could ever do it then. Wait, no, people study those things all the time. They're difficult, but maybe he has unknown prior background in math, or is gifted in that regard. It's not as though he achieved something that no human ever has before. It's a reasonably routine though difficult task - akin to perhaps completing a marathon.

> Well, clearly nobody could ever do it then.

Almost nobody, yes. Not in one sitting.

Re: Two Months of Soylent

#239

Post by eru »

paxtonab wrote: post #57

"I didn't give up food, I just got rid of the bad food." After reading the 1st HN abut this I was skeptical, but this sentence fully convinced me that Rinehart is on to something. Imagine a world with a quick, healthy, affordable lunch substitute that negated the 'need' to eat fast food when you feel pressed for time at work... Thankfully this only happens to me 2 or 3 times a month , but I'm guessing that for most o…

Couldn't you just fast those days? (And I mean you as in you, not those other Americans.)

Re: Two Months of Soylent

#240

Post by eru »

stephengillie wrote: post #2

While your project is crazy, you've inspired me to try eating 1/2 of a 600-calorie sandwich every 3 hours. The points about disconnecting our energy source from our entertainment resonates with me, and I'm becoming more aware of the benefits of a consistent calorie supply. The FDA recommends a crazy amount of potassium. Most people don't get that much potassium in their diets.

Interesting. Why would you want to have a constant calorie supply? Our bodies are very adapt at buffering. (Especially if you abstain from the simpler carbohydrates.)
Post reply on HN