
How I Ate No Food for 30 Days - hoov
http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/soylent-no-food-for-30-days
======
bowlofpetunias
EDIT: Unbelievable. Both the title and the link to the article I commented on
have been swapped from the PandoDaily article
([http://pandodaily.com/2013/11/12/vice-investigates-
soylent-f...](http://pandodaily.com/2013/11/12/vice-investigates-soylent-
finds-rats-and-mold/)) to the Vice article which PandoDaily referred to, but
that tries to give it a positive spin.

This goes well beyond whatever policy pg was trying to defend recently. This
is deeply manipulative.

\---

It looks a scam, it sounds like a scam, it's marketed like a scam and now it
apparently is being produced like any other scam.

So how long until we finally draw the obvious conclusion?

Just because some notable VC's gambled on it doesn't make it any more
credible. In fact, there is pretty much zero evidence in the credible column.

~~~
tptacek
I yield to no HN user in the extent and intensity of my distaste for the idea
of Soylent, but the Pando article was, per Pando's charter, linkjacked
clickbait that referred directly to the Vice article. It was totally
reasonable --- desirable, even --- for the two articles to be switched. Would
that we could simply do away with Pando altogether so that this kind of
controversy might never recur.

~~~
diogenescynic
It seems like censorship or manipulation when no explanation is given. Even if
it is on the up and up, it'd be nice if someone could comment as to why the
changes occur.

------
yuvadam
Soylent might, technically, work. It might be safe and healthy, it definitely
looks simple and allows you to forget anything related to grocery shopping,
cooking and cleaning up afterwards.

But thinking about the prospect of the future makes me sick to my stomach.
Soylent paints a disgustingly frightening dystopia where humans are fed 100%
"correct" food to allow them to continue being cogs in the business machine,
not stop for lunch during the day in the office, and be able to pull those
extra longs evenings and nights to get more work done. Not to mention the
vanishing social and human aspects of eating, together with friends and
family.

Rob Reinhardt's assertions that organic cultivation of vegetables, fruits and
legumes does not scale are downright FALSE, and only serve the Soylent
marketing machine.

Soylent is doing nothing more than accommodating to the needs of humanoids who
continue the endless pursuit of some vague promise of capitalist fulfillment
(work hard, be rich, be happy), ignoring the fact that the direct opposite of
such a lifestyle leads to a much more healthier, happier life which remains in
touch with our basic, primal human existence.

~~~
tolmasky
Its funny because we already live in this dystopia and you simply don't notice
it because the plastic food we eat "looks real" and "tastes good". What is the
difference between the completely artificial hamburger people get at McDonalds
and Soylent? The fact that its basically "molded" to look like the real food
we used to eat?

The reality is that we long ago crossed the line into having a society that
mostly eats absolutely garbage and artificial food. This is not some future
prospect, it is today, and we regularly see (and ignore) the disastrous
medical results. This is of course perpetuated by a government that pushes a
purely political nutritional agenda (let's tell everyone carbohydrates are the
most important staple to eat and let's put corn and sugar in everything for
economic reasons and let's also hope no one notices that fiber has
mysteriously disappeared from our diets).

At least Soylent is trying to harness this machine for good. A world where
"the cogs" at least receive proper nutrition would be a step up from today's
illusion of choice.

~~~
nsxwolf
I'm not following. In what way is a McDonalds hamburger artificial? It's
bread. It's meat.

Even if there are mechanically separated parts of the meat, they're still
meat.

Even if it's as artificial as you say, isn't food that "looks real" and
"tastes good" better than food that "looks like deplorable shit" and "tastes
like deplorable shit" and is unapologetically named after something horrible
from a 1970s dystopian sci fi movie?

~~~
JohnTHaller
McDonalds only recently (last year) stopped using 'pink slime' in their
burgers: [http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/mcdonald-confirms-no-
lo...](http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/mcdonald-confirms-no-longer-using-
pink-slime-chemicals-171209662.html)

~~~
nsxwolf
"Pink slime" is meat. If it had been invented by a molecular gastronomist,
we'd be heralding it as an exciting, innovative gourmet food.

