
Soylent Thinks It Found What Was Making People Sick: Algae - Rifu
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-11-07/soylent-thinks-it-found-what-was-making-people-sick-algae
======
old-gregg
Soylent's problem is not a seemingly overlooked ingredient. Their biggest
problem is inability to run the continuous food processing loop.

What's the point of tweaking the recipe if you can't guarantee the execution
and your customers get, basically, randomness for lunch?

We had a corporate subscription for Soylent 2.0 drink. The taste varied from
batch to batch on the scale from "milk in a cereal bowl" to "sewage water".

These issues have been regularly popping up on reddit and their own forums for
months now. We have suspended the subscription and I can't bring myself to try
another bottle, even though I originally loved the concept and the taste.

~~~
developer2
To be fair, this statement is something that needs to be followed up with hard
evidence. Inconsistent flavour between batches does not _necessarily_ mean
you're getting different percentages of ingredients. You can't simply blame
them for variation in taste; just look at orange juice companies for the
amount of chemical manipulation that goes into making a single brand of orange
juice taste exactly the same in every batch even though oranges naturally have
varying flavors. That is _not_ the kind of science I want behind my food.

There are thousands of individuals and organizations out there with the
equipment to analyze batches to determine whether the mix is consistent. Why
haven't we heard from them? I can't imagine risk of lawsuit for defamation is
the only reason. The whole appeal of Soylent is that the formula is public;
surely they can't be hiding behind "publishing analysis of our product is
exposing our corporate secrets".

~~~
IanCal
> There are thousands of individuals and organizations out there with the
> equipment to analyze batches to determine whether the mix is consistent. Why
> haven't we heard from them?

Honest question, why would anyone bother? Who would actually benefit from
being able to release a statement about how variable it is?

------
Pitarou
Inexcusable.

The only reason Soylent have gotten away with it for so long is that the FDA
rules for this category of product haven't been written yet.

A product shouldn't make people sick when used as intended. So if a product is
intended to be consumed as 100% of your diet, it MUST:

\- contain all known macro- and micro-nutrients necessary for human health

\- contain nothing that makes you sick when you eat it all the time

Soylent failed on both counts:

\- Early formulations lacked selenium. Beta testers duly developed symptoms of
selenium deficiency.

\- The latest formulation contained algae. Customers duly got sick from
consuming more of this kind of algae than humans have ever consumed before.

The first mistake might be excused as a beginner's error and a learning
experience. But they didn't learn. Luckily, Soylent lives in the land of class
action lawsuits. The lawyers are gonna shut these jokers down.

~~~
intopieces
Good lord. The percentage of people who 'got sick' by Soylent was less 0.1% of
all consumers. If we went into panic-mode for that kind of result for every
product, we wouldn't have any products. The variation in humans is too great
to test for everything.

"The Lawyers" aren't going to shut anyone down because no one is suing, and if
they tried I doubt any judge would allow a class-action lawsuit for a few
tummyaches.

Soylent lists the ingredients on the box. That the consumers were unaware of
their sensitivity to algae is not evidence of misconduct on the part of
Soylent.

~~~
Pitarou
I take your point about the class-action.

I also take your point about human choice, as far as it goes, but I still
think Soylent is a special case.

If I eat ridiculous amounts of pesto and rupture my duodenum, nobody would
hold the pesto producer responsible, because that's not the way people eat
pesto.

But if eating lots of Soylent made me ill, Soylent's makers should, in
principle, bear some responsibility, because they know that this is how people
eat Soylent. Indeed, Soylent was heavily hyped as something that could be 100%
of your diet, and they can't pretend that never happened.

The FDA actually DOES require that novel ingredients are tested to the point
where 0.1% problems are detectable. I know that the algae isn't a novel
ingredient, but if Soylent add it to their formula, it will suddenly comprise
a large part of the diet of a large number of people. That is a novel thing in
itself, so I would argue that Soylent has some responsibility to make sure
what they're doing is safe. If FDA rules say its okay not to, the FDA rules
need to catch up.

