
Soylent on the latest Vice piece - caublestone
http://blog.soylent.me/post/66807143901/this-morning-vices-brian-merchant-published-a
======
tptacek
Wow. Exactly the right response. I would never have paid any attention to
Soylent's agreement with a large HACCP-certified manufacturer before, but
Vice's story actually made that relevant to me. They might actually _pick up_
customers from this shitstorm.

Argh! But, well played.

~~~
mcphilip
It's hard to imagine the type of person that would be on the fence about
Soylent that would be ok with it after reading this article. Hopefully the "it
was beta" excuse for producing Soylent in an unhealthy environment won't fly
outside of SV culture. If anything, it should bring up serious doubts about
the integrity of a team that, when faced with overwhelming demand and flush
with investor cash, stoop to a level of cognitive dissonance necessary to
claim lofty goals of fighting hunger worldwide while sidestepping around the
rats and filth in their "beta" production environment. If the Soylent team
wants respect they should focus less on dreaming up scientific sounding
rebranding campaigns and slow down the "deployment" of their product in order
to subject it to rigorous scientific tests and trials before mailing it to
strangers.

\---------------

Meta: wow, I really get worked up over this Soylent stuff. There's something
deeply disturbing about this to me, like we're witnessing the birth of a
monster. Maybe it's the first sign of the worst of the "move fast, break
things" cutting corners culture smelling money to be made iterating on
peoples' health...

~~~
sneak
That was the beta/promo batch. I fail to see how that's relevant now.

They're already subjecting the production version to rigorous testing.

As for trials, those cost hundreds of millions of dollars and are done for no
other food. Are you suggesting that they simply not make Soylent because it
hasn't gone through a phase 3?

I bet you're real fun at bake sales.

~~~
seiji
That's the point. You don't get to "beta" foodstuffs.

Try running a public beta on some cancer drugs and see how far you get.

~~~
shawnz
> Try running a public beta on some cancer drugs and see how far you get.

1) This isn't a public beta.

2) If cancer drugs WEREN'T tested before being sold, I would be far more
worried.

------
hawkharris
Many startups put the word "utilize" in their press releases to sound fancier
and more official: "This...prompted us to utilize more robust packaging."

You can always say "use" instead of "utilize" to avoid buzzwords and sound
more conversational. In fact, there are only a few specific cases (mostly in
science writing) where "utilize" is necessary:

[http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/use-
versu...](http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/use-versus-
utilize)

~~~
rdl
This is also incredibly common among company/field grade military officers
trying to appear "educated".

I use "use" when something is put to its intended or designed use; I use a
shirt by wearing it. I utilize a shirt by wrapping it around my arm, as a
pressure dressing, to stop bleeding.

~~~
onezeno
I was in enlisted Air Force and the term is annoyingly over utilized there as
well.

~~~
rdl
Otoh there are some awesome contributions to the English language like
"waivered" and in general a lot of nouning and verbing.

------
kposehn
The Soylent team continues to impress.

I think this is probably one of the best handled rollouts of a product with so
high a potential for controversy. Each issue seems to get addressed rapidly,
the company is pursuing a quest for quality, and the product itself is coming
together rapidly.

I'm glad to have contributed.

~~~
jack-r-abbit
Me too. I eagerly await my order to come in January.

------
lnanek2
I don't really understand why Soylent needs a factory anyway. Just white label
some generic meal replacement shake like Ensure and they are done. The only
thing interesting about the company is they managed to market a product that
already exists as something new to a new audience.

~~~
cgh
Please see this discussion, in particular the response from "rob":
[http://discourse.soylent.me/t/comparing-soylent-to-
existing-...](http://discourse.soylent.me/t/comparing-soylent-to-existing-
nutritional-products/431)

Summary: Soylent aims for something more ideal than a suboptimal solution.
It's a day to day meal replacement for otherwise healthy, active people. Given
the ingredients of Ensure, I wouldn't want to try to live on it for 30 days.
It's like Google vs. Altavista, if you'll pardon the strained analogy.

~~~
mdisraeli
From the link: "I considered Ensure but found it much too expensive, low
calorie, unpalatable, and an ingredient make up that was far from complete or
optimal"

I have family ties into this industry, and quite frankly this comment is
rather ignorant. Ensure is a brand range, with a lot of variation, some of
which are, for example, extremely high in calories.

It is also worth noting that one of the uses of products like Ensure is to
actually mix in with regular cooking, increasing the calorific and nutritional
value of normal food.

Comparing existing products in the market with "Altavista", and Soylent with
"Google" is also very disingenuous, as it serves to discredit all the work put
into existing products, and ignores their business model. Funnily enough,
Ensure isn't marketed as hipster-food, and everything about it is tailored for
their target market of the medical industry.

