
Soylent 1.0 arrives at Ars: We mix it up and slurp it down - sunsu
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2014/05/soylent-1-0-arrives-at-ars-we-mix-it-up-and-slurp-it-down/
======
morbius
The gas comment and upsetting of irregularity might seem humorous to the
author, but as a biologist and the child of two physicians (one being a
gastroenterologist), this seems very disconcerting. Certain foods that contain
disproportionate amounts of certain ingredients (e.g. spices, excessive
starches, excessive dietary fiber) do upset bowel movement patterns, but a mix
of vitamins and nutrients shouldn't do that. It would be interesting to
analyze the effects of a protein shake on bowel regularity and the effects of
Soylent on bowel regularity on a single subject, and then compare the two.

Also, foul-smelling gas is usually caused when the balance of the gut
microbiome is disturbed in some significant way, and this factor combined with
the effects described by the author make me very anxious about the probable
proliferation of Soylent. It's one thing for short-term effects, but what
about Soylent in the long term? A hampered gut microbiome is severely
detrimental to the health of a person's immune system.

EDIT: Just saw the amount of sucralose in each serving. Makes the gut
irregularity a lot clearer. Still concerning, though.

~~~
brandon272
Another explanation for the increase in gas and change in regularity might be
that Soylent contains a fair amount of fibre, which is one thing that the
typical American diet is lacking.

~~~
jqm
In that case a possible solution would be several drops of beano per can.

------
fasteo
I am still amazed that this product is attracting some much attention. This
product is crap, born out of plain gross ignorance.

\- Completely useless source of Vitamin D (D2 instead of D3).

\- All K1, nothing of K2.

\- Alpha-tocopherol as the only source of Vitamin E family (4 tocopherols and
4 tocotrienols)

\- Retinol as the only source of Vitamin A (80% should come from mixed
carotenoids)

\- Iron ???? You should NEVER supplement with iron (probably the same for
copper)

\- Inferior form of Magnesium (oxide). Should use citrate, or some chelated
form.

I would go on and on all day long with this but it is the missing ingredients
what is really disturbing:

Macro (carbs,protein and fat) plus micro (vitamins, minerals and trace
elements) are just the tip of the iceberg when we talk about healthy
nutrition. Where are all the phytonutrients (flavonoids, glucosinolates,
phytoestrogens, carotenoids, etc) ? They are a "non nutritive", bioactive
little molecules that make the fine tuning (read anti-cancer, immune system
potentiators, etc) within our body. They are not essential for life, but they
are indeed essential for health and longevity. There are 20.000+ known
phytonutrients and it is now clear that they work together in synergistic
fashion to provide their health benefits. Macros are as a good as the
phytonutrients that come with them.

Phytonutrients are those little resistors, condensers and little chips you see
in the motherboard that doesn't really get into the spec sheets: They seem to
do nothing, but try to remove them and see your CPU blow up.

I go shopping once per-week and I can make a rare steak with sea salt and a
big fresh spinach+tomato+olive oil+vinegar salad in 3 minutes, chronometer in
hand. Liver with onions - once per week - take 20 minutes to prepare but it
pays off: A authentic nutrient powerhouse.