I might be inclined to give Soylent the benefit of the doubt if I thought they
had a better attitude. But when they made themselves sick because they forgot
humans need selenium in their diet, they didn't say, "Wow! How could we have
been so dumb? We need to take more care with people's bodies." It was more
like, "Hey, no problem. Nobody died and we fixed it now. Let's move on."

These are just the screw ups we know about. What are the odds there are plenty
more they managed to hush up? Nobody has been killed or injured so far, but if
they don't change their attitude and people continue to live off their
swill...

~~~
cthalupa
If I release a product containing lactose, clearly state it contains lactose,
and a bunch of people have stomach problems after ingesting it because they
are lactose intolerant, is it my fault? Regardless on whether or not it was
meant to be a 100% meal replacement?

This is a fairly ridiculous argument. People's lack of knowledge about their
own food sensitivities is not Soylent's fault, nor should it be expected to
be.

~~~
Pitarou
Your analogy is inappropriate. You know as well as I do that common
ingredients such as flour and milk are regulated differently from novel ones.

------
binarymax
Where is the FDA in all of this? I would hope that after the widespread issues
with the product, they would have stepped in and blocked shipment until safety
studies have been done that comply with regulations.

~~~
mstodd
They're busy regulating life saving drugs. If we got rid of the FDA all
together, there would be more competition for products like this, and
companies would need to win the trust of consumers by providing real health
study information.

~~~
sidlls
Please read about "The Jungle". (Wiki:
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Jungle](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Jungle)).

Relying on companies to compete on the basis of maximizing customer health
is... short-sighted at best.

~~~
geofft
Right, I was gonna say, didn't we literally try this? And decide that it was a
mistake? And _come up with_ the FDA in response?

------
glenda
Sounds like they have a bug in their "food stack" and this modification is
like printf debugging - if no one gets sick then it was the algae, otherwise
they will need to continue poking around to figure out what's wrong.

What a silly game to play when people's health is at stake.

~~~
darawk
You can say the same thing about the food in any restaurant. I really don't
understand the hate that's directed towards this product. Nobody was seriously
injured, it was a relatively small number of people that got sick.

Soylent is trying to do something more ambitious than other packaged food
manufacturers. It's not unreasonable to expect there to be some small hiccups.
If you can't tolerate that, then don't buy it.

People get food poisoning randomly from restaurants all the time. And usually
they can never figure otu exactly what it was that caused it, they just carry
on and maybe get their rating lowered or license taken away if it keeps
happening. Chipotle even just had the same problem.

Yes, they get a bunch of shit for it. But it's not like this is a problem that
doesn't afflict the 'normal' food industry as well.

~~~
amelius
> You can say the same thing about the food in any restaurant.

But Soylent is supposed to be consumable on a daily basis, so long-term
effects are important. Remember the documentary Super Size Me, which tested
long term effects of food from a certain fast-food restaurant? [1]

[1] [http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0390521](http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0390521)

~~~
hueving
That documentary tested overeating well outside the bounds of any sane
nutritional guidelines. It's sad that people don't have the critical thinking
skills required to realize the same thing would happen if you ate those levels
of calories at any restaurant or even at home.

~~~
dnautics
wasn't there a counter-documentary where someone ate from mcdonalds every day
and also followed a fairly strict exercise regimen and wound up being way
fitter than when he started?

~~~
endophage
Yep, it was called "Fat Head." The exercise regime wasn't even that strict, it
was basically continuing the regular walking the documentarian already did.
However, the food intake was strictly limited to 1800 calories and less then
100g of carbs per day. The goal being to show fast food isn't inherently
unhealthy, it was the quantity (as already noted above) being eaten in Super
Size Me that was unhealthy. In that regard, Fat Head succeeded as the
documentarian's health metrics all improved (lot weight, lower blood pressure,
better cholesterol measurements).

~~~
glandium
Note that the premise of "Super Size Me" was to get the "Super Size" menu
whenever asked by the Mc Donald's counter clerk, leading to overconsumption.

~~~
dogma1138
Yes, but the overall point remains if you overeat you'll get fat regardless of
what it is.

