
The Soylent Revolution Will Not Be Pleasurable - adriand
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/29/technology/personaltech/the-soylent-revolution-will-not-be-pleasurable.html?hp
======
JumpCrisscross
There is a false all-or-nothing mentality being forced on Soylent. Part of
this is Soylent's original marketing as a "food replacement". Part is their
present refusal to make their product taste better. But part is our cultural
unfamiliarity with separating utility from luxury eating.

I'm a foodie. I delight in trying new dishes, restaurants and cuisines. I'm
also a marked extrovert. I constantly seek out social settings and
experiences. Combined with my ineptitude at cooking and address in Manhattan,
we have why I eat one to three meals out a day. I manage the healthfulness of
my diet with simple rules. Salads for lunch, finish all the greens on your
plate before moving to other things, defaulting to seafood over red meat, etc.

But this comes at a cost, both in dollars and in time. Many times, a meal will
go half eaten, because I have to rush out for a call. Other times, dinner gets
pushed out so late that the only options aren't healthy. Yes, I could schedule
meals into the day, but sometimes I prefer doing other things. And it's not
just work! I feel starved during film festivals, too, between full schedules
and my refusal to feed on solely popcorn and tapas for two weeks.

I don't think too many people will ever seriously replace a majority of their
meals with something like Soylent. But even shifting my weekday lunches and
late-night snacks from salads, paninis and starving to something cheap,
healthy, and available would be welcome. A prerequisite to this would be
Soylent not tasting like pancake batter. Utility doesn't have to be
unpleasant. But there is a place for this amongst people who love food, love
people, and aren't necessarily workaholics.

~~~
niels_olson
I would recommend against getting too many calories for too long from
something like Soylent. One issue people are missing is Wolf's law: bone grows
into stress. You want strong knees and ankles? Run. If you don't chew you will
end up with a glass jaw and no teeth. This is a common problem in the elderly:
they start loosing a couple teeth and they're quickly all gone because they
modify their eating choices to avoid foods that have become difficult to chew.

~~~
spitz
I wouldn't be surprised to see the Soylent guys come out with a solid food
version for this and other reasons.

~~~
serf
perhaps it could be green, plasticky chips.

------
gfodor
A. Cheap. B. Healthy. C. Pleasurable. D. Fast/Easy

Pick three.

ABC = Homecooked meals, ACD = fast food, BCD = eating out, ABD = Soylent. Not
complicated. Soylent provides a specific set of design tradeoffs that suit
certain situations better than the alternatives.

~~~
samstave
Why is soylent not having a billion dollar DoD contract at this time?

~~~
kenrikm
IIRC one of the big things they had to change with the MREs was to add more
variety. Troops get low morale eating the same thing over and over.

~~~
jonah
My grandfather fought on the front lines in the Pacific Theater during the
War.

Being at the very end of the supply chain, they got the worse, least desirable
MREs after the variety had been cherry-picked by everyone else upstream. I
forget exactly which ones they were but it was pretty grim.

------
Xenmen
[For a purported breakthrough with such grand plans for reshaping the food
industry, I found Soylent to be a punishingly boring, joyless product. From
the plain white packaging to the purposefully bland, barely sweet flavor to
the motel-carpet beige hue of the drink itself, everything about Soylent
screams function, not fun. It may offer complete nourishment, but only at the
expense of the aesthetic and emotional pleasures many of us crave in food.]
[It suggests that Soylent’s creators have forgotten a basic ingredient found
in successful tech products, not to mention in most good foods. That
ingredient is delight.]

Christ, it's as if he's willfully ignored everything; that's the POINT of
Soylent, to give the option of a functional meal not for pleasure, so that you
actually _have_ a choice whether. Right now you don't, you have non-nutritious
meals that don't take preparation time and are cheap, and nutritious meals
that take vast amounts of time to prepare and/or are generally more expensive
to acquire/prepare.