I do love supplements, but I use them the way they are meant to be used: as
supplements.

~~~
gone35
I see you hold strong opinions (I am very critical of Soylent myself), but it
might be wise to re-visit the evidence for some of your strongly-held
assertions --otherwise you might end up misinforming others, and yourself.

For instance, what you say about 'NEVER supplement[ing] with iron' is quite
wrong. Iron deficiency anemia is quite common, especially for young women; and
it is routinely treated by iron supplementation [1], even over-the-counter: if
anything, iron's bioavailability in adults is very low, and it is difficult to
exceed safe levels (although it's the opposite for children) [2].

Also Vitamin D2 is _not_ useless at all. Even though _some_ recent studies
have shown _some_ limited evidence that D3 is stronger and longer-acting;
decades of clinical practice have shown the safety and efficacy of high-dose
D2 in treating severe vitamin D deficiency [3]. It's disingenuous to say
otherwise.

And... what you say about Vitamin K1 vs K2 is also far from well-established.
Putting aside the fact that actual clinical vitamin K deficiency is extremely
rare in the first place, K1 is the most commonly used form for a reason: even
though there has been some recent work indicating possible differences in
bioavailability and function on the part of K2; current knowledge is still
very limited, and there is not enough evidence to displace K1 as the main
formulation approved for dietary supplements [1,2].

I could go on and on with other inaccuracies in what you said, but you get the
idea.

Also be careful with overdoing that liver with onions habit. Even though
animal river is very rich in iron and copper (which likely explains part of
how you feel after eating it); it also happens to contain high amounts of
vitamin A in retinoid (retinol) form, which as you correctly point out should
be taken in moderation due to their much higher bioavailability _vis a vis_
carotenoids, thus increasing its potential toxicity [7].

[1]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_supplement](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_supplement)

[2] [http://www.webmd.com/vitamins-and-supplements/lifestyle-
guid...](http://www.webmd.com/vitamins-and-supplements/lifestyle-
guide-11/iron-supplements?page=3)

[3]
[http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/589256_4](http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/589256_4)

[4]
[http://www.ilsi.org/Europe/Documents/Menaquinones%20and%20hu...](http://www.ilsi.org/Europe/Documents/Menaquinones%20and%20human%20health.pdf)

[5]
[http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/scdocs/doc/nda_op_ej822_vit_k2_...](http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/scdocs/doc/nda_op_ej822_vit_k2_en.pdf)

[6]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liver_(food)](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liver_\(food\))

[7]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitamin_A#Equivalencies_of_reti...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitamin_A#Equivalencies_of_retinoids_and_carotenoids_.28IU.29)

~~~
fasteo
Great review.

I should have pointed out that we are talking about healthy subjects here.
People with anemia should take iron supplements. I am with you here. Same for
people with severe vit D. deficiency. In this case, any form of vit. D will
benefit them.

Thanks for the advice about the liver. I only take it once a week and a very
limited amount (maybe 70-80 grams). In this case, my main course if basmatic
rice with the liver for some fantastic flavoring.

Yeap, I love eating real food.

~~~
gone35
Oh ok, got you. Thank you for clarifying.

Sure! As long as that's not polar bear liver [1]; you be mindful of other
unlikely dietary sources of unusually high retinol content like sweet
potatoes, pumpkins or cod liver oil [2]; and keep up with regular check-ups;
you'll surely avoid hypervitaminosis A.

[1]
[http://www.patient.co.uk/doctor/Hypervitaminosis.htm](http://www.patient.co.uk/doctor/Hypervitaminosis.htm)

[2] [http://bestnaturalfoods.com/newsletter/vitamin-a-too-
much.ht...](http://bestnaturalfoods.com/newsletter/vitamin-a-too-much.html)

~~~
fasteo
Case in point to show how I use supplements: My kids won´t take liver, no
matter how hard I try to "hide" it. So, I give them 1/4 teaspoon per week of
cod liver oil (green pastures, fermented).

Again, it´s not the supplements; it´s the product.

------
beloch
If you know how, it's surprising how deliciously and nutritiously you can eat
for ~$10/day, which is what Soylent currently costs. Doing so does require
cooking and a bit of planning. Obviously, filet mignon is off the menu, but
you'd be surprised what still is. Also, (properly chosen) real food is proven
while Soylent is not.

So, what is the niche for Soylent?

People who know about nutrition know that you probably shouldn't trust the
claims Soylent makes until it's been on the market for a while. People who
know how and are willing to cook economically probably don't want to risk
their health on an unproven product that won't save them money (currently).
People who are largely ignorant of nutrition and eat ramen and Kraft Dinner
daily probably won't want to give up the taste they'd be missing out on, nor
pay _extra_ for it.

There are a few crazy people who will adopt Soylent as their primary staple,
but the majority of business will likely be from people looking for novelty or
an occasional time-saving meal replacement. Basically the meal-shake crowd.
What's the best way to appeal to this segment? Claim that your product can be
eaten daily without causing health-problems, just as Soylent is currently
doing. Future variants might include calorically reduced versions for the diet
crowd or a protein-boosted version for the (wannabe)body-builder crowd.
There's plenty of commercial opportunity here.

