4 ms·

But why not go for a protein bar then? Quest bars for instance are delicious (I'd even prefer them to a candy bar), and pack a far more interesting macro profil

by jclos 10y ago

But why not go for a protein bar then? Quest bars for instance are delicious (I'd even prefer them to a candy bar), and pack a far more interesting macro profile than the Soylent ones.

kmicklas 10y ago
> and pack a far more interesting macro profile than the Soylent ones. What makes you say that?
- jclos 10y ago
  It contains way more fat and carbs than protein. Fat and carbs are already cheap and plenty (just pick up a bag of crisps) everywhere around us, so if you try to replace one of your meals by something like this you might as well go for something that is more expensive/less practical to eat, like protein. It may just be my lifting background making me biased though as we typically require a higher protein intake.
  - kmicklas 10y ago
    I think the lifting background is biasing you. I'm also a lifter and I had the same thought when I first saw Soylent. But actually, I would dispute that fat is cheap and plenty. Carbs are for sure, but when I do the math I'm actually very unsure how a typical American diet would have either enough fat or enough protein, without scaling the whole thing to well beyond caloric maintenance, which is probably exactly what people are doing. Unless you're a serious lifter, the macro ratios in Soylent actually make a lot of sense if you are eating it for most meals. You're right to point out that there is a bit of a conflict between Soylent's two goals of being both a viable replacement for every meal, and for any given meal. If you only eat one meal of it, it should probably counteract the bias of your other meals, namely, having too much carbs. But keto-Soylent would not be ideal for everyone using it as a complete food replacement.
ravenstine 10y ago
As much as I too love Quest bars(the cookie dough one is insanely good), I'm not so sure I agree on the nutrient content: http://files.soylent.com/pdf/bar-nutrition-facts-en.pdf http://files.soylent.com/pdf/bar-nutrition-facts-en.pdf http://www.questnutrition.com/protein-bars/choc-chip-cookie-dough-box-of-12/ http://www.questnutrition.com/protein-bars/choc-chip-cookie-... Granted, they are trying to do different things; Soylent tastes like crap but has a lot of nutrients(supposedly a "complete" meal), whereas Quest is higher in protein and lower in sugar while tasting terrific. Personally, I would still choose Quest over Soylent because I suspect that the idea that we need a constant intake of a wide variety of nutrients isn't really true. I'm not denying that we definitely need vitamins and minerals, but experience of going months eating very few vegetables(and almost entirely meat and cheese) has caused no noticeable health effects in me besides weight loss. We're made to think that we've got to eat a ton of vegetables and even take supplements, which I think might be more clever marketing than anything else.
- jclos 10y ago
  But the micronutrient selection is only relevant if you only consume Soylent, and most people here seem to be saying that they only consume some Soylent products in replacement of a couple of meals/when they don't have time. So if the rest of your meals are normal meals you will have filled your micronutrients requirements already. Soylent is only beneficial then over a protein bar if you plan to eat garbage the rest of the day too, but then if you do the macronutrient profile of Soylent becomes pointless, because the garbage you are going to eat later on is probably going to be carbs and fat bombs (as garbage food usually is). Therefore I don't really see the place that Soylent is trying to occupy and I can't help but dismiss it as another nutritional fad.

by jclos 10y ago

But why not go for a protein bar then? Quest bars for instance are delicious (I'd even prefer them to a candy bar), and pack a far more interesting macro profile than the Soylent ones.

kmicklas 10y ago

> and pack a far more interesting macro profile than the Soylent ones. What makes you say that?

jclos 10y ago
It contains way more fat and carbs than protein. Fat and carbs are already cheap and plenty (just pick up a bag of crisps) everywhere around us, so if you try to replace one of your meals by something like this you might as well go for something that is more expensive/less practical to eat, like protein. It may just be my lifting background making me biased though as we typically require a higher protein intake.
- kmicklas 10y ago
  I think the lifting background is biasing you. I'm also a lifter and I had the same thought when I first saw Soylent. But actually, I would dispute that fat is cheap and plenty. Carbs are for sure, but when I do the math I'm actually very unsure how a typical American diet would have either enough fat or enough protein, without scaling the whole thing to well beyond caloric maintenance, which is probably exactly what people are doing. Unless you're a serious lifter, the macro ratios in Soylent actually make a lot of sense if you are eating it for most meals. You're right to point out that there is a bit of a conflict between Soylent's two goals of being both a viable replacement for every meal, and for any given meal. If you only eat one meal of it, it should probably counteract the bias of your other meals, namely, having too much carbs. But keto-Soylent would not be ideal for everyone using it as a complete food replacement.

ravenstine 10y ago

As much as I too love Quest bars(the cookie dough one is insanely good), I'm not so sure I agree on the nutrient content: http://files.soylent.com/pdf/bar-nutrition-facts-en.pdf http://files.soylent.com/pdf/bar-nutrition-facts-en.pdf http://www.questnutrition.com/protein-bars/choc-chip-cookie-dough-box-of-12/ http://www.questnutrition.com/protein-bars/choc-chip-cookie-... Granted, they are trying to do different things; Soylent tastes like crap but has a lot of nutrients(supposedly a "complete" meal), whereas Quest is higher in protein and lower in sugar while tasting terrific. Personally, I would still choose Quest over Soylent because I suspect that the idea that we need a constant intake of a wide variety of nutrients isn't really true. I'm not denying that we definitely need vitamins and minerals, but experience of going months eating very few vegetables(and almost entirely meat and cheese) has caused no noticeable health effects in me besides weight loss. We're made to think that we've got to eat a ton of vegetables and even take supplements, which I think might be more clever marketing than anything else.

jclos 10y ago
But the micronutrient selection is only relevant if you only consume Soylent, and most people here seem to be saying that they only consume some Soylent products in replacement of a couple of meals/when they don't have time. So if the rest of your meals are normal meals you will have filled your micronutrients requirements already. Soylent is only beneficial then over a protein bar if you plan to eat garbage the rest of the day too, but then if you do the macronutrient profile of Soylent becomes pointless, because the garbage you are going to eat later on is probably going to be carbs and fat bombs (as garbage food usually is). Therefore I don't really see the place that Soylent is trying to occupy and I can't help but dismiss it as another nutritional fad.