7 ms·

> Rob Rhinehart, to compress all the nutrition the human body needs to live into one single, easily digestible formula, like the twenty-first-century version of

> Rob Rhinehart, to compress all the nutrition the human body needs to live into one single, easily digestible formula, like the twenty-first-century version of manna. But that is fundamentally the opposite of the way we increasingly want to eat in America and in much of the developed world. Uh, speak for yourself. I order Soylent from time-to-time. It's a nice way to simplify about 75% of my meal prep, while remaining healthy and helping me avoid constant snacking. If I was on my own I'd consider 100% Soylent. You don't need three gourmet meals a day. Food is a convenient social activity, but it's not the only one. So many issues with this article, but this one... > the persistent effect that progress in food processing has had on our taste buds, as we amp up artificial flavors in an attempt regain the natural flavor we have stripped from our food with technology If you'd ever had Soylent, you'd realize that it's entirely the opposite of an "amped-up, artificial flavour". It's not bland - it has a light flavour that isn't offensive no matter how much you drink.

connoredel 10y ago
To take it a step further: Is it immoral to eat whole foods for all 3 meals a day? Research has shown we get most of the nutrients we need from our first meal (of whole foods) each day. We only need calories from that point on. Shouldn't we then just try to get the most efficient form of calories, so long as those calories don't do harm? Leave the other 2 nutrient-rich meals for the rest of the world. He frames it as "this is not what Americans want." But just because we can increasingly eat 3 nutrient-rich meals doesn't mean we should. In fact, it means the opposite -- that we should give those meals away because we can.
- burkaman 10y ago
  But starvation and malnutrition are generally not caused by lack of production, right? I think distribution and economic issues are usually at fault. So eating less doesn't help anyone, except maybe yourself.
- ccallebs 10y ago
  > Research has shown we get most of the nutrients we need from our first meal (of whole foods) each day. Not disagreeing but this is the first I've heard of this. Do you have any sources on hand?
collyw 10y ago
> while remaining healthy Thats yet to be seen. This food is a processed as you can get, I have my doubts that it will be good for you in the long term.
- shuntress 10y ago
  "We do not view processed foods as inherently bad or unhealthy. We believe that the nutritional value of a foodstuff - regardless of whether it is prepared in a factory, a restaurant, or at a backyard barbecue - is a direct consequence of the variety of nutrients that it provides and their context within one's overall diet." from- https://faq.soylent.com/hc/en-us/articles/203709619-Soylent-Approach-to-Nutrition https://faq.soylent.com/hc/en-us/articles/203709619-Soylent-...
  - paulcole 10y ago
    Wait, so the makers of a processed food find nothing inherently wrong with processed food? Color me convinced. I also enjoy saying "Numerous scientific studies have suggested..." while linking to none.
    - shuntress 10y ago
      I agree that page is not a thorough proof of their case. It seems to be intended to just outline, at a high level, their point of view. You are saying you disagree that the constituent components of an egg are the source of its nutritional value? Do you suggest that something inside a chicken imbues in the egg ephemeral nutritional properties that our digestive system cannot extract from an equally proportioned mix of fat/cholesterol/protein/etc that was produced in a man-made factory rather than a hen?
      - paulcole 10y ago
        Due to lack of training and education, I don't claim to have any knowledge of nutritional science. The makers of Soylent, on the other hand, are pretty good at making broad sweeping nutritional claims without bothering to back them up with legitimate science.
dpcx 10y ago
I had some the other day. The liquid drink tastes like slightly sweet cornbread batter. Not bad, not great.

connoredel 10y ago

To take it a step further: Is it immoral to eat whole foods for all 3 meals a day? Research has shown we get most of the nutrients we need from our first meal (of whole foods) each day. We only need calories from that point on. Shouldn't we then just try to get the most efficient form of calories, so long as those calories don't do harm? Leave the other 2 nutrient-rich meals for the rest of the world. He frames it as "this is not what Americans want." But just because we can increasingly eat 3 nutrient-rich meals doesn't mean we should. In fact, it means the opposite -- that we should give those meals away because we can.

burkaman 10y ago
But starvation and malnutrition are generally not caused by lack of production, right? I think distribution and economic issues are usually at fault. So eating less doesn't help anyone, except maybe yourself.
ccallebs 10y ago
> Research has shown we get most of the nutrients we need from our first meal (of whole foods) each day. Not disagreeing but this is the first I've heard of this. Do you have any sources on hand?

collyw 10y ago

> while remaining healthy Thats yet to be seen. This food is a processed as you can get, I have my doubts that it will be good for you in the long term.

shuntress 10y ago
"We do not view processed foods as inherently bad or unhealthy. We believe that the nutritional value of a foodstuff - regardless of whether it is prepared in a factory, a restaurant, or at a backyard barbecue - is a direct consequence of the variety of nutrients that it provides and their context within one's overall diet." from- https://faq.soylent.com/hc/en-us/articles/203709619-Soylent-Approach-to-Nutrition https://faq.soylent.com/hc/en-us/articles/203709619-Soylent-...
- paulcole 10y ago
  Wait, so the makers of a processed food find nothing inherently wrong with processed food? Color me convinced. I also enjoy saying "Numerous scientific studies have suggested..." while linking to none.
  - shuntress 10y ago
    I agree that page is not a thorough proof of their case. It seems to be intended to just outline, at a high level, their point of view. You are saying you disagree that the constituent components of an egg are the source of its nutritional value? Do you suggest that something inside a chicken imbues in the egg ephemeral nutritional properties that our digestive system cannot extract from an equally proportioned mix of fat/cholesterol/protein/etc that was produced in a man-made factory rather than a hen?
    - paulcole 10y ago
      Due to lack of training and education, I don't claim to have any knowledge of nutritional science. The makers of Soylent, on the other hand, are pretty good at making broad sweeping nutritional claims without bothering to back them up with legitimate science.

dpcx 10y ago

I had some the other day. The liquid drink tastes like slightly sweet cornbread batter. Not bad, not great.