Will Soylent actually change the world for the poor though? If they can bring
the price down Soylent might make a difference with the educated poor, but
that's a very small segment of the population. The uneducated poor will
gravitate towards food that tastes better.

~~~
netcan
I find the "soylent is cheap and $10 a day" message very weird too.

$10 per person per day (in multi-month bulk, it $12.15 per day for a weekly
supply) is on the expensive side for grocery shopping. If your goal is
nutritious thriftiness, $2-5 per day is a very achievable goal. If you want
cheap on a global "nutrition-crisis" level, $0.30-$2 is the goal. I've hear
soylent mentioned in that context too.

It's only "cheap" when compared to eating out which seems like a very
disingenuous comparison.

I'm not dismissing soylent. I'd be interested in trying it. But, calling it
cheap is crazy.

~~~
vidarh
I spend more than $10/day on lunch alone. Without eating out.

"Cheap" varies greatly by location, and expectation, and how much time you're
willing to put into cutting cost. And if you're considering Soylent,
presumably spending lots of time planning out your meal is probably not high
on your list of desirable activities (I could probably easily cut my lunch
cost, but I value the time it'd take at more than my potential savings)..

~~~
netcan
Sure.

$100 is a lot less than some other people spend on lunch. Bench pressing 100kg
is easy for some people. I wouldn't call it light. When you say something is
"cheap" it's always relative.

But, there is within the bounds of regular conversation there are some
assumptions you make about things. If you say this jar of powdered chocolate
beverage is cheap, I will assume you mean relative to coffee, tea or something
else I'm likely to make at home and not relative to a barrister coffee or a
martini in bar.

Here I think the logical comparison is other powdered foods (slim fast,
protein shakes, weight gainers, etc) or grocery shopping.

~~~
vidarh
> Here I think the logical comparison is other powdered foods (slim fast,
> protein shakes, weight gainers, etc) or grocery shopping.

Then, let me repeat myself: I spend $10/day on lunch based on _grocery
shopping_. Easily.

There are certainly many parts of the world where $10/day for Soylent would
not be competitive at all. And it certainly would be less competitive for
people who value their time low enough to spend time keeping the cost down (I
could probably cut 1/3 of my lunch bill by going to the cheaper grocery store
5-10 minutes away rather than the one downstairs from the office; and I could
cut quite a bit off the bill by spending time finding the cheapest lunch meat,
and the cheapest bread etc., but I won't).

But the point remains, that while $10/day may sound expensive, in many
locations it is not, and even less so when comparing with "shopping as quickly
as possible" vs. bargain hunting.

------
lvevjo
I'm bothered by the amount of maltodextrin. (Among other things. But this
jumps out at me.) Assuming this is correct:

[http://blog.soylent.me/post/68180382810/soylent-1-0-macronut...](http://blog.soylent.me/post/68180382810/soylent-1-0-macronutrient-
overview)

That's a lot. As you can see it's the #1 ingredient in Soylent:

[http://blog.soylent.me/post/74770956256/soylent-1-0-final-
nu...](http://blog.soylent.me/post/74770956256/soylent-1-0-final-nutrition)

They claim that the overall glycemic index (with fiber, etc.) is "rather low",
but I can't find fasting vs. postprandial glucose readings that would
substantiate this. By itself, maltodextrin has a rather _high_ GI. I do see
that Rhinehart posted about this concern a while back:

[http://discourse.soylent.me/t/effects-of-soylent-on-
diabetic...](http://discourse.soylent.me/t/effects-of-soylent-on-
diabetics/4894)

...but does anyone have more recent info? Without more data, diabetics and
prediabetics should best avoid this for now.

edit: A clarification - blood glucose testing won't actually tell you the
product's GI, of course. And the important number to look at is glycemic
_load_ , but that is easy to calculate given GI. The Soylent folks have not
yet shared the GI afaik. (They would need to send it to a lab for testing.)
Diabetics should already be monitoring their glucose levels anyway, so I
assume they will figure out pretty quickly if this stuff spikes their blood
sugar. It's not something you would want to replace all your meals with if
that is the case!