But the media-invented pejorative nickname "sounds gross", therefore that is
scientific proof that it's not "real food" and will kill you.

~~~
JohnTHaller
When people think of 'hamburger', they think of ground beef. Just ground beef.
And maybe some spices.

They don't think of the chemical process involved in factory processing the
normally inedible bits of a cow into a slimy pink goop (see where the name
came from?) and then mixing that in with their ground beef at a specific
percentage to avoid getting into trouble.

------
ChuckMcM
I suppose you could spin it "Look how healthy our rats are and there is
nothing in this warehouse but Soylent! Testing on rats, check!"

But this made me a bit sad.

I think Soylent is great, it is disruptive, it is more palatable than
nutraloaf it could be a great alternative for folks who just need food to
live, and it could provide a fascinating 'control' group for various
Microbiome projects. But clearly these folks aren't exactly "experienced" as
Jimi Hendrix might say.

Here is the challenge, there is a crap ton of knowledge about how to do things
that isn't taught in school or on the web or in books. You learn that by
'apprenticing' at a company or organization which is already doing something
like what you want to do, and getting the history of all the things they had
to overcome and avoid "in the old days." It isn't nostalgia, it is education
through experience. _That_ is what experience is. And the only way to get it,
is to _experience_ it. It was sad for me when I realized this, I could be
smarter than my manager at the time and yet he could be a better manager
because he had experienced more issues and overcome them (or at least seen the
solution to them) to have a much better sense of what would be an important
problem and what would be a minor problem. I could put any situation I wanted
in front of him and he had an answer to the "big problem" / "small problem"
classification, but _he could not express that as an algorithm I could learn
from_.

So when people come out of college and start companies the next day I tend to
cringe a bit as there is a lot of stuff they are going to learn the hard way.
That is doubly true when you're doing multiple disciplines (food prep +
nutrition + distribution + marketing + regulation + Etc.) and having run a
business of type A won't prime you to run one of type B, other than to help
you recognize where you need subject matter experts.

One wonders why the first hire at Soylent wasn't someone who had 5 years or
more setting up and running a food production line. I don't know but I have
heard folks in similar situations say "How hard could it be?"

~~~
dragontamer
What you do, is then you hire a 10-year veteran of the food preparation
business.

What you DON'T do, is pickup a few textbooks on body chemistry and assume you
can figure it all out by yourself.

~~~
lowboy
Why not? The human body is a machine, and we can examine and alter that
machine. We've been doing that throughout history.

I don't like the early claims of Soylent being "perfectly optimized" and the
like.

~~~
diydsp
The human body isn't a machine. It is a more complex thing that includes many
machines. There are so many features of the human body that we can not examine
and that we don't even know where to look...

The real question is "Soylent is perfectly optimized... for what?" Soylent may
be optimized for "meeting the models of nutrition that we have." Yet, those
models may be like using an FAQ to run a nuclear reactor. I'm not trying to
fear-monger. I think Soylent is a great experiment. I wish I had to guts to
carry out the reporter's month-long experiment.

~~~
VLM
"like using an FAQ to run a nuclear reactor."

That sounds like a winning long term strategy if the opposition makes
decisions solely to maximize short term profit. Don't overestimate the
opposition. Bad money pushes out good.

------
mikeyouse
There are some fairly stringent regulations that ensure food products are made
in a GMP environment.[1] Flaunting those rules is extremely dangerous, both
from a health perspective and from a legal one. There are numerous instances
where those in charge of food operations have gone to prison for failing to
maintain hygienic standards.[2]

Soylent better get their shit together. Food safety is nothing to play around
with, literally life-and-death decisions being made.

1\.
[http://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceRegulation/CGMP/ucm110877.ht...](http://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceRegulation/CGMP/ucm110877.htm)

2\. Listeria killed 33 people, owners of company to prison:
[http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-
canada-24292036](http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-24292036)

~~~
seiji
Aren't supplements/non-medical powders/various other juju immune from FDA
issues?

~~~
jlgreco
_FDA regulates both finished dietary supplement products and dietary
ingredients. FDA regulates dietary supplements under a different set of
regulations than those covering "conventional" foods and drug products. Under
the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994 (DSHEA):

\- The manufacturer of a dietary supplement or dietary ingredient is
responsible for ensuring that the product is safe before it is marketed.

\- FDA is responsible for taking action against any unsafe dietary supplement
product after it reaches the market. _

[http://www.fda.gov/food/dietarysupplements/](http://www.fda.gov/food/dietarysupplements/)

