I too am highly skeptical of ALL of these claims.
My main gripe with Soylent (ever since I first saw it here on HN a month ago) is that they are making cooking seem like a horrible chore that nobody wants to do.
Shopping is convenient because I go whenever I have time and only buy exactly what I need. At the same time, I also ensure I only buy the best ingredients I can at the moment (Assuming labeling is correct).
A lot of people I know and myself included, LOVE to cook. I love cutting a bell pepper and catching a whiff of its fresh smell in my nostrils. I love sometimes adding different sauces, spices or ingredients in my meals to give them a distinct and unique taste.
And cleaning up is also fun because I recognize I am a responsible adult, able to revert something back to the state I received it in. Just like my bed, or a rental car or my home.
I fear for the people who see this as a great "life hack" who wind up doing long-lasting damage to themselves. There are cases of people having liver failure when they go on a long-term liquid diet. I have no idea if that applies, because we don't really know why that happens.
I appreciate the hacker instinct, but, in this case, I fear it is a dangerous one.
None of them have a background in biology/nutrition/medicine/health from what I can see.
Their product ha the story and format to appeals to the HN audience "hack food".
They consider cooking a chore and a "waste of time", which means there are audience is VERY limited. The majority of people spend a large amount on variety and taste in food because they like it. So their target market is people who think like them.
And finally - and most importantly - you cannot eat the same concentration and matrix of nutrients every day!
On some days you will work harder, or work less, fall sick, want sugar, drink alcohol, be happy, have medicines - or experience any of a thousand different variable large and small which necessitate a change in diet.
A person's vitamin C needs are different if they are eating a diet that is predominately meat than if they are eating a lot of grains (the reason why Inuits didn't suffer from scurvy). Maybe there is a combination in Soylent that makes calcium very difficult to absorb or alters the body's ph so calcium has to be leached from the bones to proper ph. After 10 years, your bones become exceedingly brittle, and there isn't much you can do about it.
I'm not saying this is less healthy than eating Ensure for every meal, but I would say the exact same thing about Ensure, and I trust a little more science has gone into it (maybe 10% valid nutrition and 90% "how do we get this to taste/sell better" food "science").
The worst part for me is that we have no idea. At best, we have a few anecdotes. But I feel this way about every "miracle food" that comes on the market.
I realize this is anathema (I love food as much as anyone else) but there are moments in my life where I'd like to code or create things rather than worry too much about my next meal.
Is it just the "nutritionally complete" bit?
You have to maintain a car, feed it (oil/diesel/electricity) and care for it (regular washing), otherwise it will go the 'way of the horse' ...
I agree with you on your last statement but I don't think soylent is a solution to that problem. I don't think a formula will have the nutritious benefit of a manually prepared fresh meal.
This is a silly thing to say, honestly. It's unscientific in every possible way, and honestly sounds like saying "I don't think there's any way there's not a god" to defend religion.
It's worth giving it a shot, or doing research to prove or disprove it, but wild speculation is not the way to approach this one, imho.
To me, the more worrisome thing is that they are making eating seem like a horrible chore that nobody wants to do.
That said, Plumpy'nut and other RUTFs have done amazing things for the neediest people on the planet, so I'm not as willing as other HNers to throw the project entirely under the bus. I am interested in how this product compares to what exists.
Can I come over for dinner? :D
> My main gripe with Soylent (ever since I first saw it here on HN a month ago) is that they are making cooking seem like a horrible chore that nobody wants to do.
Some people really do hate cooking. Either they don't enjoy the act of it, or do not have a lot of time for it. I know... one could say that you could make time for it. The fast food industry works not because the food is good (It generally isn't...) but because it's so easy. I think people are a lot better off eating Soylent then MCD :)
On the contrary. I think they're doing something reasonable, which is purposefully marketing the product to people to whom cooking is a horrible chore they don't want to do. I'm one of those people, and I suspect there are others.
I despise all the time I have to spend on food preparation. I'm annoyed that even if I eat out regularly, I have to spend time planning my nutrition and budget or risk being unhealthy or broke. Other people (or machines) can prepare food better than me, so I think it's ridiculous that it's still expected that each adult (or household) should learn to cook personally. Sure, it's not terribly difficult, but neither is making clothes, fixing many home plumbing issues, cutting hair, performing an oil or tire change, and many other things that are well-accepted as outsourceable.
~400 cals or so.
Or taking it further with blending/vitamixing (so you keep the fiber) veggies.
I thought this was the most hilarious article I've read. And it was not sarcastic...
Quoting from the list of ingredients for ON[1], this is wrong: Natural and Artificial Flavors, Acesulfame Potassium.
[1] http://www.optimumnutrition.com/products/100-Whey-Gold-Stand...
