13 ms·

"Soylent is perfectly balanced and optimized for your body and lifestyle, meaning it automatically puts you at an optimal weight, makes you feel full, and impro

by chasing 13y ago

"Soylent is perfectly balanced and optimized for your body and lifestyle, meaning it automatically puts you at an optimal weight, makes you feel full, and improves your focus and cognition." Bull-fucking-shit. This is a product made by four twenty-somethings, none of whom appears to have a background in nutrition or any kind of health studies. To trust your health to these people would be fucking stupid. Jesus. Also: They've got to be violating some kind of FDA rules. So that'll be fun. When they get sued. Or accidentally harm someone. Please. Do not back these people. ----- Edit: What FDA rule do I think they're violating? I don't know, exactly. But I doubt you can say things like "it automatically puts you at an optimal weight, makes you feel full, and improves your focus and cognition" without having some actual data backing you up.

fc2 13y ago
"They don't have a background in nutrition therefore they can't possibly know anything about nutrition" Never heard of books and the internet?
jerrytsai 13y ago
I am skeptical of Soylent, but I also think that interesting ideas-- backed by at least some science-- are worth examining. That being said, health claims such as the ones you cite-- "it automatically puts you at an optimal weight, makes you feel full, and improves your focus and cognition"-- fall into the realm of regulated speech. You shouldn't be making claims like these without well-controlled clinical trials to back them up. The sellers of Soylent will need to hire legal counsel before long...
Afforess 13y ago
Wow, it's like the "Hacker News Is Depressing" Article didn't happen. I trust the Soylent folks more than I trust myself purchasing frozen meals in a grocery store. It's hard to be worse than that benchmark.
- jckt 13y ago
  Are we not allowed to criticise anymore? Chasing makes a good point. They simply stated several claims, and didn't even attempt to substantiate them at all.
  - Afforess 13y ago
    Chasing is clearly spreading FUD. Claiming they are breaking FDA rules, without any backup to that assertion is pretty much the definition of FUD. What FDA rules could they be violating? ----Edit: Also noticed this---- Soylent will be produced in an FDA-approved facility with strict regulatory controls ensuring safety.
    - jckt 13y ago
      Technically he says he thinks he broke some FDA rules. His phrasing could've been better, but his point stands--perhaps it's false advertising? This is what the campaign site said: "Soylent is perfectly balanced and optimized for your body and lifestyle, meaning it automatically puts you at an optimal weight, makes you feel full, and improves your focus and cognition." After that, they don't offer any comprehensive list any ingredients, any recipe, any nutritional information (if you find any, I'd be glad to retract this point). Also, as far as I know from the guy's blog, the idea is to replace your diet with Soylent (and water, I guess). Surely that's false advertising, by saying your food can replace all other foods, while your food hasn't even been tested yet? I'm sure if it was just some fruit smoothie thing they could get away with saying that it's a healthy food. But as a complete, all-round food-replacement? I'd be careful with that.
- evv 13y ago
  Its not like one article would change the behavior of everyone on here. HN has pessimism in its culture, and most of the best comments are the critical ones.
  - chasing 13y ago
    I find criticism to be much more helpful (usually) than cheers. For what it's worth.
    - ruswick 13y ago
      I agree. Mindless consensus is not the way to probe issues and engage in meaningful discussion; contentious discourse is.
  - Afforess 13y ago
    I agree, but you don't need to emulate Linus's rants to share criticism. There is a difference between constructive criticism and spreading FUD.
- revelation 13y ago
  I'm fine with being positive on the next fun cat photo sharing service, no evil has ever come from that, but they are advertising this as a complete replacement for all your meals without even telling as much as whats in it. That, frankly, should be illegal, and it probably is.
  - mey 13y ago
    I suggest start here http://robrhinehart.com/?p=298 http://robrhinehart.com/?p=298 and check out the continuation of his experiment at http://robrhinehart.com/?p=424 http://robrhinehart.com/?p=424
  - Kell 13y ago
    Hu? Not telling you what's in it ? Isn't the recipe open sourced and extensively discussed on their website ? Like here for example : http://robrhinehart.com/?p=424 http://robrhinehart.com/?p=424 ?
    - DanBC 13y ago
      Weirdly, that page tells you that the creator himself thinks Soylent may be dangerous for people other than him. > I am reticent to provide exact brand names and instructions because I am not fully convinced of the diet's safety for a physiology different than mine. What if I missed something that's essential for someone of a different race or age group? Why does he now think it's acceptable to market this to everyone?
      - munificent 13y ago
        I'm not sure, but I've got about 154,567 guesses.
      - pbreit 13y ago
        > Why does he now think it's acceptable to market this to everyone? Because he and a number of people have been "eating" it for a number of months?