~~~
seiji
Ah, got it. So it's just self policing until you kill someone, then the
regulators step in.

~~~
cgore
There are a few dietary supplements that voluntarily submit to FDA inspection
of their facilities. Most don't. The protein powder I use is one of them:

[http://www.1stphorm.com/products/men/level-1](http://www.1stphorm.com/products/men/level-1)

I wouldn't really consider using anything that isn't, but lots of people do
every day, probably mostly from ignorance.

------
ddoolin
It really seems like the authors are trying to excuse the unsanitary
conditions when really it's not excusable to have them at any stage. Both the
journalism and the topic at hand were disappointing. They have more than
enough capital to keep the place clean, and you'd think it'd be at the top of
their list given the huge (vocal) concern over personal health regarding their
product.

------
sethbannon
As someone who drinks Soylent regularly, the most pertinent part of this
article was the blood tests after the author went on a 30 day Soylent-only
diet. "Doctors tested Merchant’s blood at the end of it, and the only nutrient
he was deficient in was Vitamin D -- i.e. sunlight", which he says made sense
because having Soylent handy meant he "wouldn’t have to leave the office".
That's certainly good news.

If the mold was the result of shoddy shipping causing the bag to be punctured,
it's hard not to take that with a grain of salt.

And as for the rat (singular -- not "rats" plural as the title says),
certainly that has the "eww" factor, but so long as the mix itself was not
exposed to any animals, I certainly don't care.

[edit: the article this post was linking to has changed, so my comment is a
little dated]

~~~
KeliNorth
I'm not a real fan of chewing food, but having done a similar diet before I
prefer it. Turns out that even though me and food don't always get along,
after 3 weeks on a liquid diet the cravings for real food for me come back.
There are plenty of weightlifters who have done similar full-liquid diets for
years before soylent, this data exists but has been largely ignored since it's
from a different kind of community. Anyways - 30 days isn't enough, many items
take longer to produce issues. Vitamin C comes to mind, it's destroyed by
sunlight, copper (copper is good for destroying a few biological agents it
seems, birth-control and Vitamin C, oh it's uses - but we need it as well so
it'll be there in soylent in trace amounts), and age, but so little is needed
to avoid scurvy, and it takes about 3 months from your last consumption of it
to produce adverse results, that it wouldn't be an issue... in the short run.

To address your comment about animals: I saw animals that are littered with
disease standing above the product. Standing, breathing without masks, talking
without masks(which means trace amounts of spit), in standard clothes that've
probably been exposed to much. The rat was far less disturbing than seeing the
people who were handling the product.

Contrary to the blood-work, there is a issue that presented itself after 30
days. Not a nutrient deficiency, but a chewing one: he mentioned he started
chewing gum due to his jaw aching. As far as I know chewing is supposed to
help keep the jaw healthy (an expert/dentist has been sorely lacking from
these soylent discussions, I imagine they'd have much to say about chewing,
jaw, and tooth issues that crop up), and as someone who hasn't done a great
job of that in life... I certainly wouldn't want to mess with jaw health
anymore.

~~~
foobarqux
> There are plenty of weightlifters who have done similar full-liquid diets
> for years before soylent

Name one competitive weightlifter, powerlifter or bodybuilder that lived
primarily on a shake made from powder for years.

~~~
KeliNorth
As in people doing these diets years before soylent, not years on said diet.
My grammar might not've been clear enough.

EDIT: Specifically I'm thinking of the hundreds (if not thousands by now) of
people on T-Nation/Testosterone Nation who've done the 1-month Velocity diet,
which is (or was, I haven't been there in years, but that particular diet has
been around for at least 5 years+), a protein shake diet with very little
solid food. There are years of people doing it for a month and relating their
experiences, highlights and downfalls, and I'm sure there are several more
experiences in that world that would provide better data points. However, it
has the issue of being mostly anecdotal evidence.

------
fredsters_s
As a long time beta user I have a bunch of problems with this piece:

\- the Oakland space was a temporary location while they were iterating on the
beta. Soylent is not manufactured there.