As hackers, surely we should be supporting good business, rather than blindly
going with the latest fad?

~~~
sneak
Why doesn't Ensure have a good webpage showing us these options and educating
us on how to choose?

There's more to "product" than what's in the bag.

~~~
mdisraeli
Because pharmaceutical/clinical nutritional sales have very little at all to
do with websites!

In our tech focused, Business to consumer / mass business market, it is easy
to forget about hands-on sales.

These products, remember, have lots of legislation around them, very strict
instructions on when they are appropriate to be used, training is required in
order to really use many of them properly, and so on. That tends to be the
first indicator of the need for sales reps.

Equally, and perhaps more importantly, remember that direct to consumers is a
market for these products only because of clinical teams recommending them.
Their typical sales targets are huge, and are acquired in big bulk contracts
with entire hospitals, if not healthcare regional bodies. Contracts on that
scale are, again, typically done via sales teams who work closely with a
client, build a relationship, and help the client get the most out of their
sales. This model also exists in the tech industry, and indeed is how most Big
Enterprise IT works.

I'm sure they could get more direct to consumer sales if they improved their
website, yes. But even ignoring any legislative issues with directly aiding
that market, why focus on growing the 5% of your market (being generous!),
when that 95% of hands-on sales is really what you should be investing in?

~~~
sneak
Because a million bucks in nerdy preorders without any marketing to speak of
suggests that there's a large underserved market.

------
codex
There is some evidence that working with one's hands relieves depression and
promotes happiness. I would like to see a clinical trial which attempts to
measure the opposite effect from Soylent: that removing the food preparation
ritual can contribute to depression, or at least ennui. Sometimes removing a
piece of the natural environment is not good for an organism. Few suggest
replacing all human walking with motorized transport, for example; I wonder if
the same will hold for meals.

On the other hand, some people use food as a drug, and removing it may be
helpful in a Buddhist desire-suppression kind of way.

------
ericmsimons
What happened to the original HN submission of the vice article?

~~~
tptacek
It's right here:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6720193](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6720193)

~~~
OoTheNigerian
It has practically disappeared and the submitted link was substituted[1]. I
think this is a first.

I doubt that PG is aware of this type of orchestrated manipulation going on.
It is quite dangerous for the credibility of HN.

Soylent seems interesting and potentially disruptive. However, it is FOOD and
deserves to be put under the microscope. Anyone conniving to make them dodge
scrutiny (especially via underhand moves) is not doing them any favours.

[1][https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6720515](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6720515)

~~~
KevinEldon
Soylent is a food, like the McDonald's McRib sandwich, the Baconator from
Wendy's, the Denny's Grand Slam Breakfast, and the delicious beef tacos from
my local Mexican restaurant. Why does Soylent need more scrutiny than any of
these or the hundreds of thousands of other food products on the market today?

~~~
whyenot
> Soylent is a food

The company is claiming that it is a dietary supplement and NOT food in order
to avoid FDA scrutiny. At least that is what the PandoDaily article that was
originally linked to claims.

~~~
salemh
This is from the actual parent article: _Soylent is designed and regulated as
a food, not a supplement._

------
jebus989
The fact a rat was spotted in a dusty old warehouse isn't really worth
addressing.

From what I've learned so far, the only factor letting this product down for
me is the price. I'd guess $65/w is around what I'm spending on food now. Do
we have any idea of their margin? Is the price expected to decrease once they
get a decent production line up?

~~~
spurgu
Yeah, I spend even less than that. The price would have to be somewhere around
half of that to make it attractive for me.

~~~
zipppy
That's incredible to me...even at $65 it's less than $10 a day. Half the price
would be like $1.25 a meal.

I spend almost that simply for lunch each day (sushi, sandwiches...food on-
the-go), so for me spending $65 a week would pretty easily save money. Makes
me curious how many people (in the U.S.) spend less than $65 a week on food.

------
bane
When I was younger and had my wisdom teeth out, they had to break my lower jaw
to get the deeply impacted lower ones out. I spent six weeks eating nothing
but Ensure. To this day I can't stand the taste of it.

Going back to solid food took a few days of introducing progressively more and
more solid food back into my system and was not terribly fun.

I think the appeal of this, in terms of time savings during busy work periods,
is intriguing. But there's already tons of these kinds of things in a very
crowded market, and I don't even have to mix it myself. But as an extended,
multi-week replacement? No thanks.

