61–70 of 103 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In what way? According to who?
The dozens of people on the Soylent subreddit who got weeks of diarrhea followed by jaundice? Though I think my favorite was the people who were arguing that some level of mold was acceptable if it meant they didn't have to deal with the inconvenience of foil seals.
Ugh -- Soylent and now this seems to represent a branch of scientism at its worse. Our bodies are complicated. Therefore, nutrition science is complicated, and very much a work in progress. Because people eat various things all their lives in an uncontrolled way, and because what you eat can have impacts on you 10, 20, or 50 years down the line, getting reliable nutritional data is extremely expensive and difficult .…
Additionally, there are a wide variety of traditional diets that cover very different foods. Since everything in the body interacts in complicated ways, we cannot even generalize specific foods as being "non-risky" to eat, since the empirical evidence we have only applies to the interactions of each food with the rest of the diet. So it's not clear what would actually constitute a definitive "traditional" diet; the best we could do would be to try and mimic a specific traditional diet as closely as possible, which still doesn't take into account the interactions caused by non-diet aspects of health like amount of exercise.
There is value in that kind of stability, but by incorporating mainstream nutrition research into your diet you can trade increased risk for what is likely to be a better average result. I say likely to be better than average because, as incomplete as nutrition data is, some data is still better than no data. It doesn't make sense to ignore what we know in the moment just because it might be wrong later. As long as you research carefully and stick to the most well studied aspects of nutrition, risk is minimal.
It's also worth pointing out that the normal person's diet today is already a large departure from traditional diets. So even if we assume a "traditional" diet is the goal, it does not follow that that Soylent would be better or worse than the normal person's diet today. It's likely that the human body is adaptable enough to handle whatever you eat.
Ugh -- Soylent and now this seems to represent a branch of scientism at its worse. Our bodies are complicated. Therefore, nutrition science is complicated, and very much a work in progress. Because people eat various things all their lives in an uncontrolled way, and because what you eat can have impacts on you 10, 20, or 50 years down the line, getting reliable nutritional data is extremely expensive and difficult .…
Seems like some folks have really poor diets by choice, and this couldn't be that much worse. Could it?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They've addressed this many times. There are different "grades" of maltodextrin with different glycemic indexes. Soylent uses a higher grade with a low glycemic index. Google "low DE maltodextrin." Soylent also uses other low-glycemic carbs such as isomaltulose.
The glycemic index of a carbohydrate is a bad measure of its quality. A better measure is the degree to which it is fermented by bacteria in the intestines. Furthermore, there is research demonstrating that carbohydrates consumed without the phytonutrients that normally accompany them in whole food increase markers of oxidative stress and inflamation. Soylent might be better than a frozen pizza or fast food, but in t…
Ugh -- Soylent and now this seems to represent a branch of scientism at its worse. Our bodies are complicated. Therefore, nutrition science is complicated, and very much a work in progress. Because people eat various things all their lives in an uncontrolled way, and because what you eat can have impacts on you 10, 20, or 50 years down the line, getting reliable nutritional data is extremely expensive and difficult .…
Your appeal to nature holds as much weight as the soylent science when it comes down to it. The only constant in the human diet is change. What our ancestors ate even 500 years ago has very little overlap with what we even consider "traditional food" now.
Soylent is so awful for you. They really capitalized on the ignorance of millenials with regard to proper nutrition. edit: Shouldn't have trigger responded, but one of my biggest gripes with Soylent is their use of maltodextrin. It's not something you want to be consuming in mass every day. It is good for post-workout nutrition but as a meal you may as well be consuming sugar.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Honest question: Do you not enjoy food? What do you think the benefits are? I'm asking because I think I would be severely depressed on such a monotone diet. I love cooking and it gives me great joy to eat good food, or new kinds of food, or even the boring lunch restaurant type food if it's done reasonably well. Lunch is also a nice social event. I'm skipping lunch sometimes (when I'm not that hungry) but I feel lik…
The choice for me is pretty simple. No breakfast, or soylent. I'd rather be eating something than nothing. If I have the chance to eat a real meal I take it, but there are also times where I literally can't. Idk why it is suddenly in vogue to shit on people for being busy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For other people who have no idea what LSA is... LSA is a 3 in 1 solution [...] made of ground linseed, ground sunflower seeds and ground almonds Seems to be a thing in Australia and New Zealand.
And just because I didn't know this until yesterday, Linseed is Flax seed, just different names for the same stuff. You can use your kitchen grade flaxseed oil for painting, putting your art supplies linseed oil on your quark is more questionable.
I guess it is one of those oils like Coconut oil, where you can ingest it or use it for a myriad of lubricating and protective purposes.
For those who don't know MyMuesli: It's a company which lets you mix your own muesli (from ~350 ingredients) and ship it to you. It's one of Germanys most successful non-VC-funded startups. They started in 2007 with just a website and nowadawys got shops in most major german cities where you can pick up your ordered muesli (useful for customers who avoid the delivery costs) or buy pre-mixed packs. Even though their muesli is anything but cheap they're hugely successful.
Ugh -- Soylent and now this seems to represent a branch of scientism at its worse. Our bodies are complicated. Therefore, nutrition science is complicated, and very much a work in progress. Because people eat various things all their lives in an uncontrolled way, and because what you eat can have impacts on you 10, 20, or 50 years down the line, getting reliable nutritional data is extremely expensive and difficult .…
I disagree with your assertion that it is "extremely risky" to apply current nutrition knowledge. Since we don't understand the effects of the "traditional" diet, it's not clear whether it is helping or hurting us. Yes, we have empirical evidence, but as you said it is poorly controlled. So all we can know is that if we eat a "traditional" diet, we will probably live close to the average lifespan and have average hea…