- w1ntermute 13y ago
  > trust the Soylent folks more than I trust myself purchasing frozen meals in a grocery store. That's a strawman. You're ignoring the fact that those frozen meals are made by companies who have more experience in the food industry than these 4 clowns combined a million times over. I am MUCH more afraid of the Soylent guys' sheer ignorance than I am of any profit-motivated negligence on the part of large frozen meal companies. Edit: also read this thorough breakdown of Rob Rhinehart's claims regarding Soylent by a health expert and nutritionist: http://www.businessinsider.com/rob-rhinehart-food-substitute-eating-disorder-2013-3 http://www.businessinsider.com/rob-rhinehart-food-substitute...
  - bhitov 13y ago
    > thorough breakdown of Rob Rhinehart's claims regarding Soylent by a health expert and nutritionist I've seen this posted a few times and I'm having trouble seeing it as thorough. Her complaint on his caloric restriction claims contained a link to relevant research, that was adequate. Her other complaint, which was about his understanding of protein digestibility, contained little detail. These were the only claims she addressed with more than denial.
  - thebooktocome 13y ago
    As much as I think the nutritionist in the Business Insider piece is right, I wish she could have been somewhat more even in tone. It's hard to link that to people who are predisposed to taking Rhinehart seriously.
  - nawitus 13y ago
    Froze meal companies don't need to sell particularly healthy meals, in fact I don't most of their customers care much about healthiness.
  - josh2600 13y ago
    Ad Hominem attacks don't strengthen your argument. From what I can tell, the Soylent team appears to be pursuing their goals in an admirably scientific fashion. Although there's quite a bit of work to do, I recall an article from a couple of days ago on HN that was talking about the wonderful work the big guys are doing. This quote from General Mills is priceless: >In a public comment posted on the FTC website, our friends at General Mills pointed out that under the IWG guidelines, the most commonly consumed foods in the US would be considered unhealthy. Specifically, according to General Mills, “of the 100 most commonly consumed foods and beverages in America, 88 would fail the IWG’s proposed standards.” [1] I understand your disagreement, I disagree with your ad hominem attack and think that there may be some merit to the Soylent team and their claims, especially when taken in light of the General Mills comments. [1]http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2013/05/19/dear-american-consumers-please-dont-start-eating-healthfully-sincerely-the-food-industry/ http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2013/05/19/de...
- brown9-2 13y ago
  Would you mind saying how they won your trust? Have you tried the product?
- gus_massa 13y ago
  I didn't like the insults and the tone of the comment. I think that it could have been written in a more polite way. Anyway, I agree that it's advertised as a too good to be true product, and it was created by people without the needed background. In the last update they added sulfur!!! ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5609546 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5609546 ). It's one of most common elements in the human body, not a very strange unexpected thing. Most of the vitamins were discovered because some people aet a very restrictive diet. Usually because more diverse food were not available (in the middle of the sea), or because they didn't have money to buy more diverse food (semi slavery). A diverse diet of complex food protect you form not eating the thing that you don't know you should eat. Eat only this at your own risk.
- blazespin 13y ago
  In fact, most doctors would say that you should trust yourself more. Our bodies are generally pretty good at self regulating and telling us what we should or shouldn't be eating. If you look at something and find yourself salivating / very hungry, it's probably your bodies way of telling you it has some nutrient you're missing.
- xtracto 13y ago
  It is funny that I agree with both you and GP's post: On one side, it is very sad that the majority of posts in this thread are very negative. But on the other side, I would give more credit to their enterprise if there was a nutriologist, chemist, or at leas tan MD in their team. The fact that no one in the team is slightly related to food/nutrition or human well-being rings bells.
peterwwillis 13y ago
They've got to be violating some kind of FDA rules. Like what? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_and_Drug_Administration#Food_and_dietary_supplements http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_and_Drug_Administration#Fo... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation_of_food_and_dietary_supplements_by_the_U.S._Food_and_Drug_Administration#Dietary_supplements http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation_of_food_and_dietary_... "The Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994 mandated that the FDA regulate dietary supplements as foods, rather than as drugs. Therefore, dietary supplements are not subject to safety and efficacy testing and there are no approval requirements. The FDA can take action against dietary supplements only after they are proven to be unsafe. Manufacturers of dietary supplements are permitted to make specific claims of health benefits, referred to as "structure or function claims" on the labels of these products."