\- all the journalists writing about Soylent seem to attribute to Rob stuff
that he doesn't actually say: namely that you should _only_ consume Soylent
all the time. The point of Soylent is that it replaces transactional eating
and makes me healthier. It's not about replacing the eating I do for fun.

\- Soylent _is_ a technology company. It's not just positioning. They are
iterating towards finding an exponentially better way to do transactional
eating using technology. That's the definition of a tech company.

~~~
_delirium
_Soylent is a technology company. It 's not just positioning. They are
iterating towards finding an exponentially better way to do transactional
eating using technology. That's the definition of a tech company._

Well, any product is technology in that sense. But this particular technology,
meal-replacement shakes, is already reasonably well established. What seems
new to me is that Soylent is pitching itself to people who either don't know
about or have failed to become interested in the existing products, which
seems like a marketing innovation more than a tech innovation. They _don 't_
seem to be differentiating on technical quality or iteration. If you read
their campaign, for example, it is entirely positioned against regular food,
as if they have just invented the full-meal-replacement shake, and does not
mention anything about technical innovation over existing competitors:
[https://campaign.soylent.me/soylent-free-your-
body](https://campaign.soylent.me/soylent-free-your-body)

It's possible they _also_ have technical innovation over any existing meal-
replacement shake, but they are being very quiet about it if so.

~~~
aianus
The existing products have really terrible marketing. They sell them in
pharmacies and generally broadcast a message of "for supplementation or
diseased/senile people only".

Kudos to Soylent for trying to normalize liquid diets.

~~~
mikk0j
That's it. I had to read this far before I realized that's exactly what their
core is: "trying to normalize liquid diets" (as in make them normal,
acceptable, approachable, I think?). There's nothing natural (as in
biologically normal, desirable or standard) about a liquid diet, so that's
going to be an uphill battle.

~~~
aianus
I have some kind of psychological problem where I chew 5x more than normal
people. This causes me to fill up on very small quantities of food and it's
very difficult to hit 2000 calories a day without eating a lot of small meals
or taking liquid supplements. So, at least for me, a liquid diet would be
highly desirable.

As for biologically normal, it all turns into a liquid sludge in your stomach,
doesn't it? Past that point I don't see how your digestive system can tell the
difference as long as the composition of the sludge is similar enough.

------
driverdan
How about linking to the original and not this blogspam?
[http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/soylent-no-food-
for-30-days](http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/soylent-no-food-for-30-days)

I'm no fan of Soylent (mainly because it's all marketing hype, meal
replacements have been around for decades) but this title is BS. He had a
moldy shipment caused by damaged packaging and saw rats at a bar. BFD.

~~~
anigbrowl
I watched the video. the rat is separated from the food preparation area by a
sheet of plastic. This doesn't increase my confidence one iota.

------
DanBC
The preparation area shown in the video is hilariously disgusting. Fucking
horrific.

I still expect them to come out as a huge troll. If so, 10/10, did rage, would
rage again.

------
Pxtl
> “You’re not going to feed a booming population with organic farms,” Rob
> says.

This is a popular misconception. While organic farming requires far more
labour than conventional farming and the yields are lower for the same land,
it's not actually _that much_ lower. We're talking about a 5-30% drop in
yield. Not great, but not "OMG mass worldwide starvation" change. And that's
while being vastly more efficient with fresh water.

Think about your average 3rd-world country and ask yourself what's in short
supply - land, manpower, or fresh water?

~~~
lowboy
Organic growing techniques use "vastly" less water? How so?

I'm guessing that there's a correlation between farmers who choose to grow
organic and those who try to conserve water, but I can't see how one is
"vastly" different.

~~~
stinkytaco
There's pretty solid evidence that biointesive techniques use less water
because they make better use of the same space. If I grow two tomato plants in
the space I used to grow one, I waste less water.

But yes, you're right, I don't know if "vastly" is the word I would use.

~~~
lowboy
Does biointensive === organic?

