41–50 of 208 posts
Are that kind of drinks popular in North America and if, then why..? I'm having problems understanding why would anyone want to consume something like that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Regulation of food products to some degree is critical to help prevent contamination and illness. In this case, Canada's regulations appear to be simply outdated and, perhaps, overly draconian.
I understand the need for regulations, especially in food and drugs, but when it comes to things like regulating the amount of fat/sugar/fiber I can't think of any reason other than an attitude of 'mommy knows best'. Thank you for taking the time to reply.
Also, I suspect these regulations have more backing than what you are assuming. They may not be correct, but they are good enough for people survive indefinitely on which is a solid track record.
PS: Used soylent for months 1.x and 2.0, swapped to Meal squares.
Are that kind of drinks popular in North America and if, then why..? I'm having problems understanding why would anyone want to consume something like that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Regulation of food products to some degree is critical to help prevent contamination and illness. In this case, Canada's regulations appear to be simply outdated and, perhaps, overly draconian.
I understand the need for regulations, especially in food and drugs, but when it comes to things like regulating the amount of fat/sugar/fiber I can't think of any reason other than an attitude of 'mommy knows best'. Thank you for taking the time to reply.
The issue as I see it is that the definition of what would be considered reasonable today is not in line with the CFIA's. I don't see the intent of the regulations as unsound.
Are that kind of drinks popular in North America and if, then why..? I'm having problems understanding why would anyone want to consume something like that.
The Canadian requirements look very sensible: http://www.inspection.gc.ca/food/labelling/food-labelling-fo... Spit it out - which one did Soylent fail?
The 30% cap on calories from fat is pretty ridiculous in my view. Even if you don't buy into the idea that fat is healthful, there is plenty of science that indicates it is, and so at least CIFA should not regulate fat content in this way. Sidenote: I don't drink Soylent and have no idea if it fails the fat content. I'm in the "Soylent is not healthful" camp, if it matters.
I know we're all avant guard around here, but until fairly recently it wasn't accepted knowledge that fat wasn't as bad for you as first thought. It's understandable that regulations would take time to adjust.
My breakfast is often Siggi's 4% skyr (thick yogurt): http://siggisdairy.com/product/plain-whole-milk-24oz/
Plus Organic valley heavy cream: https://www.organicvalley.coop/products/cream/
Ususally about 300g + 100g, then sometimes some granola (oats, almonds, sometimes honey), for body.
Soylent is:
* 37g carb
* 21g fats
* 20g protein
What I'm eating is much healthier by my estimation:
* 16g carb
* 49g fats
* 35g protein
(Before granola, which you can use to moderate the carbs if you want.)
It is not hard to mix two things together, sometimes three. If you really want to custom flavor it, buy a jam (I suggest Mymoune rose petal jam, from Lebanon, but there are millions of flavors when you pick your own jam!)
What is so good about soylent? Why not just mix skyr and heavy cream if that's the kind of meal you want?
Why eat a strange synthetic meal from a company that has trouble with rats and mold when you could eat a couple simple whole foods? What problem is Soylent solving, exactly?
And aren't you worried about the unfavorable omega 3:6 ratio in this stuff? Just going off the ingredients they list, I can't find any literature they give on the ratio. (If you're not up to speed, the latest: http://openheart.bmj.com/content/openhrt/3/2/e000385.full.pd... )
(Diet Note: I'm 5'10 and 146 lbs male, 12-13% body fat. In my diet I aim for ~60-70% calories from fat, but don't always hit it.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fat calories would be one reason. 47% in soylent vs 35% max allowed. Their announcement mentions that it failed more than one requirement, so there must be something else in addition to this.
These regulations are outdated. The push against fat calories and towards carbohydrates was largely motivated by the sugar industry, see: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=oLtQLDptI1g In addition to this, fat calories are more “filling” than carbohydrate calories. Something useful for a meal replacement (assuming unsaturated/“healthy” fats) I hope Soylent sticks to their guns with the best knowledge available, and I hope…
With what we know now, a cap on fat is ridiculous. The cap should be on carbs.
How about in the meantime, Soylent makes a "Canada edition" that is otherwise identical but declared "NOT a meal replacement"?
That's probably what they'll do. "Not a meal replacement but sold in convenient 2000kcal pouches... wink wink".