Now you have a third choice, complete nutrition at cost, minus the pleasure
associated with the above two choices.

~~~
Aqueous
Right - Soylent will be successful based on how it defines its mission, not as
a replacement for traditional food but as a better second choice. However, if
I remember correctly some of the first publicity I saw about Soylent pitched
it like it was somehow a _replacement_ for food - and that's what I think this
writer was reacting to. I agree with the author that I still would be
reluctant to sacrifice the pleasures of eating even a non-nutritious meal for
complete, ready-to-go nutrition (if that's even what Soylent is) more than a
few times.

Soylent strikes me as a food not unlike MREs for the military or some of the
dehydrated food that astronauts take up to space. That is, it could be the
kind of nutrition that targets people in extreme circumstances, who might
_desperately_ need nutrition and energy but, because they're in the middle of
a war zone, or in a space suit hovering above Earth, cannot get to it.

~~~
ryukafalz
It could also be useful in developing nations where access to food isn't as
prevalent as it is in first-world countries.

Pleasurable or not, Soylent does offer huge value in these situations simply
in that it's a way to _not die_.

~~~
gamblor956
People in developing nations can eat for an entire _week or more_ on $3.
Soylent's got a long way to go before it's anything more than an overpriced
meal replacement shake.

It's not even a disruptive product--there have been similar meal replacement
shakes available at Whole Foods for many years now, at similarly outrageous
prices. Soylent's innovation is its marketing--especially in identifying and
chasing its target market.

~~~
gfodor
What other meal replacement products? There are plenty of _supplements_ but
are there other products that claim to give you 100% of your necessary
nutrition with 3 daily servings?

~~~
gamblor956
Garden of Life and Shakeology are the two big ones I remember off the top of
my head. There are more. Google is your friend.
([https://www.google.com/search?q=vegan+meal+replacement+shake](https://www.google.com/search?q=vegan+meal+replacement+shake))

------
ianstallings
From the related video on that page: _" if this was all we had to survive,
then what would be the point of living"_? That basically sums it up. I've ate
field meals before in the Army and although they are okay too, I take the
preparation of good food seriously. It's one of the relatively inexpensive
luxuries of modern first world society. Taking the time to enjoy a meal gives
my spirit a rise.

And honestly, when the world seems to be moving towards whole foods, organic
meals, and avoiding processed foods, this seems to be going in the opposite
direction. Not saying it has bad ingredients, but that the _appearance_ of
being processed will dissuade people.

------
papa_bear
I wrote this comment on an earlier soylent thread that got buried, but I think
it could find a big market in people who care A LOT about eating specific
nutrient proportions.

I'm working on the website Eat This Much
([http://www.eatthismuch.com](http://www.eatthismuch.com)) and a huge portion
of our audience are people that want to eat EXACTLY 40% of their calories from
carbs, 30% from fat, and 30% from protein (that's part of the zone diet, as an
example). Our meal plan generator allows you to request those proportions, but
sometimes it can't meet the exact targets due to any number of other
constraints, and it's a huge source of complaints from our users. It's a
pretty complicated problem to solve while trying to give people a varied and
interesting diet with real food, but Soylent makes it very simple. I use my
own site as much as possible, and I'm excited to have it give me half of my
calories from Soylent (probably my breakfast and lunch).

~~~
ultimatedelman
this site is pretty cool. i'd do it if it didn't cost almost 3x as much as
pandora per year.

------
Rudism
The main appeal of Soylent for me (I've been taking somewhere between 50%-75%
of my calories from a DIY Soylent recipe for about three months now) is the
ability to very precisely control how many calories I am consuming on a
daily/weekly basis. I had been trying to lose weight for a while before
switching to Soylent, but found it difficult to always know exactly how many
calories were in something (especially when eating out or cooking something
using a wide variety of ingredients). The frustrations stemming from this made
progress difficult.

With Soylent, I know exactly how many calories I'm eating. I can increase or
decrease very easily to make room for "cheat meals" on evenings and weekends
which I enjoy much more frequently and with less guilt than I did when I was
trying to control my calorie intake with regular food. My weight loss progress
has resumed to exactly the rate it should based on the number of calories I'm
eating, which is possibly further proof that my estimation skills on a non-
Soylent diet were not very good.

