4 ms·

I unfortunately gave up Soylent when it was found to contain high levels of carcinogenic heavy metals. I believe they found it had 10-25x the minimum amount to

I unfortunately gave up Soylent when it was found to contain high levels of carcinogenic heavy metals. I believe they found it had 10-25x the minimum amount to be considered carcinogenic for arsenic, cadmium, and lead. It's a good idea to make a product that could reduce meat consumption and food waste while helping the environment but maybe this isn't the best way? Maybe helping people and corporations better manage and track food would be a better alternative. Also all the new types of meat alternatives like new veggie burgers, such as those from beyond meat etc are looking really promising and we should support those efforts globally.

codezero 10y ago
Yikes! Where is a write up with these findings if you have one handy. Otherwise I'm off to Google! Found one: http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015/08/watchdog-group-says-soylents-cadmium-and-lead-levels-violate-ca-law/ http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015/08/watchdog-group-says-s...
- moon_priestess 10y ago
  The Soylent people address this on their site: https://faq.soylent.com/hc/en-us/articles/204197379-California-Proposition-65 https://faq.soylent.com/hc/en-us/articles/204197379-Californ... Really, I think the concern here is quite overblown. For example, Soylent 2.0 contains lead at a maximum rate of 0.010725 µg/mL. The FDA's action level for food intended for infants and children is 0.5 µg/mL (which is 46.62 times higher). Source: https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/csem/csem.asp?csem=7&po=8 https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/csem/csem.asp?csem=7&po=8
jly 10y ago
I highly question the claims that soylent is better for the environment. This product's primary ingredient is soy. Imagine we replaced a good chunk of the currently consumed food with this. That would require field after field of soybean crops. The lack of diversity in this kind of growing would result in an unprecedented level of industrial agriculture, which is one of the great issues we face as a world population. We should be encouraging less monoculture, with larger and more diverse crop variety. It is also possible to do in a sustainable way while still consuming some meat. Large-scale production of products like soylent is exactly the opposite of the direction we need to be going to help the environment. This has some further background material: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/12/magazine/12policy-t.html http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/12/magazine/12policy-t.html
- erikpukinskis 10y ago
  If we replaced a good chunk of meat and dairy with soy, we'd save quite a lot of carbon. That's a good thing. I agree we should promote crop diversity. But I don't understand why you think this one specific ingredient is a problem. When someone eats bread, do you get upset because it's promoting wheat? Bread is pretty much 100% wheat, and people eat a LOT of it. If Soylent were the only food people consume, I would understand your concern. But most people don't eat Soylent and most Soylent eaters don't eat only Soylent. So I don't really understand your concern.

codezero 10y ago

Yikes! Where is a write up with these findings if you have one handy. Otherwise I'm off to Google! Found one: http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015/08/watchdog-group-says-soylents-cadmium-and-lead-levels-violate-ca-law/ http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015/08/watchdog-group-says-s...

moon_priestess 10y ago
The Soylent people address this on their site: https://faq.soylent.com/hc/en-us/articles/204197379-California-Proposition-65 https://faq.soylent.com/hc/en-us/articles/204197379-Californ... Really, I think the concern here is quite overblown. For example, Soylent 2.0 contains lead at a maximum rate of 0.010725 µg/mL. The FDA's action level for food intended for infants and children is 0.5 µg/mL (which is 46.62 times higher). Source: https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/csem/csem.asp?csem=7&po=8 https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/csem/csem.asp?csem=7&po=8

jly 10y ago

I highly question the claims that soylent is better for the environment. This product's primary ingredient is soy. Imagine we replaced a good chunk of the currently consumed food with this. That would require field after field of soybean crops. The lack of diversity in this kind of growing would result in an unprecedented level of industrial agriculture, which is one of the great issues we face as a world population. We should be encouraging less monoculture, with larger and more diverse crop variety. It is also possible to do in a sustainable way while still consuming some meat. Large-scale production of products like soylent is exactly the opposite of the direction we need to be going to help the environment. This has some further background material: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/12/magazine/12policy-t.html http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/12/magazine/12policy-t.html

erikpukinskis 10y ago
If we replaced a good chunk of meat and dairy with soy, we'd save quite a lot of carbon. That's a good thing. I agree we should promote crop diversity. But I don't understand why you think this one specific ingredient is a problem. When someone eats bread, do you get upset because it's promoting wheat? Bread is pretty much 100% wheat, and people eat a LOT of it. If Soylent were the only food people consume, I would understand your concern. But most people don't eat Soylent and most Soylent eaters don't eat only Soylent. So I don't really understand your concern.