Organic is a loaded term nowadays, so maybe it's just semantics.

~~~
stinkytaco
No. Really, singling out "biointensive" was unfair as _any_ intensive
agriculture would have the same benefit.

>Organic is a loaded term nowadays, so maybe it's just semantics.

So loaded as to be basically meaningless.

------
ruswick
Honestly, I just don't _get_ Soylent. What is the purpose?

As a health measure? The market for weight-loss shakes and other dietary
solutions is saturated, and most of it appears to be complete shit. Dietary
shakes are easy to come by, and are almost universally reviled because they
don't work as advertised and taste disgusting.

Is Soylent a supposed to be a remedy for malnutrition? Why is drinking a bunch
of vitamins a better option than taking a dietary supplement? How does Soylent
account for the fact that nutrient absorption is less efficient in artificial
supplements? Why not just eat quality, healthy human food?

But, far and away the worst and most appalling argument is that soylent is
"convenient," and that it's beneficial to people who "don't have time to eat."
I'm sorry, but if you can't find time to eat human food, the issue is your
schedule, not the food. Correct me if I'm wrong, but eating is _pretty fucking
important._ If you are in a position where feeding yourself actual sustenance
is inconvenient, then there is a probably a severe deficiency with your
schedule and a problem with your priorities.

~~~
pyrocat
> I'm sorry, but if you can't find time to eat human food, the issue is your
> schedule, not the food. Correct me if I'm wrong, but eating is pretty
> fucking important. If you are in a position where feeding yourself actual
> sustenance is inconvenient, then there is a probably a severe deficiency
> with your schedule and a problem with your priorities.

You don't sound very sorry. You sound incredibly judgmental of anyone who has
different priorities than you.

Personally, I love food, I just hate preparing it. Spend 30 minutes to cook a
meal that I will eat in 5? No thanks. So I eat out all the time, which is
really fucking expensive.

You've heard of the PM triangle right? Same basic idea here. Food can be
cheap, tasty, quick, and healthy, but not all at once. McDonalds is cheap,
tasty, and quick but not healthy. That steak dinner you just cooked yourself
is cheap, tasty, and healthy but not quick. I personally always pick the quick
option, but the other items can vary. Thus I'm usually eating quick, tasty,
and healthy items. I have trouble finding things that are quick, healthy, and
cheap. This seems to fill that niche nicely.

It doesn't mean I'm going to suddenly stop eating out, but it will mean I
spend less money in the long run, without having to spend extra time. For all
of the comments on Hacker News about how time=money, even when you're not on
the clock, you'd think this concept would make sense more immediately.

------
CameronBanga
Is there a reason that OP linked to crummy PandoDaily fluff and not to
original Vice video? If anyone wants to go straight to source.

[http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/soylent-no-food-
for-30-days](http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/soylent-no-food-for-30-days)

------
tomasien
This is a pretty sensationalist headline, given that they're in a new factory,
new offices, and the general findings of the experiment are so positive that
the subject is considering going back on Soylent in the future.

~~~
Yver
The "mold" part of the title feels especially disingenuous.

~~~
mikeyouse
There was literally mold on a month-old product. How is it disingenuous to say
there are rats and mold?

~~~
tzakrajs
Because the mold occurred when the packaging was compromised -- this is not
related to the conditions of the manufacturing.

~~~
moocowduckquack
It might be related to the rat.

~~~
ogreyonder
You might be a literate orangutan.

Figured I'd join in on the speculation while it's fresh.

~~~
jlgreco
His speculation seems _more_ than fair, since we know they at least _had_ a
rat problem.

------
eclipxe
Soylent represents everything I hate about the valley.

~~~
SandB0x
Eating is _broken_. It's time to disrupt the digestive system!

~~~
sillysaurus2
How do you have >10avg comment karma? Snarky one-liners?

------
ilamont
It's possible to recover from quality scares. Clover Food Lab, which got its
start as one of the MIT food trucks, had to deal with a salmonella outbreak
over the summer. These news reports and blog posts by the founder document
what happened:

Salmonella outbreak sickens 12 in state, triggers closure of Clover
restaurants: [http://www.bostonglobe.com/lifestyle/health-
wellness/2013/07...](http://www.bostonglobe.com/lifestyle/health-
wellness/2013/07/15/salmonella-outbreak-sickens-state-triggers-closure-clover-
restaurants/ARtB7O4zcbFUGALVeIEKBO/story.html)