Soylent is a preferable solution to this problem over something like Slim-fast
or Ensure mainly due to cost, but also taste. The meal replacement shakes
marketed for calorie-control/weight loss are generally very sugary or sweet
tasting which is not something I could do for 2-3 meals a day for 5 days a
week. Something more bland and flavorless like Soylent is much easier to
handle as a staple meal long-term.

------
chipsy
Here's what my on-the-street perspective is telling me: Over time the shelf
space for ready-to-go protein shakes at the local convenience store
chains(Walgreens, CVS, etc.) has gradually crept up. Some of these shakes
still do the "joke's on you, this 'healthy' shake has as much sugar as Coca-
Cola" thing. But there is a generation of them, led primarily by the Muscle
Milk brand, which has stuck pretty strictly to pulling in good nutritional-
facts numbers and working on taste second.

I'm a buyer of these shakes because for me, the consumption experience is
mediated by before-and-after aspects as well as what the product tastes like.
"Will I feel good an hour after I have this?" I tell myself. And while I have
to pay a little more for the privilege of that, it's worth it for me.

Will it be a fad? I don't know. The trend has been upward so far and I think
Soylent could easily ride it.

------
baddox
That's actually one of the fairer reviews I've seen. I think the author misses
the appeal of Soylent for a lot of people, which is that for these people,
food itself is primarily a _hassle_ rather than a source of joy. These people
would rather just scarf down a boring drink for a few seconds per day to keep
themselves alive than deal with the problem of deciding on, buying, and
preparing traditional food.

~~~
bignaj
I think it speaks to some other problem if people think eating is a hassle.
Eating is super important to live, determines a lot of your health and most
people here have missed that it is also a very important social interaction.
Maybe this is the HN bubble but eating is not just about sustenance. Could you
get someone who is not a workaholic tech employee to eat this willingly?
Somehow I doubt it.

~~~
baddox
> Maybe this is the HN bubble but eating is not just about sustenance.

It _is_ only about sustenance for some people. Many (probably most) people
enjoy a lot of the food preparation and eating process. Others, myself
included, do not. Maybe it's because my sense of taste or smell is stunted.
Maybe it's because I'm socially underdeveloped. So be it. It's certainly not
because I'm a workaholic tech employee, even if I currently am, because it has
been the case as long as I can remember. Whatever the reason, I really don't
enjoy the experience of preparing or eating food.

~~~
bignaj
I think you are correct... this is for a niche market.

------
bbwharris
I personally just don't like this concept that food is a "nuisance". Or
healthy food rather. Food and meals are the one thing that brings people
together and offers up conversation, laughter, and emotion. Food is something
that a lot of people enjoy and look forward too.

Are we really supposed to just take soylent as a healthy alternative for
sustenance so we can continue to work? Just buy a juicer and keep it natural
then. But really, take the break and eat a meal with a human being. You've got
one life. Live it.

~~~
jimmar
> Are we really supposed to just take soylent as a healthy alternative for
> sustenance so we can continue to work? Just buy a juicer and keep it natural
> then. But really, take the break and eat a meal with a human being. You've
> got one life. Live it.

I didn't see any stipulations on the soylent website requiring you to avoid
socializing and stay chained to your desk while drinking it. Maybe I missed
some small print?

~~~
bbwharris
No not at all. But I don't see eating as a problem that needs a solution. I
didn't mean for my comment to mean that soylent is anti social.

------
bignaj
I don't know why there is so much hype about this product still. Maybe there's
a niche market for people who are so busy they forget to eat (another problem
in and of itself) but for everyone else it completely misses all that is good
about eating: taste, social interaction, texture, experience, temperature,
variety. Be right back, asking my girlfriend if she wants to sit and chug
Soylent tonight instead of going out for Thai.