Whether or not you are diabetic, it would be a good idea to go to your doctor
and get complete bloodwork done before you start using this if you are
planning to drink the stuff on a daily basis and _especially_ if you replace
the majority of your meals. Get tested for the sort of things they check when
you get a physical, but within a few months leading up to the point you start
Soylenting. Test again 6-12 months after you start and compare the numbers,
then kindly make a spreadsheet or something and share your results.

~~~
tachyonbeam
I've heard that they had no nutritionists onboard...

~~~
nomedeplume
False: perhaps they had no accredited nutritionists. The founder has claimed
to have read several texts.

~~~
cloudwalking
Sorry but non-accredited nutritionists don't count as nutritionists.

~~~
tormeh
They do. It's like art. The protected term is dietitian.

------
sirdogealot
That's a great writeup.

I can't wait to try mine once it arrives!

I almost forgot about the project and basically just wrote it off as $65 down
the drain when they surprisingly emailed me earlier this week saying it had
been shipped out.

Funny how the $65 still ends up going down the drain one way or another when
you spend it on edible products.

I am curious about their project from a legal standpoint.

I live in another country and basically just clicked through some acceptance
forms and sent them the money what seems like over a year ago now.

What happens to the soylent company if I die after ingesting it for a week or
a month straight? Even if it wasn't what actually killed me?

On another note... after having done some research into making my dog's
food... isn't soylent basically just dog food for humans? They take all the
right amounts of industrial grade vitamins, mix it together with a substrate,
and bake it into kibble bits.

Is soylent just kibble without the baking?

~~~
nemo
It's more like a meal replacement shake than dog food. It's very much like
Ensure or Jevity or whatever. All of those do the same basic thing of trying
to cover basic nutritional requirements.

The big difference is the marketing. Most of those products assumed you were
either unable to eat or trying to lose weight. Soylent is roughly the same
product but marketed to people who aren't interested in eating.

~~~
techtalsky
I think there's a significant difference in that Ensure and Jevity aren't
meant to be sustainable as a long term food source, and don't optimize for
cost per meal.

~~~
2muchcoffeeman
There must be some long term solution that exists already.

Think about people in comas, people who have parts of their jaw removed due to
various oral and throat cancers.

If they can get the price down I'd probably try it too. Can't be worse than a
protein shake as a post-workout supplement.

~~~
colechristensen
[http://www.amazon.com/s/?&field-
keywords=tube+feeding+formul...](http://www.amazon.com/s/?&field-
keywords=tube+feeding+formula)

It's not exactly expensive, not that I'd recommend trying it.

~~~
sirdogealot
Yea really, you want to live off of an IV drip and never move?

Go for it, you will probably survive. Just not experiencing a very fulfilling
life.

~~~
JetSpiegel
Well, if you have an Oculus Rift, you can jack into the Matrix.

------
ceasarby
How is Soylent any different than mass gainer products or protein+carbs
supplements like muscle milk?

Yeah I know, it cost 5 times more, taste worse and gives you tons of gas.

So why should I buy it over well known products?

~~~
mrmincent
You can't live off those products alone, you would miss out on important
nutrients. AFAIK Soylent is a food replacement.

~~~
ceasarby
Take vitamins, take fish oil and you'll be fine. You can't live on just
Soylent either. (Unless you chained up in dark room with Soylent as the only
food available)

~~~
aianus
How do you know you can't live on just Soylent? Their CEO has been doing it
for months.

~~~
dkersten
All we know is that this one guy has survived on it for months. How will his
health be after 5 years? 10 years? Both if he stops now and if he continues.
Nobody knows.

And that assumes that everyone is the same as this guy.

~~~
icebraining
Yes, nobody knows, that's why it's interesting to see instead of prematurely
declare it impossible.