You can actually get a balanced daily diet out of mcdonalds if you ask for
unsalted fries and get one of their salads once in a while.

Honestly sodium aside the only thing you need to do not to over eat at MC is
to get water instead of soda and just regular sized burger.

It will be around 600-700 cals per meal with fries which means you can eat 3
of those a day and maintain weight or even lose some depending on your age,
sex, bodymass and daily regiment.

------
teaearlgraycold
>Since its introduction in 2013, the protein drink Soylent has become the go-
to food substitute

Maybe I'm being pedantic, but Soylent is not a protein drink. It's primarily a
carbohydrate drink.

~~~
nickff
Is actually more of a fat-drink than a carbohydrate or protein drink.[1]

[1] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soylent_(food)#Ready-to-
Drink](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soylent_\(food\)#Ready-to-Drink)

------
jostmey
Soylent better be sure that they are right. They just fingered the problem
onto another company (TerraVia). What supplier would work with Soylent if it
turns out Soylent is wrong?

~~~
macspoofing
Plenty. Food is a cut-throat competitive business.

------
baby
I love what Soylent is doing, I have wished for such a meal replacer all my
life.

I've drank something like 40 bottles of Soylent (which are, so far presumably
safe) and they have helped me replace a lot of fast food. Never had problems
with them until I started getting nauseous and now I can't drink it anymore.

With all these news about people getting sick, I feel a bit silly having beta
tested stuff with my own body. And they definitely have lost at least one
customer here.

But I'm still happy to see them experimenting with such a product. I still
want this to happen, I will just not beta test it myself.

~~~
DanBC
> I have wished for such a meal replacer all my life.

why aren't any of the very many other products that have existed for years
been good enough?

~~~
resfirestar
What products would those be? Most meal replacement shakes marketed in the US
are for people trying to lose weight, so they have far less calories and fat
than a meal for people just trying to eat healthy.

~~~
catenthusiast
Have you heard of Ensure?

~~~
resfirestar
Yeah, I even wrote a paragraph bashing it (or at least, people claiming that
it's a product of serious medical research) last time we had a Soylent thread.
It has a lot more sugar and carbs than most people would want to eat
regularly, which makes it more suitable as a _temporary_ food replacement or a
snack than a lunch staple.

~~~
scdlbx
Try something like Glucerna. It's like Ensure but for diabetics, so it has a
lot less sugar and carbs.

------
hammock
_> Algal flour is a fairly novel ingredient that serves as a vegan replacement
for butter and eggs. Derived from algae grown in fermentation tanks and then
dried_

Reminds me of fungal protein, aka quorn aka mycoprotein. They were advertising
it as the next big thing in protein sources. Its also grown by fermentation.
If you google it, there are safety concerns.

~~~
Cerium
There are safety concerns, but I think there are differences in product
maturity. Quorn products have been available since the 80's, and early 2000's
in the USA. Over the last ~15 years there have been a couple thousand
complaints over the products, but since these are not incident related I would
characterize them more like complaints about specific ingredients. Some people
get reactions to peanuts, red wine, etc, but we do not consider that the
manufacturer is at fault.

Thanks for getting me to take a look at Quorn safety. I've been eating it for
years, and continue to. Even though I am no longer really a vegetarian I enjoy
Quorn products more than chicken based products since Quorn has better product
consistency (not fat or gristle bits) than animal sources.

------
hacker_9
Clearly there is a market for this 'super convenience' food/drink if people
are still willing to buy this product after it made them sick. Even when their
own stomach is the guinea pig. The company could do with better marketing
though, reading things like this:

 _In 2013, he raised capital to turn his full attention to Soylent, which he
named after the science fiction novel that served as the basis for the 1973
movie featuring Charlton Heston as a detective who discovers that a new type
of food called Soylent Green is made of people._

..certainly doesn't help.

~~~
dictum
I'm more aggrieved by the marketing (from day one) being a variation of
"techies too busy to cook for themselves"

It's not even a suggestion to drink it once in a while, when you're indeed
unable to eat something else. It's an invitation to replace all meals with a
prepared drink.

It feeds on, and enables, the perpetually-busy/all-nighter culture of SV.