~~~
gfodor
false dilemma.

nobody says you can't go out for Thai. but if you find yourself regularly
scarfing down a Subway sandwich for lunch and losing an hour of time in the
process, Soylent might be a healthier, more efficient alternative.

~~~
bignaj
Except I'm never doing that, so I will never buy this product. I _want_ to
lose an hour eating because I can spend time with my friends or take a break
or talk to people. Subway isn't that bad either, and is certainly more
enjoyable to eat than Soylent.

~~~
gfodor
There are literally millions upon millions of people who spend at least one
meal a day just consuming food and not socializing. If you've ever worked in a
traditional office environment people regularly take lunch at their desk if
they are too busy to socialize. It's not hard to understand the appeal of
Soylent if you step just slightly outside your own personal experience.

~~~
bignaj
I do work in a traditional office environment. The problem is being too busy,
not eating. Eating is not a problem that needs to be solved. Being too busy is
the problem that needs to be solved.

~~~
gcd
> Eating is not a problem that needs to be solved.

Obesity in America would like to have a word with you.

------
pyre
If this is truly all the body needs, then how do they deal with uptake issues?
There are several things that compete for uptake in the body in the same way
that oxygen and carbon monoxide compete when binding to the hemoglobin in your
blood.

E.g.:

\- Omega-6 fatty acids will push out the much better Omega-3 fatty acids.
IIRC, the recommended ratio is 2:1 (Omega-3 to Omega-6)[1].

\- Absorption of iron is inhibited by calcium.

[1] FYI, most oils have a _ton_ of Omega-6, and not much Omega-3. One
exception here is coconut oil, which has little of either.

------
tragicAndCruel

      costs about $3 per serving
    

Too fucking expensive for a cleverly named bachelor chow.

~~~
baddox
But probably considerably cheaper than what every person who has ordered
Soylent was previously paying per serving.

~~~
tragicAndCruel
No way. I can scrape by on ramen, potato chips, soda, hot dogs, orange juice
concentrate, cereal and milk, and come out ahead (YMMV).

GNC quality protein shakes be damned. This stuff has to hit the 25 cent mark,
per glass, to qualify for it's target market: the unwed and unloved who have
no one to cook them decent meals while toiling away at shit jobs.

------
peter-row
It sounds like the Soylent Revolution _will_ be pleasurable.

If you have Soylent for one or two meals a day, then you'll really enjoy
everything else. The mechanics of pleasure are well understood - you enjoy
things more when you don't get them so often.

And it's cheap(ish), and apparently not too unhealthy.

~~~
ekianjo
> And it's cheap(ish), and apparently not too unhealthy.

That's really too early to say.

------
AllenKids
I have nothing constructive to add. Just as a Chinese who frequently hosts
dinner party for friends and coworkers, the idea of someone voluntarily using
soylent as meal substitute is utter crazy and I feel personally insulted by
the mere existence of such horrific product.

------
Jsarokin
Still waiting for someone to invent Soylent Ramen...

I bought all the ingredients and made DIY soylent from one of the hacks
someone posted... The taste was a serious problem. I wanted to drink it for a
week, but there was a 0% chance of that happening the way it tasted.

Then I tried making Soylent Pasta, but boiled out all the nutrients and the
water turned piss yellow ([http://juliansarokin.com/soylent-for-science-pasta-
bad-decis...](http://juliansarokin.com/soylent-for-science-pasta-bad-
decision/))... But if there was a way to not mess that up, I think that could
be really interesting.

Still waiting on my official Soylent, hopefully it tastes better than my
catastrophe.

------
mpetrov
Wouldn't Soylent eventually add some flavouring to make it less
utilitarian/boring? It's still the first version of the product and it seems
that the author doesn't even consider the possibility that there would be
variations of the powder for variety and different taste preferences in the
future. Does anyone know if they ever stated anywhere that the taste won't
change?

------
yew
Does the author not understand that significant numbers of people _already_
don't often get the opportunity to eat food that could be described as
enjoyable? He seems to dismiss the idea without justification.

Given the choice between unhealthy almost-but-not-quite zero-variety food and
healthy actually zero-variety food, the latter strikes me as the better option
- and if you don't happen to live near a source of good food (no bakeries,
butchers, delis, fresh fruit vendors, etc . . .), being low on time or money
means making that choice (or not having one to make).

Speaking for myself, the cheap and ultra-quick food I usually ate during my
years at school was just the same thing over and over - it didn't taste very
good to begin with and certainly didn't improve with time. I couldn't fix
something myself, or wait for someone else to fix something, or spend time
socializing (that's what weekends were for!), or go somewhere else. I can say
that I honestly would have preferred something like Soylent on grounds of both
convenience and taste.

------
webnrrd2k
Soylent strikes me as too similar to multivitamins, which haven't fared well
in many studies, even though they contain a bunch of the stuff your body
needs.

There is a lot we don't understand about how food and human nutrition works,
and I'd be nervous about relying on a heavily engineered food as more than an
occasional addition to my diet.