~~~
DanBC
"Nobody knows" and "interesting to see" are very different to the claims made
by Soylent:

 _" You can finally join the easy, healthy, and affordable future of
nutrition."_

 _" What if you never had to worry about food again?"_

 _" For anyone that struggles with allergies, heartburn, acid reflux or
digestion, has trouble controlling weight or cholesterol, or simply doesn't
have the means to eat well, soylent is for you."_ (this one is clearly making
medical claims and I am amazed that Soylent avoided regulators)

 _" Soylent frees you from the time and money spent shopping, cooking and
cleaning, puts you in excellent health,"_

 _" there is much evidence that it is considerably healthier than a typical
diet."_

People can do what they like with their bodies but the Soylent founders were
shady by making these nonsense claims during fundraising.

~~~
icebraining
Sure, but ceasarby didn't raise issues about Soylent's claims, s/he wrote "You
can't live on just Soylent either.", and that's the post being replied to.

~~~
DanBC
I don't understand.

You claim that Soylent is a fun experiment. Soylent don't. Soylent claim that
you can replace all your food with this forever.

When someone says "you can't live off Soylent" and someone replies that it's a
fun experiment letting people know the lies and misrepresentations from the
producers of Soylent is a valid response. Soylent is not being marketed as an
experimental product woth some risk. Soylent is being marketed as a finished
product that has health benefits.

~~~
icebraining
I do understand. That just wasn't what was under discussion here. The back-
and-forth was about the possibility of living on Soylent-the-product, not
about the claims of the company.

------
ohwp
I'm into reef tanks. Its incredible difficult to mimic sea water conditions. A
lot of people have great results for years but there system can still collapse
within days. A synthetic alternative was started called the DSR method
improving a lot but is still fragile.

To me this shows that nature is ofter more complex than we think. Soylent
might include all product a body needs but what about chewing for example.

~~~
netcan
That's a good point, but I think you should take the "only soylent" idea with
a grain of salt. I think it's more of a mechanical rabbit goal than a real
one. Something to focus the product developers and the marketing. In real use,
I expect this will replace some portion of what people eat.

~~~
krrrh
That would be fine as an internal or pie-in-the-sky goal, but by making these
claims they are exposing their customers to health risk and themselves to
legal risk. There are hundreds of MRPs on the market, and many of them have
more thought put into their formulations than Soylent, but none of them make
the claim that you should or could live soley off the one product for any
extended period of time.

------
jacquesm
Cooking is enjoyable (even if I suck at it) and eating together with others is
an important social ritual.

Soylent takes all the enjoyment and the little bits of social interaction
still present in our lives out and replaces them with 'fueling up', a hyper-
optimized model for an already stressed to the hilt working life.

But that's why slowing down a bit is actually good. Take your time to cook,
chew your food and talk with your fellow human beings. Share your meals, every
day.

Sure, preparing and cooking food takes time. But you know, that's actually a
good thing and I'm saying that as someone that would probably spend a lot more
time still on the computer if cooking and sharing the cooked food would not be
an important part of my daily schedule. And I'll _never_ give that up. So I
guess soylent isn't for me. I prefer my foods to be fresh and tasty, and I
think I can do that for roughly the same amount of money that this goop costs.

Variation is good, social interaction is good, I can't see the point in
soylent, not to mention the interesting question of what will happen long term
healthwise if you switch to a mono-cultural product like this for any
significant fraction of your diet.

Best of luck to those that are going down this route, meanwhile I'll spend
some time with my friends and family with salads, sandwiches, pastas and other
foods over here.

~~~
icebraining
HN takes away all the enjoyment and the little bits of direct social
interaction still present in our lives and replaces them with text-only
messages, which lacks the fundamental attributes of physical presence, and
I'll never give that up, so I guess HN isn't for me.

Best of luck to those that are going down the route of online discussions,
meanwhile I'll spend some time with real people and not just bits.

~~~
jacquesm
That analogy really does not hold water.

HN allows you to interact with hundreds of people from all over the globe,
something that you could not do in real life, it would be a physical
impossibility.

On top of that it does not replace you normal day-to-day interaction with
others, nor does it aim to do so, it simply complements it.

Soylent does not do anything regular food does not already do except
(probably) save some time, replaces enjoyment of food (taste, smell) and good
company with slurping sludge and aims to replace.

Nice try though.