~~~
dimino
s/busy/lazy/g

At least, that's how the marketing is hitting me.

------
briHass
Part of the issue is their desire to keep the product vegan. Instead of using
known-safe, health-promoting sources of polyunsaturated (O3/O6) fats like fish
oil, they use algal sources, which have very little data supporting them as
safe/effective sources of O3.

~~~
atomical
[http://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/fish-oil-friend-or-
foe-20...](http://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/fish-oil-friend-or-
foe-201307126467)

There are other safe sources of omega 3's.

~~~
briHass
The sources mentioned in that article are ALA, which have conversion rates to
the desired DHA/EPA that vary greatly between individuals [1]. Typically,
something like 5% of ALA is converted to EPA and even less is converted to
DHA. It's better to eat the preformed DHA/EPA rather than relying on the
conversion.

edit: Harvard health seems to even disagree with themselves:
[http://www.health.harvard.edu/staying-healthy/why-not-
flaxse...](http://www.health.harvard.edu/staying-healthy/why-not-flaxseed-oil)

[1]
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9637947](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9637947)

------
bdcravens
Blue Bell in Texas shut down for months due to listeria. Would that put some
companies out of business? Maybe, that's ok. This is public health we're
talking about.

Disrupt. Move fast and break things. Iterate iterate iterate. Fail fast. This
may be okay when you're making a better spreadsheet, but not everything can be
a startup.

~~~
gohrt
Spreadsheets are used to make real decisions. Spreadsheet bugs kill too.

------
sevensor
Is this unrelated to the mold contamination people were reporting?

~~~
scotu
yeah, different issues

------
jorblumesea
The fact that Soylent is classified as a "Nutritional supplement" is absurd.
No inspections, no accountability.

~~~
sowhatquestion
This is false. Soylent is classified as a food, and has to follow the same FDA
requirements as any other food.

"Soylent is not in violation of any product-safety standards or requirements,
and is manufactured in FDA-approved facilities that follow federally regulated
current Good Manufacturing Practices (cGMP)."

Source: [https://faq.soylent.com/hc/en-
us/articles/204197379-Californ...](https://faq.soylent.com/hc/en-
us/articles/204197379-California-Proposition-65)

~~~
jorblumesea
You just proved my point: cGMP relates to drug safety, not to food
consumption. It is not regulated as a food.

[http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DevelopmentApprovalProcess/Manufact...](http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DevelopmentApprovalProcess/Manufacturing/ucm169105.htm)

------
jdavis703
Well one of the reasons I liked their products was because of the "algal oil"
(no word on if they're going to remove that also). This is basically vegan
fish oil, which as a vegetarian is one of the things I've missed.

~~~
rosser
As a long-time vegetarian, I've been buying algae-sourced EPA/DHA capsules for
years from a company called Vegetology. They actually, you know, _test their
product_ for safety.

------
mathattack
Here's what I don't get... There is all this bad hype about Soylent. Why not
just get one of the dozens of other meal replacement shakes in your average
health food store?

~~~
jpindar
Wrong subculture. Health foods are marketed for hippies and athletes and
dieters. Soylent is for nerds!

/s

~~~
mathattack
So it's strictly a Marketing game? There's nothing behind the product? I would
have thought nerds would be smarter. Or is it something like a hipster beard
and hats when it's warm?

------
jasonwilk
I'm a fan of Soylent but I wouldn't say things like 'Soylent prides itself on
rapid product development—an ideal popularized by Google and Facebook Inc.'

Things that are going into my body should not be rapidly developed and
released. It's slightly different than Facebook launching a new feature that
may or may not break.

~~~
ClassyJacket
Things that go into your body get rapidly developed and released all the time.
Ever been to a restaurant with a new item on the menu?

------
SuicidebyStar
I think I found a better alternative to Soylent called "Bertrand"
([https://bertrand.bio/](https://bertrand.bio/)). It is made out of organic
ingredients, tastes solid (just order the one with no flavor, it actually
tastes better) and is hopefully more healthy since it is made from "real"
natural powderized ingredients. So even if there are nutrition components
(e.g. other micro-nutrients) which weren't researched properly till today
(quite likely imho), they should still be in the drink since it's not made
from artificial components.