- 3825 13y ago
  You can't make blanket statements like "Soylent is perfectly balanced and optimized for your body and lifestyle, meaning it automatically puts you at an optimal weight, makes you feel full, and improves your focus and cognition." because people might think they can eat Soylent and nothing else. I won't say they are breaking the law. All I am saying is they need a lot of clinical trial to cover their butts in court.
  - peterwwillis 13y ago
    False. There is no law that requires them to qualify "structure or function claims". They can claim it makes you 200 feet tall, and it doesn't matter, because it is not a drug and it has nothing to do with listing ingredients on the label. However, false advertising claims are handled by the FTC. I suggest you talk to them before the FDA. edit: For a court case to be effective the plaintiff has to prove that the product does not work; the burden of proof is not on the manufacturer, according to FDA regulations. Depending on wording this could require a long testing period with many people for a judge to take it seriously.
    - refurb 13y ago
angkec 13y ago
Trust yourself on the food industry is stupid too. Please. Stop eat junk food. But you still eat them right?
- ceejayoz 13y ago
  Replace 'soylent' with 'junk food' in their marketing copy. "Junk food is perfectly balanced and optimized for your body and lifestyle, meaning it automatically puts you at an optimal weight, makes you feel full, and improves your focus and cognition." Ever see anyone say that about junk food?
  - tinco 13y ago
    Yes actually. You can go to the store and buy high-fiber cookies with images of people doing Yoga on them. You can go to a McDonalds and read how their chicken burgers are low-fat and fit in a healthy diet and you can buy Red Bull whose commercials constantly claim it improves focus and cognition. Not to mention all the 'regular' non-fast preprocessed food people all over the world believe to be fitting for a regular diet.
    - ceejayoz 13y ago
      None of those examples are anywhere near the sort of specific claims being made on the Soylent site. It's being marketed as a panacea.
ancarda 13y ago
Several people have tried the recipe and can vouch for it. If you don't like it, don't buy it.
- chasing 13y ago
  The study you cite confirming their claims sounds bulletproof.
  - ancarda 13y ago
    I don't see you citing anything. Also, I never confirmed or denied their "claims", I simply stated others have tried it and it's not going to "kill" you or anything. Your original post's attitude seemed to imply it was almost risky to consume this as it's made by people aged "20 or so". Not only do I find your age discrimination shocking, I also take issue with your sarcastic tone. If you want evidence, I can think of two sources: [1] http://discourse.soylent.me/ http://discourse.soylent.me/ -- Plenty of people on the discussion boards [2] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8WpksPED_Q http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8WpksPED_Q -- Week long study
    - drtse4 13y ago
      Are you serious? Even not eating for a week will not kill you and i would not call a link to a forum and a 5 minutes video, "sources". At the moment, other than the blog of one of the founders there is not much to read about this. What about some specialists taking a look at this before start selling it?
      - ancarda 13y ago
        Rob wants to put this through proper clinical trials: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTkuvppi334 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTkuvppi334 As of now it hasn't existed for more than a few months so it's a little hard to give sources for trying it for "years". Additionally, Rob strongly suggests NOT eating it every day. As for problems arising months (or years), there's also a post about that too: http://robrhinehart.com/?p=570 http://robrhinehart.com/?p=570
cal2 13y ago
It appears as if only one of the founding individuals has a degree in anything remotely pertaining to nutrition (David Renteln, degree in "Human Evolutionary Biology"). Speaking as a biochemist who works in the biotech industry, this looks to be like a gigantic train wreck just waiting to happen. At first glance, I would be convinced these individuals know very little about the science behind their product. They all have a bunch of fancy business acronyms next to their name, yet the majority of this group appears to have little scientific background. Website annoyances: - Why is a benzene ring in the background of their logo? Sure, the benzene moiety is prolific and crucial throughout biological systems, but plain benzene is a toxic carcinogen. - Why is their favicon cyclohexane instead of benzene, if that was why they're going for?
- w1ntermute 13y ago
  As someone else in biotech, I agree with your sentiment. I would advise the guys behind this to go back to making social networking and photo sharing apps and leave biotech to those who know what they're doing. You can't just say "oops" and apologize when you put someone in the hospital, or worse. It's not like if someone hacks your Instagram account.
  - fredsters_s 13y ago