Clover Food Lab delays reopening after Salmonella scare:
[http://www.metro.us/boston/news/local/2013/07/23/clover-
to-r...](http://www.metro.us/boston/news/local/2013/07/23/clover-to-reopen-
wednesday-after-salmonella-scare-offer-free-french-
fries/#sthash.xjdvKUJI.dpuf)

First response by the founder: [http://www.cloverfoodlab.com/is-this-your-
first-time/](http://www.cloverfoodlab.com/is-this-your-first-time/)

Did we say Wednesday? We meant Thursday…: [http://www.cloverfoodlab.com/did-
we-say-wednesday-we-meant-t...](http://www.cloverfoodlab.com/did-we-say-
wednesday-we-meant-thursday-2/)

Read the blog posts by the founder, and the comments. Transparency about what
was going on was key to keeping their customers informed, as well as curious
members of the public. They also worked very closely with health officials.
Clover was able to survive with its reputation intact.

~~~
kmfrk
Don't you think it says something about Silicon Valley that your first thought
is to characterize this as a _PR issue_?

It's Airbnb "ransackgate" all over again ...

~~~
mattgreenrocks
"If we focused too much on quality, we'd run out of VC money!"

------
mixmastamyk
The angry comments in every solyent article are pretty silly imho. You are
under no obligation to use it. Those that do are still permitted to dine with
family. :/ Any bugs will get worked out over time.

These days I usually make a smoothie for a quick breakfast... perhaps some
unsweetened almond milk, protein/vitamin powder, ground flax seed, a bit of
fruit/veggies, sometimes even a healthy oil. The concept is not terribly
different than soylent.

I do like to keep my blood sugar in a moderate range, however. I might be
interested in trying soylent if they had a low-carb version, one not
significantly made of oats and maltodextrin.

~~~
DanBC
> Any bugs will get worked out over time.

Meanwhile, they'll still market it as optimized nutrition to put you in
perfect shape and fine for everyone even if they have allergies etc etc.

~~~
mixmastamyk
Maybe they've gone a bit far with that, but I've not yet encountered marketing
that didn't put a positive spin on its product. As always take with a grain of
salt.

------
kmfrk
What happens when the _Move Fast and Break Things_ philosophy is applied
outside software. :)

------
wil421
People dont realize what little regulations supplements face compared to
"food".

Most products you buy at nutrition/health stores (like GNC/Vitamin
Shoppe/etc.) are not really tested. You can pretty much be getting chalk and
no one will know. Or you get an overdose of Ephedra and die.

~~~
foobarqux
See superdrol (anabolic steroid with high liver toxicity) and Craze (meth
analog)

~~~
wil421
This was exactly what I was talking about. Muscle building supplements and
bath salts.

------
mathattack
Seems like Soylent is taking advantage if the entire industry loophole called
supplements. If the loophole didn't exist, this type of entrepreneurship
wouldn't.

Food companies are also doing real experiments. I don't see tasteless goop
shakes disrupting the market any more than sport shakes.

EDIT: I stand corrected on the first paragraph. I still believe the 2nd to be
true.

~~~
caublestone
Soylent is a food and not a supplement. The commercial version of the product
is being produced in an FDA approved and GMP certified facility - RFI.

~~~
mathattack
I stand corrected. Good for them!

------
antonius
I love how nonchalant the CEO was when he called the VICE reporter to tell him
not to eat any of the spoiled batch of Soylent.

------
LukeWalsh
It's unfortunate for Soylent to end up in such a situation given how easily it
could have been prevented.

For me however it does not discount the product in the least, and I would
expect a rethinking of the production process to be posted soon in response.

~~~
DanBC
> For me however it does not discount the product in the least

You can get better products from reputable companies.

Or you can buy this gloop, from a bunch of people who clearly have little clue
about what they're doing.