I'm drinking it for two months now and I'm happy with it. Very convenient,
fair price, available in a vegan & gluten-free version and it tastes okay-ish
(like oatmeal).

P.S.: I'm not affiliated with this company in any way, just a happy customer.

~~~
miranda_rights
Interesting. I like the idea but the macronutrients are heavily weighted
towards carbohydrates. For reference, normally 30-35% of your daily calories
should be protein, while only 11% of the calories of Bertrand come from
protein.

~~~
SuicidebyStar
That is true, especially the vegan version lacks protein (in comparison to the
"active" version). That's why I add rice protein to the drink to get up to
120-150g protein/day. Besides that I add also Acerola powder for more
(natural) vitamin C.

------
caogecym
We always get latest version of soylent instead of having a way to subscribe a
specific version. This is like cloud based service, the upgrade is
transparent, you benefits from ingredient upgrade, and you suffer from it. The
key here is how fast Soylent can identify and address customer's concerns.

------
shepardrtc
I enjoyed Soylent when it first came out, but then they started trying to be
clever. It was already a complex product and they went crazy trying to replace
the fish oil they were using. Around v1.4 it started to taste absolutely
disgusting and the consistency was that of slime.

------
grondilu
I've not often eaten algae, but I do remember it to have the weirdest taste I
have ever experienced.

~~~
mrob
Seaweed is a type of algae, and I eat rehydrated dried seaweeds every so
often. I wouldn't call any seaweed delicious but they're no worse than the
average vegetable. If you eat other seafood you'll probably find the taste of
seaweed acceptable.

------
NoGravitas
I'm not surprised. Spirulina is sold as a miracle health food, but it makes me
toss my cookies.

------
lnanek2
That's too bad. I love the algae based DHA-3 fortified milk at the super
market. The other option is fish based DHA-3 fortified and I can't stand the
taste. It's strange to blame something sold in supermarkets like that.

------
jzd131
I get sick every time I eat fake eggs made from Algae- this makes a lot of
senseto me.

------
010a
Please fix it and get these products back on the market so I can get my order
in.

------
st3v3r
Move fast and make people vomit

~~~
tectec
Sounds like a fun roller-coaster

------
zelias
Wasn't Soylent Green also made of "algae-based ingredients"?

Perhaps the name of the product is more on-point than we realize...

------
rosser
No, I'm pretty sure it was hubris. Proximal cause versus ultimate cause, and
all that.

------
muad
Does it really make a difference for Soylent at this point?

I would imagine their brand is already trashed.

------
print_r
I was sure it was going to be "People"

------
aj_n
Way to casually ruin Soylent Green, Bloomberg!

------
homulilly
someone should inform the author of this article that algae aren't plants

~~~
kjbflsudfb
Would you prefer they complicate the discussion by trying to explain what they
are? My understanding has always been that they have many plant-like
characteristics, but not all. In fact, they are even a part of the plant
kingdom.
[https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/06/070619182508.h...](https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/06/070619182508.htm)

~~~
homulilly
Some are, some aren't. Upon further research it does appear the type used in
this algal flour are related to plants but many algae species aren't closely
related to plants at all.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viridiplantae](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viridiplantae)

------
Balgair
Oh boy, another Soylent discussion.

Here is what all the off topic discussion will be:

Person1) "What is so hard to understand sheeple?! Soylent isn't for all your
meals, just ones that you are too busy to eat. Also, it has all the vitamins
you need not like all those thousand other bars/drinks!?"

Person2) "I'd rather move to the bottom of the ocean than buy Soylent. Why
would you ever skip a meal?! Capitalism is the root of all evil including
making me miss my dinner!"

Folks, we all come at food differently, it's a very personal thing. Just
because _you_ feel this way about food, does not mean we all do. It's like
people that stand or sit when they are wiping after going #2. We all coexist
just fine and none of us know that there is really any other way and are
astounded when other people are different.