~~~
icebraining
The company may aim to replace all their users' meals with Soylent, but the
user can have different aims, which can just be to replace the occasional meal
that you had to rush, even if that's just once a month. Even the creator still
eats normal meals with friends and family.

Besides, it only replaces company if the only thing you can do accompanied is
eat. Otherwise, it might actually save you time to do other social activities,
instead of having to drive home and spend 90 minutes preparing and eating a
meal.

It's perfectly reasonable to have reservations about Soylent, but your comment
just sounds like a "damn kids with your video games, get off my lawn".

~~~
jacquesm
> It's perfectly reasonable to have reservations about Soylent, but your
> comment just sounds like a "damn kids with your video games, get off my
> lawn".

Actually, your commented tried to ridicule, whereas mine was made in good
faith and would have likely been exactly identical if I'd written it at 25
instead of nearly 50. In fact, back then I probably needed the health and
social aspects of food and company more than I do today (and I was well aware
of it).

I simply laid out my reasons for definitely not jumping on this bandwagon, and
I don't have any dog in the race financially or otherwise.

So, what's your motivation for attacking anybody that dares to raise doubt
about the product, or that maybe simply disagrees with their philosophy with
such energy?

9 comments in one thread is a bit much.

~~~
icebraining
I don't know your age, nor do I care. Your comment (and others here) just
strikes me as unimaginative and slightly self-aggrandizing; pontification on
the value of shared meals and slowing down makes for boring reading. It's fine
that you (and I don't mean just you) don't have an interest in Soylent, but I
don't have an interest in getting a car, and yet I don't go around posting on
Tesla threads about the value of walking and the dangers of cars.

Do you know the Onion's story of the man who mentions he has no TV[1]? That's
how those posts sound to me.

I don't have a horse in this race, I'm not in any way associated with Soylent,
nor do I even plan to buy a pack. I don't trust it as a meal replacement, and
I think their claims are overreaching. I have no problem with concrete
criticism, and you don't see me replying to ("attacking", as you put it)
people raising valid questions, just those posting just to tell us how much
they don't need it and those writing unprovable claims.

And they may be 9 posts (although they were only 8 before this post), but most
are back-and-forth with people that replied to me.

[1] [http://www.theonion.com/articles/area-man-constantly-
mention...](http://www.theonion.com/articles/area-man-constantly-mentioning-
he-doesnt-own-a-tel,429/)

------
netcan
Soylent is a weird and interesting case.

I feel like 99 out of 100 times an identical product gets produced by a
supplements company and no one notices. Somehow, this one seems to have really
really interested (or really really pissed off) people.

One possible narrative is "blandness is a virtue". All the pictures are bland
beige stuff in a plastic jug. The people drinking it look normal, not athletic
or exceptionally pretty. Their expressions are neutral.

The 'water of food' is, I suppose, a compelling idea.

~~~
mmondok
Soylent's rise in popularity reminds me a bit of Lifelock. The CEO comes out
and makes very ambitious claims. In Lifelock's case, that was the whole,
"here's my SSN." [0] For Soylent, it's the CEO living off just that for months
on end [1]. These types of sales pitches continue for months until the claims
prove false and then the product marketing is changed. Maybe Soylent is
different, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

[0] [http://www.wired.com/2010/05/lifelock-identity-
theft/](http://www.wired.com/2010/05/lifelock-identity-theft/) [1]
[http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/food-and-
drink/could...](http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/food-and-drink/could-
soylent-replace-food-the-drink-that-claims-to-contain-all-the-nutrients-the-
body-needs-9334154.html)

------
refurb
I have to admit that when I first heard of this product I thought it was
ridiculous and would never take off.

Considering it's now been officially launched, I have to say "Impressive job
Rob!" and will publicly eat my words.

------
hswoo2
I don't think the point is whether Soylent will replace food entirely (even
though the creator thinks so) or it will 'undermine and erode the food
traditions of developing cultures'. Rather to me it seems to be the
commodification of (absolute) nutrition which has never been done before. Much
like the japanese who have commodified sex and relationships (see cuddle
cafes, boyfriends for hire), people can now pay just for complete nutrition
without having to buy food, and would do so if the cost saving to them is more
valuable to them than the enjoyment derived from the meal.

Obviously this is circumstantial but I can see it being a hit for
entrepreneurs or the generic yuppie who has no time for a long lunch/needs to
save for that mortgage.

