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

51–60 of 235 posts

Re: Soylent 2.0

#51

Post by explorigin »

Selling bottles is really terrible from an environmental perspective. It's sort of the same problem as bottled water. Now we have a lot of plastic bottle trash instead of the pouches that pack down flat and provide much more product/waste ratio.

Plastic bottles are more recyclable but recycling bins are still not common in my area of the country (although we recycle at home).

There is also the increased fuel costs of shipment. One more question is where is the bottling happens. If it's in California like the development labs, is it contributing to the drought there a la Nestle water-bottling?

Re: Soylent 2.0

#52

Post by normloman »

mahouse wrote: post #33
coherentpony wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lifestyle? IIRC, the creator of Soylent had a busy lifestyle and as a result barely had time to cook or eat and that's why he created Soylent.

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.

Re: Soylent 2.0

#53

Post by tashoecraft »

anentropic wrote: post #32
conorh wrote: post #23

I tried Soylent 1.5 for about a month (not as my sole food source, but for maybe one meal a day), but I was unable to adjust to it well, my stomach was just constantly upset and I didn't feel great after eating it. I then tried Nutren 1.5 [1] thinking it might be different, but same effect for me, so I guess it is just me. I'm going to try 2.0 again, maybe I'll do it in smaller doses at first and see if I can adjust…

why? why not just eat good food? !

As someone currently using soylent to replace my lunch during the work week I can tell you the reasons not to eat "good food". I cook every single one of the my breakfasts and dinners and strive to make a balanced, healthy meal. But I struggle to consistently bring a healthy lunch. My preparation methods don't keep up, I get bored, it turns out to not be a very balanced meal, etc. So instead I use soylent to avoid eating out every day, which the high majority of the people I work with do. I also save around $10 a day doing this. I eat plenty of good food, I love food, and I love cooking. I just also enjoy my soylent method of lunch.

Re: Soylent 2.0

#54

Post by orangecat »

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…

There's a weird psuedo-religious aspect to it too. It's right to spend an hour cooking, and wrong to have a convenient pre-made meal, even if it's nutritionally as good or better.

Re: Soylent 2.0

#56

Post by [deleted] »

mahouse wrote: post #33
coherentpony wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lifestyle? IIRC, the creator of Soylent had a busy lifestyle and as a result barely had time to cook or eat and that's why he created Soylent.

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

[deleted]

Re: Soylent 2.0

#57

Post by pervycreeper »

EarthLaunch wrote: post #4

Given that soy is one of the common allergens, this sounds amazing (especially with it being high-fat which matches modern nutritional science) except for the soy. They should make one called "Soylent -1.0" or something. Are there any alternatives?

Also not healthy to consume soy if you are male, apparently.

As for alternatives, there are many. There is a big community on the site which discusses recipes for rolling your own.

Edit: just read an article where he responds to that concern:

> The powder has always contained some soy lecithin, but the liquid actually shifts from rice protein to soy for its primary protein source.

>

>The change comes for a variety of reasons, including the water footprint of rice farming and the desire to make as many components of Soylent as sustainable as possible. Rhinehart also says that the switch to soy for protein enhances the product’s texture and taste. There are some public concerns about high consumption of soy, but Rhinehart is quick to dismiss them. "Because we’re not using whole soy, we’re just using the protein isolate…the isoflavone levels are much lower than what they would be in soy flour or tofu. There are some levels, but they’re well below any that have shown to have an effect," he explained. "There was somewhat specious research in the past on what impact soy can have on testosterone levels and those have been widely debunked. We’ve certainly done our research here and we’ll be posting our analysis on the Web as well."

Re: Soylent 2.0

#58

Post by normloman »

nightcracker wrote: post #26
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.

Price and laziness. It's a lot cheaper than eating out, and (often) a bit cheaper than cooking yourself. On top of that, it's a lot easier to just shake a bottle and eat than to cook.

It may be faster than cooking for yourself, but not always cheaper.

http://www.watchusthrive.org/Libraries/Resources_Documents/B...

Re: Soylent 2.0

#59

Post by fizzbatter »

orangecat wrote: post #54
fizzbatter wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

There's a weird psuedo-religious aspect to it too. It's right to spend an hour cooking, and wrong to have a convenient pre-made meal, even if it's nutritionally as good or better.

Couldn't agree more.

I completely admit that Soylent is not perfect, and i am also a little worried of the (many?) aspects of nutrition that we're unaware of. But many people live on Fast Food, which scares me far far more than Soylent does.

But just because something is not perfect, does not warrant the very odd zealotry that i see for "normal" food and against Soylent (and like products).

It's honestly, flat out bizarre to me. They act like "normal" food is their favorite sports team, or a company that they have vested interest in. As if their profits will take a hit, if this new fangled Soylent thing catches on.

And i can't imagine it is for our potential health that these people are fanatical. I don't see them being so religious about many other non-healthy life habits that people have. Yet, throw in liquid food and it's a slug fest.

I just don't understand.

Re: Soylent 2.0

#60

Post by dangrossman »

EarthLaunch wrote: post #4

Given that soy is one of the common allergens, this sounds amazing (especially with it being high-fat which matches modern nutritional science) except for the soy. They should make one called "Soylent -1.0" or something. Are there any alternatives?

Soy hasn't been an ingredient in powdered Soylent since 2013 or 2014. You can still buy it on their site.
Post reply on HN