Chill, people, chill, it's food.

~~~
akamaka
You could also say some people like Trump and other people like Clinton, and
it's just an opinion. However, one opinion is highly correlated with being
more educated.

I suspect that the same is true here. The population at large has a very poor
level of education about food, and Soylent seeks to exploit that very large
business opportunity.

I would prefer to see more people with an understanding of healthy eating and
cooking.

~~~
pveierland
> The population at large has a very poor level of education about food, and
> Soylent seeks to exploit that very large business opportunity.

Conceptually, the advantages of a product such as Soylent includes long shelf-
life, reducing the frequency and time needed to shop food, offering healthy
fast-food meals, having a lower carbon footprint and being more sustainable
than regular food, reducing the time spent preparing food, being cheaper than
other sources of ready-made food (with basis in my own budget). These are not
trivial advantages if fully realized, and it seems reductive to reduce the
advantages of Soylent to just being a product for people poorly educated about
food.

> I would prefer to see more people with an understanding of healthy eating
> and cooking.

I believe most people who eat healthy basically just follow hand-wavy norms
and guidelines about what is considered healthy, e.g. include fish and
vegetables in your diet (simplified). Once someone actually tries to engineer
a complete diet such as Soylent it becomes apparent how hard it is to
guarantee rich completeness. However, in the long run I believe the
engineering approach, based on scientific input, is more likely to result in a
proper diet. Especially when in the long run a "Soylent version X" can be
based on a closed loop with personal body telemetry and customized food mixes
based on these sensor readings.

~~~
akamaka
I agree with you overall, but my different viewpoint comes from witnessing
other companies addressing the advantages you've mentioned.

Just as trends in the computer industry have been largely led by power users,
there are also food "power users". These are people who save time cooking with
new equipment (powerful blenders, sous vide, etc), have high quality, freshly-
picked food delivered in weekly boxes, have convenient herb gardens, etc.
There are more innovations on the horizon (Farmbot, Cinder, etc).

Of course, Soylent is still much faster, but I think these "power users" will
close the gap in convenience faster than Soylent can close the gap in quality.

~~~
daveFNbuck
I do not and will not prepare my own food, so it usually takes me at least 30
minutes and $10 to go out and get a meal. When I don't feel like doing that, a
bottle of Soylent saves most of that time and money.

------
mmaunder
Such an unfortunate name. The 1973 film was set in 2022, so not far off the
mark.

~~~
freehunter
But then again the 1973 movie was made in 1973, so there are tens of millions
of people who have never heard of it.

------
WalterSear
People have been warning us about the green soylent since the 70s.

------
AndyKelley
I flagged it because the site started playing audio while I was trying to
read. Had to close the tab to make my phone shut up. It was embarrassing and I
was unable to read the content.

------
conjectures
Algae? Yeah right. Soylent green is made of people.

Seriously though, how can a food supplement (sorry, meal replacement) company
expect to prosper with a brand based on a sci-fi movie about cannibalism?

~~~
freehunter
You feel that way because you're on the Internet. I've never seen the movie,
it was way before my time, and it exists in the tiniest amount of public
consciousness today. The only reason I know what Soylent Green even means is
because people on the Internet reference it occasionally.

I've talked to quite a few people about Soylent and I've said "you know, like
the movie" and most of the time they have no idea what I'm talking about.

~~~
ConceptJunkie
Besides, it's not called "Soylent Green". Green was the cause of the shock
twist in the movie, but there was also Soylent Red and Soylent Yellow in the
movie, which were pretty much what Soylent, the product, is trying to become.

The name is appropriate in the context of the movie, although I would have
never chosen it.

~~~
conjectures
> The name is appropriate in the context of the movie

Only if you don't see a problem with buying from a company whose other product
lines include ground up paupers.

The name is like a stupid teenage joke which somehow managed to survive onto
packaging.

Also it's objectively ironic that the problem is related to algae, which is
commonly _green_.

~~~
joesb
And what are people who hate a product simply because its name resembles some
movie 40 years ago? A stupid teenager? Or a stupid adult?