~~~
LukeWalsh
Perhaps I should clarify, I would hate to see this hurt the entire industry.
If Soylent does not do a complete rethinking after what has happened I expect
someone else to take their place.

~~~
DanBC
They're using a copacker now, which means a proper, approved, factory. So
things should be much better for the actual product.

I dislike the way the founder keeps saying “I want to be totally transparent,”
- but only after someone has seen a rat or found mold or whatever.

The algae stuff sounds interesting. Is anyone already working on it?

------
talles
This is, IMO, the stupidest thing ever. Why just WHY give up on food? Cooking
and enjoying food is one of our essential pleasures in life; I just can't see
myself replacing it to some hipster matrix-like shake of nutrients. Just no
thank you.

Anyway the title feels a lot misleading for someone that is used to do water
fast. That is truly 'eating no food', and some do it for lengths of 30 days
(yes it's safe for most people).

Cooking your own food, experimenting around and occasionally doing some
fasting is, again IMO, the true way to eat happy and healthy. That's what I
do.

~~~
aianus
Some people really hate the whole process of shopping, cooking, and eating.
Or, at least, they're tired of spending hours every day on it. Can you really
not think of anything you'd rather do with your time?

~~~
talles
Sure, of course. Nowadays every single piece of 'time' is invaluable to be
productive, to get rich, to achieve something.

But we lose the pleasure in the process. Sure, I'm not able to cook a pleasant
meal on midweek as I do on my weekends. But that doesn't mean that I'm going
to the extreme of blending all up and feed myself with a straw. Finding a
balance is the way to go.

------
abuehrle
The three NYC food critics (11:20 in the video) really bugged me. Their
immediate smug dismissal of the product and idea was predetermined. Maybe I'm
reading too much into what was shown, but I got the impression that there was
no possible world in which they give Soylent a chance.

I'm not necessarily a believer, but I'm noticing this behavior more and more
often as I get older and it's increasingly bothering me.

~~~
justin66
> Their immediate smug dismissal of the product and idea was predetermined.
> Maybe I'm reading too much into what was shown, but I got the impression
> that there was no possible world in which they give Soylent a chance.

Why would they? The best possible case is that it tastes like a milkshake or
malt or something good like that. At which point, they're still arguing
against a monoculture of millions of identical milkshakes, which are still
hell for anyone who actually enjoys food.

I'd expect any food critic's attitude toward this stuff to make their attitude
towards corporate fast food look pretty mild by comparison.

~~~
abuehrle
I believe no one associated with Soylent has ever claimed it to be a culinary
delight, and no one is trying to stop people from enjoying food when they want
to eat for that purpose. To have these critics evaluating Soylent by their
usual metrics in a pseudo-experimental setting is disingenuous. The guy critic
even used the word "stupid". It's not a stupid, it's just not good at
something it never claimed to be good at.

------
throwmeaway2525
From a different perspective, has anyone ever taken the time to read local
health department restaurant inspection reports (if available)?

I assume most people here eat at restaurants without too much concern, but if
you ever read the reports, you'll find experienced industry professionals
cited for far worse infractions than these.

~~~
DanBC
I live in the UK. My local town has a 5 start system. "rats in the same
building" would get a place shut down.

------
Touche
What makes Solyent special vs other meal replacements? I take a meal
replacement called Raw Meal (only one meal a day) that's make mostly from
sprouts. I feel great when I make myself do it every day. Is the difference
that Solyent isn't made from any plant material but rather is raw chemicals?

------
thatthatis
Best part of this for me was the information that the Optifast product exists.
I hope soylent is successful, but I like knowing there are existing total-
meal-replacement competitors I can order now on amazon (which I just did).

------
akinity
Gross, why are human beings packing Soylent?

------
skizm
I feel like you can get 90% of the way to soylent's promises with whey protein
milkshakes, multi-vitamins and fish oil. Toss some fiber in that diet and you
get the rest of the way. Athlete? add some creatine to your morning shake and
eat something with more carbs post workout (carbohydrate supplement powder
works great and is cheap). Having a minimalist diet isn't rocket science, but
I guess it is reassuring to have that stamp on the bottle that says a doctor
approved of the macro-nutrient ratios.

------
gonzalocasas
"Lacking background in chemistry or nutrition, Rhinehart developed the formula
through research and self-experimentation." (from the Wikipage article)

OMG, yes, that sounds like a totally reliable product to, you know, like,
trust one's own existence to.

Not to mention the incredibly sad, and dehumanizing experience of losing all
the marvellous things of a great meal that are not related to nutrition:
textures, flavor, a time to disconnect and relax, a time to chat with friends,
family, etc, just to mention a few obvious ones.