~~~
JetSpiegel
Oh yeah, the Japanese invented prostitution.

Aren't they are weird?

------
stevoo
Although I am not a huge fan of this, I believe that eventually we will end up
using this. It might take 5 - 10 years but soylent-type will be used in our
daily life. Today with our busy life's cooking something simple takes an hour
to complete. Soylent is ready to go in an instant.

Although it will not completely eradicate normal food, as eating is as well a
bonding. Here at least in Cyprus, we will have a weekly sit down on Sunday, of
10-20 if not more of family and relatives. This is very important time.

It will take years for population to actually adjust to the idea of drinking
there food.

On the plus site, this will eventually be used by astronauts I believe and
Mars colonization plans.

~~~
IanCal
> Today with our busy life's cooking something simple takes an hour to
> complete. Soylent is ready to go in an instant.

How slow do you have to be at cooking for something simple to take you an hour
of your time?

I can prepare a slow-cooked stew in well under 15 minutes, head out for the
day and come back to a house that smells wonderful and 5-10 meals worth of
food. It won't cost me 50-100 dollars either.

~~~
VeejayRampay
So you can peel for 5-10 meals worth of vegetables AND cook it all in under 15
minutes (slow cook it at that)? Well, you must have found a way to bend
spacetime or something. I understand one hour is very long, but no need to go
overboard in the other direction either.

~~~
kubiiii
I think it was the preparation time, not the cooking time. You can prepare a
vegetable soup from raw vegetables in less than 15 minutes. With some training
you can do that in 5 minutes. You'll need an extra 30 minutes simmering though
but no more work after preparation unless you want it mixed. You really can't
overcook a vegetable soup. You can even keep it a couple of days in the pan
without it getting sour. It's a hassle free meal.

But you are right, the truth lies between 15 minutes and an hour.

~~~
IanCal
Yeah that's prep time, but it really is just 15 minutes. No simmering, just
peel and chuck in some veg & spices and a joint of meat.

------
chipsy
You can see this as a kind of progression of the supplement industry, one
where the delivery stands a better chance of matching the promise: For
example, Coca-Cola and Milo both marketed themselves as a form of "medicine"
or "health food" early on, and then only later reworked their image as they
became more evidently unhealthful to the public. And bodybuilding supplements
have their own extremely checkered history[0]. Over time the categories of
supplements with actual nutritional value have stuck it out in the market as
they've proven themselves.

So I see Soylent as another step forward - the necessary food processing to
make these kinds of sophisticated supplement blends has gotten cheaper and
more widely available with time, enabling more experiments.

So the news for the future looks promising. It'll probably get cheaper. The
nutritional value is likely to go upwards in future versions as more data is
uncovered. And if it shows signs of success then there will be competing
alternatives, for sure.

[0]
[http://www.t-nation.com/free_online_article/sex_news_sports_...](http://www.t-nation.com/free_online_article/sex_news_sports_funny_grok/the_history_of_the_supplement_industry_part_i)

~~~
zheshishei
Coca-cola was originally a medicine in the same way the medical marijuana is
today though. The "Coca" in "Coca-cola" referred to the cocaine that was in
it.

------
Pitarou
And so begins the biggest experiment in human nutrition since the Dutch Famine
of 1944.