    You are EVERYthing that is wrong with startups. I would advise you to quit criticising the audacity of a team that is trying to change the world for the better. How many startups can legitimately say that?!
    - Guvante 13y ago
      How many startups if they obtained their stated goals on a global scale wouldn't impact the world for the better? Risk vs reward. Very little risk in tech companies, quite a few in biotech.
    - w1ntermute 13y ago
      In your boundless zeal for "innovation," you have completely failed to comprehend what I was saying. Putting someone in the hospital is no laughing matter. You can't just "iterate" and "learn from your mistakes" in biotech. We're talking about life and death here, not some filtered hipster cat photos.
marknutter 13y ago
Have you ever bought a red bull? Read the can. It says "vitalizes body and mind." I'm sure a lot of people read than and believe it's true. Heck, it may even be true. But it's not breaking any FDA rules, and it's not a harmful claim any more than the claims the Soylent folks are making. Do we not hold any responsibility for what we put into our bodies?
- DanBC 13y ago
  "vitalizes body and mind" is carefully constructed meaningless nonsense. "For anyone that struggles with allergies, heartburn, acid reflux or digestion, has trouble controlling weight or cholesterol, or simply doesn't have the means to eat well, soylent is for you." is not carefully constructed. It has clear and specific meaning, but it is untested and not yet proved. Have Soylent really thought about that sentence? What happens when someone with a digestive disorder eats Soylent, thinking they're getting the nutrition they need and then they get even more ill? > Soylent is perfectly balanced and optimized for your body and lifestyle, meaning it automatically puts you at an optimal weight, makes you feel full, and improves your focus and cognition. How can they say this? They have no idea what my body and lifestyle is! I could be a 78 year old bed-ridden patient riddled with cancer or a 17 year old who goes out clubbing 5 nights a week. > By taking years to spoil, They're claiming their nutrients are stable for years. I seriously doubt that.
  - lholden 13y ago
    > Have Soylent really thought about that sentence? What happens when someone with a digestive disorder eats Soylent, thinking they're getting the nutrition they need and then they get even more ill? I was having a hard time swallowing (ha) that sentence too. Many digestive problems have nothing to do with the lack of eating biologically correct nutrients. A good amount of acid reflux problems are caused by having a hiatal hernia for example.
  - justincormack 13y ago
    In these parts "red bull gives you wings" intended even less seriously. It is not 80-100% of your diet.
tutu 13y ago
Have you even read up on the background of this? He makes a pretty solid argument for what's in Soylent in one of his earliest blog posts: http://robrhinehart.com/?p=424 http://robrhinehart.com/?p=424 Obviously the guy has a background in chemistry or biology. As we all know, you don't have to go to school in a subject to become an "expert" in it.
- Ecio78 13y ago
  Of course not, but when you need surgery where do you go, to the hospital or to "the guy at the corner of the street that seems to know a lot about how stuff in your body works"?
vhost- 13y ago
I would really like an ingredients list.
- frankacter 13y ago
  http://robrhinehart.com/?p=424 http://robrhinehart.com/?p=424
dragonwriter 13y ago
> Also: They've got to be violating some kind of FDA rules. Its pretty hard to violate FDA rules when soliciting investment, they'd most likely only run that risk when they start actually marketing product. And even then, the incredibly lax FDA rules around supplements have enabled some of the biggest (and most dangerous) health related scams ever to operate within the rules, so they can probably be okay even then. Usually, this seems to involve placing a disclaimer that the product is not intended to prevent or treat any disease or condition on advertising touting its health benefits (often including explicit claims that the product prevents or treats various diagnosable diseases and/or conditions.) > But I doubt you can say things like "it automatically puts you at an optimal weight, makes you feel full, and improves your focus and cognition" without having some actual data backing you up. You'd probably be surprised.
rglover 13y ago
The FDA has an entire document on allowable amounts of rat feces and insect parts that manufacturers can have in their food: http://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceRegulation/GuidanceDocumentsRegulatoryInformation/SanitationTransportation/ucm056174.htm#CHPTA http://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceRegulation/GuidanceDocuments.... I'll listen to what the kid has to say.
- cmccabe 13y ago
  So what. Did you think that food was carefully grown in a sterile lab and delivered to you in a vacuum-packed container? It's grown in the dirt, harvested by day laborers, and stored and transported in big heaps out in the open. Word of advice to you, sir. If you care about avoiding rat feces, spoiled food, and contamination in general, buy whole foods. For example, buy apples rather than applesauce. Buy steak rather than soylent. When you can visually inspect the thing, you see a lot of defects that are hidden when you grind or mash it all up.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]

