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

Soylent Month Three

robrhinehart.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 207 posts

Re: Soylent Month Three

#71

Post by javert »

DanBC wrote: post #61
jjcm wrote: post #9

I get lost in my work/play quite a bit and often forget about meals. I'd definitely be interested in trying soylent simply as a meal replacement, especially if ingestion/preparation of it is quick enough not to break my workflow.

There are a bunch of different liquid feeds available. Well known brands include Ensure and Fortisip. ( https://www.nutricia.co.uk/fortisip// ) ( http://ensure.com/ ) These have the advantage of careful preparation and high standards of QA.

I would order Soylent right now if I could. So I'm pretty excited to find out about these. I had no idea they existed. FWIW, my diet now is like 95% red meat, with some cheese occasionally added in.

What are the downsides of these compared to Soylent? I mean, what's the motivation for Soylent if these already exist?

Re: Soylent Month Three

#72

Post by mistercow »

bsimpson wrote: post #25

I'd be concerned about the long-term side effects of having little diversity in one's diet. It's been alleged that diabetes is caused by overconsumption of processed sugar and heart disease is caused by overconsumption of red meat. Either of those things in moderation is fine. Most people don't eat a consistent dose of for instance oat powder every day. It's likely that he's chosen at least one ingredient that is har…

But the whole point is that soylent is moderation. Everything in it is balanced, so if you eat only soylent, then (in theory) you shouldn't be getting too much of anything.

>It's likely that he's chosen at least one ingredient that is harmless in moderation, but is detrimental to your health over time.

Why do you believe that that is likely?

>It's also quite possible that there are other things he's underdosing on and hasn't discovered yet (like sulphur before batch #7).

Yes, this does seem quite likely. There is probably a significant number of necessary nutrients that nobody even thinks about because they're ubiquitous.

Re: Soylent Month Three

#73

Post by javert »

mistercow wrote: post #67
huhtenberg wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Consider SlimFast. Same sh#t, but in strawberry flavor.

The main problem with SlimFast, as opposed to soylent, is that almost all of its carbs are sugars. On the other hand, it probably has a slightly better Omega-3:Omega-6 ratio.

> The main problem with SlimFast, as opposed to soylent, is that almost all of its carbs are sugars

Does that actually matter? (I know nothing, genuinely curious.)

Re: Soylent Month Three

#74

Post by sowhatquestion »

jasallen wrote: post #59
tolmasky wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, thats precisely my point: I think you underestimate how many people eat McDonalds or what-have-you every day . The interesting thing about this phenomenon is that I think it takes place all over the spectrum: the poor do it as well as the rich. Perhaps you do not see this as much because you are a self-described health nut (and thus this diet probably isn't for you, the same way an Alienware computer isn't for…

haha, I really hope you are right about the problem space. I'm currently building a company that hopes to solve exactly the "forget about food and then are starving and make a bad decision" problem. Not ready to say more yet, but again, sure hope you're right :-) Anyway, if it's that thing to have on stand-by, I'm sure its ok, but so is an Ensure, a Balance Bar, a Slim-Fast, etc, so again, no real innovation here.

Note that your argument began with "It's too radical, it won't work!" and ended with "It's boring, there's nothing new here." When I see this particular pattern of cognitive dissonance, I take it as a sign that the phenomenon being dismissed has real merit. Not to single you out, either--this pattern describes perhaps the majority of arguments I've heard against Soylent.

Re: Soylent Month Three

#75

Post by adambard »

zeteo wrote: post #63
huhtenberg wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are very forward thinking. Soylent is in the aisle one. Comfort and pleasure are subjective irrational metrics that have a lot of inertia, but that change with time. I'm sure it's plausible that people would love soylent just as much as a freshly baked croissant, but it takes time. The way things stand right now , soylent solves a problem that few people have and it comes at a price that is awful. So, yeah, it's…

Even freshly baked croissants were once an odd novelty.

I encourage you to research what a croissant is and then find and devour one. This comment makes me feel like you're missing out on that.

Re: Soylent Month Three

#76

Post by nazgulnarsil »

Another shameless plug for Soylent Orange. It's gratifying to see him bump his recipe towards mine in switching to oats. If you've never seen this before SO is the off the shelf version. It doesn't quite hit the same optimal micronutrient profile, but it gets you close. I find this + one meat based meal per day works pretty well.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AjA38cUd4BZBdGZ...

I have yet to do a proper min-maxing of ingredients for optimal nutrients/calorie.

Re: Soylent Month Three

#77

Post by sowhatquestion »

DanielStraight wrote: post #33
TheCapn wrote: post #22

"surely we can make food that is tastier, cheaper, and more nutritious than anything that exists naturally." This premise assumes we understand, with no uncertainty, how the human body functions and utilizes nutrients. Since this is still a huge mystery to science (and much of what we "know" currently is just guesswork) any 100% simulated food diet will only prove to be "better" by a stroke of luck. We've seen his po…

Indeed. To sum up some of the basic issues with his research so far: Sample size is 1. He's still eating, just much less often. Some nutrients are only required in very small amounts, which he may still be getting from his occasional meal. Three months is a very short time frame on which to evaluate a diet. Even something as simple and well-understood as scurvy can take three months to develop. In other words, he cou…

>Sample size is 1.

No. He has a group of volunteers who are testing it with him, see the second post: http://robrhinehart.com/?p=474

Not to mention the community that's sprung up around it, on http://discourse.soylent.me and elsewhere

Re: Soylent Month Three

#78

Post by [deleted] »

javert wrote: post #73
mistercow wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The main problem with SlimFast, as opposed to soylent, is that almost all of its carbs are sugars. On the other hand, it probably has a slightly better Omega-3:Omega-6 ratio.

> The main problem with SlimFast, as opposed to soylent, is that almost all of its carbs are sugars Does that actually matter? (I know nothing, genuinely curious.)

[deleted]

Re: Soylent Month Three

#79

Post by mistercow »

quannabe wrote: post #30
thangalin wrote: post #4

"If people had more self-control obesity would take care of itself." Obesity might be partly genetic. http://www.cdc.gov/genomics/resources/diseases/obesity/

Enough of this. We should fight the acceptance of obesity and externalizing blame. You alone are responsible for your weight, health, and life.

Yes and no. There is a thin line to walk here. On the one hand, there is a definitely harmful component to the fat acceptance movement as you point out. On the other hand, discrimination and humiliation of obese people is wrong and counterproductive.

But the fact is that there are some people for whom obesity is actually a medical problem that has nothing to do with self-control, and a statement like the one in the TFA demonstrates considerable privilege blindness.

Re: Soylent Month Three

#80

Post by manmal »

While I would be more than a bit anxious that I miss some nutrient (just like the missing MSM/sulphur) because soylent is a blend of raw earths and isolated ingredients - Rob's mentions of increased focus and better sleep really inspire me to check on what major nutrients I could be missing, and fix that by either supplementing or changing food habits. [I understand that Rob's motivations for using chemically produced ingredients are political and economical (resource consumption), but I'd rather eat live food as long as it's possible :)]

E.g. I recently started increasing potassium (eating more lentils and potatoes, and the occasional powder/pill) and my focus increased so much. Two years ago, I discovered that keeping vitamin D up in winter stops me from getting sick all the time. And I think MSM helps me recover faster after workouts (interesting fact: cooking decreases MSM content radically, so one could eat raw stuff instead of drinking it in powder-form).

Next step: Instead of swallowing pills, incorporate food that contains all that stuff. And have a deeper look at Soylent's more exotic ingredients.

Post reply on HN