------
jjoe
For those who feel like they are missing out on the social aspect of eating
out. Perhaps restaurants can start offering Soylent-based meals in their menu
but with a twist. Instead of a plain shake in a cup, they could mold and dye
the Soylent powder to look like a natural food like an apple, strawberry, or
even a steak and serve it on a plate.

No stigma from having to turn down a restaurant invitation or a get together
with friends.

------
itsameta4
I've been following this story since the beginning, and here's the part that
I'm baffled that people always forget:

 _They 're open-sourcing the recipe._

That should remove all the accusations of it being a scam. If it's a scam, it
will be easily proved such.

If there are nutritional problems, they can be fixed, either in the official
branch, or in one of the many forks which already exist.

------
Tarrosion
I found this very troubling:

"I wasn’t drinking enough water. At the factory, Rob told me that was a common
mistake; since Soylent is a shake, people figure they don’t have to drink
extra water—an easy way to get dehydrated."

Failing so thoroughly to communicate how to use your product that users become
dehydrated within two days is a serious mistake, though thankfully not a
common one.

------
DanBC
I'm really tempted to set up a kickstarter for a documentary of me living for
6 months on the various existing liquid feeds.

It'll be tricky getting a doctor to fit a feeding tube up my nose, but I'm
sure someone would do it. (Bit scary using non-medical people because of the
risk of the tube going into a lung.)

------
digitalzombie
I wouldn't mind eating this once and a while when I'm low on time and don't
want to drive somewhere or whip something up.

I wouldn't see myself eating this ONLY, cause the video did bring up a good
point, eating is also a social thing. Hey babe you want to go back to my place
and eat some soylent?

~~~
quantumpotato_
We can cook it, oh wait, don't have time.

------
phaed
Meh. Sensationalist piece. I know Vice and the shenanigans they use to get
headlines. I trust none of it.

~~~
rjd
My initial thought was " Don't most people that go on weight loss diets shake
do this anyway?" ... followed by "whats actually different about this product
and existing food replacement shake diets?"

------
rdl
I'd kill (well, pay up to $600/mo) for a low-carb version of Soylent. Even if
he made it in a (clean) residential kitchen, although I'd prefer if RFI did it
under contract.

Even better if you could get monthly blood analysis and then have your Soylent
customized for you.

SoylentPro, perhaps.

------
antidaily
Disruptive!

------
blueblank
> Eating will become like boozing—something we do recreationally with friends,
> or as a hobby

or, part of the grimdark future where the trend of hobby eating sends the
prices of food out of reach of the lower 7/8 of society

------
collyw
IS the stuff on vice.com real? I read about a guy who claimed to only eat raw
meat, and it seemed a bit far fetched.

Ok, this Solyent is believable, but why??? Eating is one of life pleasures.

------
bredren
I would compare this to a tech startup becoming the victim of an exploit. i.e.
an injurious but not life-threatening data hack. There are many examples of
hacks on tech startups due to technical malfeasance that sometimes show
neglect in the handling of data or poor planning in the current operation of
the system.[0]

I think Soylent has plenty of potential and while this will darken views
toward the brand for a time, it will most likely recover. The idea is too
good.

[0] [https://blog.twitter.com/2009/monday-morning-
madness](https://blog.twitter.com/2009/monday-morning-madness)

------
jokoon
doesn't your digestive system have to re learn some tricks if it's not used
for a long time ?

------
jbeja
I Quit watching the video at the part were he says "i was eating leafs, it so
strange".

------
xacaxulu
Zuckerburg will drink Soylent only if he can kill it first.

------
sillysaurus2
These top comments are really the worst of HN. Thoughtless, emotional vitriol.

Until Soylent is proved unsafe, there is no basis for calling it unsafe.

~~~
DanBC
We see unsuitably dressed workers scooping powders from uncovered boxes on a
factory floor into other boxes to be mixed, with rats in the factory.

They've left that factory now, but it's telling that even though Rob didn't
think the factory was suitable for a number of reasons he still went ahead and
prepared and shipped product to (I assume) paying beta testers.

What more do you need?

~~~
lowboy
Eh. I'm not so squeamish. I know that pretty much every restaurant will have
or has had rodents, it's just part of life.