by chasing 13y ago

fc2 13y ago

"They don't have a background in nutrition therefore they can't possibly know anything about nutrition" Never heard of books and the internet?

jerrytsai 13y ago

I am skeptical of Soylent, but I also think that interesting ideas-- backed by at least some science-- are worth examining. That being said, health claims such as the ones you cite-- "it automatically puts you at an optimal weight, makes you feel full, and improves your focus and cognition"-- fall into the realm of regulated speech. You shouldn't be making claims like these without well-controlled clinical trials to back them up. The sellers of Soylent will need to hire legal counsel before long...

Afforess 13y ago

Wow, it's like the "Hacker News Is Depressing" Article didn't happen. I trust the Soylent folks more than I trust myself purchasing frozen meals in a grocery store. It's hard to be worse than that benchmark.

jckt 13y ago
Are we not allowed to criticise anymore? Chasing makes a good point. They simply stated several claims, and didn't even attempt to substantiate them at all.
- Afforess 13y ago
  Chasing is clearly spreading FUD. Claiming they are breaking FDA rules, without any backup to that assertion is pretty much the definition of FUD. What FDA rules could they be violating? ----Edit: Also noticed this---- Soylent will be produced in an FDA-approved facility with strict regulatory controls ensuring safety.
  - jckt 13y ago
    Technically he says he thinks he broke some FDA rules. His phrasing could've been better, but his point stands--perhaps it's false advertising? This is what the campaign site said: "Soylent is perfectly balanced and optimized for your body and lifestyle, meaning it automatically puts you at an optimal weight, makes you feel full, and improves your focus and cognition." After that, they don't offer any comprehensive list any ingredients, any recipe, any nutritional information (if you find any, I'd be glad to retract this point). Also, as far as I know from the guy's blog, the idea is to replace your diet with Soylent (and water, I guess). Surely that's false advertising, by saying your food can replace all other foods, while your food hasn't even been tested yet? I'm sure if it was just some fruit smoothie thing they could get away with saying that it's a healthy food. But as a complete, all-round food-replacement? I'd be careful with that.
evv 13y ago
Its not like one article would change the behavior of everyone on here. HN has pessimism in its culture, and most of the best comments are the critical ones.
- chasing 13y ago
  I find criticism to be much more helpful (usually) than cheers. For what it's worth.
  - ruswick 13y ago
    I agree. Mindless consensus is not the way to probe issues and engage in meaningful discussion; contentious discourse is.
- Afforess 13y ago
  I agree, but you don't need to emulate Linus's rants to share criticism. There is a difference between constructive criticism and spreading FUD.
revelation 13y ago
I'm fine with being positive on the next fun cat photo sharing service, no evil has ever come from that, but they are advertising this as a complete replacement for all your meals without even telling as much as whats in it. That, frankly, should be illegal, and it probably is.
- mey 13y ago
  I suggest start here http://robrhinehart.com/?p=298 http://robrhinehart.com/?p=298 and check out the continuation of his experiment at http://robrhinehart.com/?p=424 http://robrhinehart.com/?p=424
- Kell 13y ago
  Hu? Not telling you what's in it ? Isn't the recipe open sourced and extensively discussed on their website ? Like here for example : http://robrhinehart.com/?p=424 http://robrhinehart.com/?p=424 ?
  - DanBC 13y ago
    Weirdly, that page tells you that the creator himself thinks Soylent may be dangerous for people other than him. > I am reticent to provide exact brand names and instructions because I am not fully convinced of the diet's safety for a physiology different than mine. What if I missed something that's essential for someone of a different race or age group? Why does he now think it's acceptable to market this to everyone?
    - munificent 13y ago
      I'm not sure, but I've got about 154,567 guesses.
    - pbreit 13y ago
      > Why does he now think it's acceptable to market this to everyone? Because he and a number of people have been "eating" it for a number of months?
w1ntermute 13y ago