~~~
vixin
Yes, 'There is a lot we don't understand about how food and human nutrition
works' pretty much sums it up.

Worth noting that in some reports, multivitamin preparations have been
associated with adverse health outcomes. Popping pills of whatever kind can be
dicey.

------
Zigurd
Obesity and diabetes imply that a lot of Americans have an absolutely crap
diet that probably isn't delivering much pleasure, either. If Soylent becomes
a popular alternative for people who can't feed themselves properly, it could
shave billions off health care costs.

~~~
DanBC
I'd be interssted to see how many people will chose Soylent over fast food.
Many people on HN have said they would. I suspect most people wouldn't.

------
jnks
"actually Farthard was in my original lede, was wisely cut" \- Farhad Manjoo,
the author of the piece [1]

[1]
[https://twitter.com/fmanjoo/status/471825996174217216](https://twitter.com/fmanjoo/status/471825996174217216)

------
shirro
The only thing missing that will stop Soylent making heaps of money is salt
and msg. People will eat anything if you add salt and msg even some oatmeal
goop with added vitamins.

People who think nobody will eat Soylent because it isn't a pleasurable home
cooked product have missed the mountain of products on sale that are nothing
much more more than starch and oil with salt and msg added. Take something
soylent-like and add a flavour pouch that will make it taste like instant
ramen. Then you just have to work out how to make it 99c a meal and you will
clean up.

------
sp332
Compared to what, the TV-dinner and fast-food revolution?

------
glifchits
This reads like the opinion of one who is scared of the future.

~~~
tremols
Because dystopic ideas are the new cool, with self driving cars and astronaut
food... seems that the future is designed by startrek fans that did never read
1984.

~~~
krapp
As much as I like to shake my cane at those confounded kids and their self-
driving automobiles, at least they can claim their revolutionary world-saving
product would actually be revolutionary.

------
gfodor
It's telling that even though this individual claims to dislike Soylent, he
continued to drink it for 90% of his meals on some days. Unless artificially
forcing himself to drink Soylent was part of the experiment, his actions say
he prefers convenience over taste. The fact that so many commentators seem
terrified of the addition of another _option_ for food, without removing the
ones we have today, tells me Soylent is going to be truly disruptive. The
skepticism of Soylent in the mainstream media has been very much "I don't know
why, but it just seems wrong to me." Appeal to tradition 101.

~~~
Aqueous
I think he was on assignment - that's why he consumed only Soylent for a week.
It's just like the Forbes writer who forced herself to live only on BitCoin
for a week. In her case, even though her first experience was uneven and a
huge hassle, she eventually repeated her experiment, and found her experience
was vastly improved. Unfortunately for Soylent, I think it's going to taste
exactly the same in a year.

~~~
gfodor
But he says that he didn't only consume Soylent for a week, that he still ate
regular meals. And then went on to say that there were times when he drank
Soylent he would have preferred a regular meal. It makes no sense, why not
just drink Soylent when the lack of taste was less important than the
efficiency? This would have been a fairer test. If by the end of the week the
guy was no longer drinking Soylent for any meals, then I'd buy that Soylent
was doomed, but that's not what the experiment was.