------
DigitalSea
A well-written response. Soylent have handled this extremely well and the fact
they've partnered up with a HACCP certified manufacturer with over 20 years
experience will prevent any mishaps with future production of Soylent. Really
looking forward to giving this a shot, none of the issues highlighted in the
beta have deterred me from trying as they won't be present in the main
manufacturing process.

------
mdisraeli
I am actually excited by their move to an established manufacturer. A good
manufacturing partner will be well placed to help them deal with FDA approval,
which will be required.

However, they big challenge they will eventually face is the existing
nutritional product manufacturers. At the moment, Soylent is not viewed as a
serious competitor, but it is worth remembering that if they prove that a
market exists, Abbott, Nestlé and the like both have the marketing clout and
some rather clever tricks to muscle in on the market.

But the saddest thing of all? Despite companies like Soylent, Abbott,
Nutriset, Nestlé, etc, clinical malnutrition is still a serious issue. Proper
nutrition is essential to successful treatment to many issues (cancer being
one), yet it is still commonly neglected by clinical staff and administrators
:( And most people don't even know about the risks and that different options
exist for different needs!

(Disclaimer: family work in the industry)

------
karcass
No mention of rats. /snicker/

------
mojoe
I would be very, very interested to see the long-term consequences of an
exclusively Soylent diet. I suspect the lack of phytochemicals would lead to
increased incidences of cancer. That said, I would also guess that millions
(billions?) of people have far worse diets.

------
mixmastamyk
Looking forward to a low-carb version, anything in the works?

~~~
TillE
For the same price (easily under $10/day), frozen vegetables and chopped meat.
Just add spices and a bit of oil. Dump it all in a rice cooker if you're
really pressed for time.

Not as trivially portable as a bottle of soylent, but otherwise superior in
every respect.

~~~
mixmastamyk
Yep, I already do that.

------
tobeportable
Makes much sense for disaster relief.

------
contextual
Soylent will likely become a billion dollar global enterprise, and even
"disrupt" the food industry.

It will also ultimately be a failure and frowned upon in modern society. Why?
Because a Soylent-saturated world would rob families and loved ones of the
_ritual_ and _benefits_ of eating together.

Eating together civilizes people. It's emotionally and socially edifying.
Studies show that families that dine together stay together [1]. Their
children are healthier and get better grades. It also lowers the risk of
weight problems and alcohol and substance abuse.[2]

Eating real food persisted throughout human history because _it 's more than
about eating_.

[1]
[http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/03/24/family-...](http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/03/24/family-
dinner-adolescent-benefits/2010731/) [2] [http://www.webmd.com/a-to-z-
guides/features/family-dinners-a...](http://www.webmd.com/a-to-z-
guides/features/family-dinners-are-important)

EDIT: I'm glad to see so many people disagree with me. It means I'm on the
right track.

~~~
md224
> I'm glad to see so many people disagree with me. It means I'm on the right
> track.

Does anyone else find this "first they ignore you" style of belief-
reinforcement to be vaguely troubling? Don't get me wrong, you shouldn't just
believe your critics without further inquiry, but the presence of critics
shouldn't be used as supporting evidence _in and of itself_. You risk creating
a kind of insular belief system where any threat can be transformed into
reinforcement.

~~~
StavrosK
Very true. You can't use the fact that someone has something bad to say about
you to actually improve your perceived value. It's strictly[1] more probable
that you're worse if there is criticism than if there isn't.

[1] EDIT: as pasquinelli noted, I didn't actually mean "strictly" here, I
meant >=. Also, pasquinelli, you've been hellbanned.

~~~
contextual
Many HN readers like to rationalize-away inconvenient truths as if it were a
game. When I see that kind of weaksauce response, I'm on the right track.

------
Eleutheria
They definitely need two kinds of soylent. One, soylent red, with a different
formula and more nutrients for the first few days while our bodies adapt, and
then regular soylent green.

I say this because everybody complains the first days are really hard on their
bodies and nerves. So a smooth transition would make it easier to stick to the
plan and reduce drop rates.

~~~
aaronem
I'm pretty sure calling it _anything other than Soylent Red and Green_ would
be a really, really good idea. Call it a hunch.

~~~
thinkalone
Yeah, I was pretty disheartened in the Motherboard video that the founder
_liked_ the name Soylent.

~~~
aaronem
Nothing I've seen about the Soylent project makes me imagine that its founder
lives on quite the same planet inhabited by most other humans. He has an
interesting idea and he certainly seems able to execute, at least so far, but
I can't help but be a little more skeptical than I would be otherwise; the
first time I saw mention of it, it took me a good fifteen minutes to convince
myself that it was what it appeared to be, and not a prop for some sort of
"alternate reality game". Even now, I still find myself waiting for another
shoe to drop.