> trust the Soylent folks more than I trust myself purchasing frozen meals in a grocery store. That's a strawman. You're ignoring the fact that those frozen meals are made by companies who have more experience in the food industry than these 4 clowns combined a million times over. I am MUCH more afraid of the Soylent guys' sheer ignorance than I am of any profit-motivated negligence on the part of large frozen meal companies. Edit: also read this thorough breakdown of Rob Rhinehart's claims regarding Soylent by a health expert and nutritionist: http://www.businessinsider.com/rob-rhinehart-food-substitute-eating-disorder-2013-3 http://www.businessinsider.com/rob-rhinehart-food-substitute...
- bhitov 13y ago
  > thorough breakdown of Rob Rhinehart's claims regarding Soylent by a health expert and nutritionist I've seen this posted a few times and I'm having trouble seeing it as thorough. Her complaint on his caloric restriction claims contained a link to relevant research, that was adequate. Her other complaint, which was about his understanding of protein digestibility, contained little detail. These were the only claims she addressed with more than denial.
- thebooktocome 13y ago
  As much as I think the nutritionist in the Business Insider piece is right, I wish she could have been somewhat more even in tone. It's hard to link that to people who are predisposed to taking Rhinehart seriously.
- nawitus 13y ago
  Froze meal companies don't need to sell particularly healthy meals, in fact I don't most of their customers care much about healthiness.
- josh2600 13y ago
  Ad Hominem attacks don't strengthen your argument. From what I can tell, the Soylent team appears to be pursuing their goals in an admirably scientific fashion. Although there's quite a bit of work to do, I recall an article from a couple of days ago on HN that was talking about the wonderful work the big guys are doing. This quote from General Mills is priceless: >In a public comment posted on the FTC website, our friends at General Mills pointed out that under the IWG guidelines, the most commonly consumed foods in the US would be considered unhealthy. Specifically, according to General Mills, “of the 100 most commonly consumed foods and beverages in America, 88 would fail the IWG’s proposed standards.” [1] I understand your disagreement, I disagree with your ad hominem attack and think that there may be some merit to the Soylent team and their claims, especially when taken in light of the General Mills comments. [1]http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2013/05/19/dear-american-consumers-please-dont-start-eating-healthfully-sincerely-the-food-industry/ http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2013/05/19/de...
brown9-2 13y ago
Would you mind saying how they won your trust? Have you tried the product?
gus_massa 13y ago
I didn't like the insults and the tone of the comment. I think that it could have been written in a more polite way. Anyway, I agree that it's advertised as a too good to be true product, and it was created by people without the needed background. In the last update they added sulfur!!! ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5609546 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5609546 ). It's one of most common elements in the human body, not a very strange unexpected thing. Most of the vitamins were discovered because some people aet a very restrictive diet. Usually because more diverse food were not available (in the middle of the sea), or because they didn't have money to buy more diverse food (semi slavery). A diverse diet of complex food protect you form not eating the thing that you don't know you should eat. Eat only this at your own risk.
blazespin 13y ago
In fact, most doctors would say that you should trust yourself more. Our bodies are generally pretty good at self regulating and telling us what we should or shouldn't be eating. If you look at something and find yourself salivating / very hungry, it's probably your bodies way of telling you it has some nutrient you're missing.
xtracto 13y ago
It is funny that I agree with both you and GP's post: On one side, it is very sad that the majority of posts in this thread are very negative. But on the other side, I would give more credit to their enterprise if there was a nutriologist, chemist, or at leas tan MD in their team. The fact that no one in the team is slightly related to food/nutrition or human well-being rings bells.