~~~
jacquesm
You must be unaware of the famines raging in 2014 and just about any year
before that in other parts of the world. The Dutch certainly had a hard time
of it in '44 (my grandmother's diary is amazing reading) but it does not in
any way compare to some of the stuff going on TODAY and on a MUCH larger
scale.

~~~
dingaling
The interesting factor of the Dutch famine in 1944 was that it occurred in one
region of a fairly isotropic 'developed' country, in a society where masses of
scientific and psychological measurements could be conducted for decades
afterwards. These could be compared with the same metrics for people in the
unaffected regions.

That's not something that occurs after most famines, in which the survivors
are generally anonymous.

~~~
jacquesm
Right, that's the relevant difference. Thank you for the explanation. The
'cohort' being that isolated in space and time must have helped. I can't see
how soylent green users will be subjecting themselves to the same kind of
analysis but that may be another example of my ignorance.

------
Gregordinary
Is there any concern over the use of rice protein vs whey or another complete
protein?

My understanding is that rice protein comes up short with the amount of Lysine
present. Not sure if Lysine shows up in other ingredients at high enough
levels to compensate.

[http://nutritiondata.self.com/facts/cereal-grains-and-
pasta/...](http://nutritiondata.self.com/facts/cereal-grains-and-pasta/5709/2)

~~~
xtracto
Maybe they are planning to make it Vegetarian/Vegan.

I myself am allergic to Milk Protein. So drinking anything with whey powder or
similar is impossible for me.

~~~
Gregordinary
There was an article a couple weeks back that mentioned they were looking into
Spirulina as a protein source. It was mentioned as part of long term
sustainability and bringing down the cost per meal. So providing a
vegetarian/vegan formula may be part of their long term goal.

Though, still concerned about protein completeness in the current formula.

------
laichzeit0
Looking at the nutritional facts, this looks like a great substitute for off
the counter mass-gainer shakes. I'm really into weight lifting but sometimes
struggle finding the time to eat meals while at work and still hit my daily
caloric surplus.

------
known
To alleviate poverty, Governance must be decentralized for 1,350,000,000
people in India. Each state In India should have separate currency.

------
adnam
The first bite it with the eye, and Soylent looks like a cat vomit smoothie.

------
nunodonato
I wouldn't touch this with a 10 foot pole. Sad how we are so brainwashed to
just do maths on nutritional intake. ever heard of vital energy in food?

~~~
Gigablah
I'd take mathematics over homeopathic nonsense.

~~~
nunodonato
well, its sad how people downvote things they don't understand.. but I'd
expect that in hackernews.

Also, what I said as absolutely nothing to do with homeopathy.. shows how
clueless that comment was.

------
bcoates
Lots of people are comparing it to meal-replacement alternatives, but I'm
unimpressed with how it compares to much more mundane foods, like a 7-11
burrito that has a very similar nutritional profile, retails for $1.69 in
single quantities, and is much easier to prepare (2 minutes, no dish washing,
no need to refrigerate for settling)

[http://www.nutritionix.com/7-11/7-select-burritos-beef-
bean-...](http://www.nutritionix.com/7-11/7-select-burritos-beef-bean-green-
chile-burrito-10-oz)

~~~
rosser
I'm very much not what you might call "pro-Soylent", but even I think that
calling its nutritional profile "similar" to that a convenience store burrito
is ludicrous.

------
jeswin
India should buy this company or do something very similar. I mean the country
India, the government. This could be a big step towards solving hunger. We
should look for optimizing mass production. And it reduces cost of wood or
gas, distribution and packaging wastage, spoilt food and the like.

To take my country's example, this should just be free. If people are hungry,
get our desi version of solyent. Nobody is forced to have it, yet they have
better nutrition than anyone else right now including the rich people eating
unhealthy fried stuff.

~~~
patio11
If the government of Indian bought it and then managed it like the existing
ration system that would not necessarily actually improve the lives of the
intended beneficiaries.

~~~
jeswin
Sure. I am not disagreeing that management needs to improve.

What I'm saying is that the future of rationing should be this, not the
current system. The current system does not ensure nutritional value and there
are other expenses involved in preparing a meal. As a country of 1.2B the
basic meal (a packet of desi-solyent or whatever) should be free.

This of course applies to all countries and all such public distribution
systems. I just used India for an example.