peterwwillis 13y ago

They've got to be violating some kind of FDA rules. Like what? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_and_Drug_Administration#Food_and_dietary_supplements http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_and_Drug_Administration#Fo... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation_of_food_and_dietary_supplements_by_the_U.S._Food_and_Drug_Administration#Dietary_supplements http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation_of_food_and_dietary_... "The Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994 mandated that the FDA regulate dietary supplements as foods, rather than as drugs. Therefore, dietary supplements are not subject to safety and efficacy testing and there are no approval requirements. The FDA can take action against dietary supplements only after they are proven to be unsafe. Manufacturers of dietary supplements are permitted to make specific claims of health benefits, referred to as "structure or function claims" on the labels of these products."

3825 13y ago
You can't make blanket statements like "Soylent is perfectly balanced and optimized for your body and lifestyle, meaning it automatically puts you at an optimal weight, makes you feel full, and improves your focus and cognition." because people might think they can eat Soylent and nothing else. I won't say they are breaking the law. All I am saying is they need a lot of clinical trial to cover their butts in court.
- peterwwillis 13y ago
  False. There is no law that requires them to qualify "structure or function claims". They can claim it makes you 200 feet tall, and it doesn't matter, because it is not a drug and it has nothing to do with listing ingredients on the label. However, false advertising claims are handled by the FTC. I suggest you talk to them before the FDA. edit: For a court case to be effective the plaintiff has to prove that the product does not work; the burden of proof is not on the manufacturer, according to FDA regulations. Depending on wording this could require a long testing period with many people for a judge to take it seriously.
  - refurb 13y ago

angkec 13y ago

Trust yourself on the food industry is stupid too. Please. Stop eat junk food. But you still eat them right?

ceejayoz 13y ago
Replace 'soylent' with 'junk food' in their marketing copy. "Junk food is perfectly balanced and optimized for your body and lifestyle, meaning it automatically puts you at an optimal weight, makes you feel full, and improves your focus and cognition." Ever see anyone say that about junk food?
- tinco 13y ago
  Yes actually. You can go to the store and buy high-fiber cookies with images of people doing Yoga on them. You can go to a McDonalds and read how their chicken burgers are low-fat and fit in a healthy diet and you can buy Red Bull whose commercials constantly claim it improves focus and cognition. Not to mention all the 'regular' non-fast preprocessed food people all over the world believe to be fitting for a regular diet.
  - ceejayoz 13y ago
    None of those examples are anywhere near the sort of specific claims being made on the Soylent site. It's being marketed as a panacea.

ancarda 13y ago

Several people have tried the recipe and can vouch for it. If you don't like it, don't buy it.

chasing 13y ago
The study you cite confirming their claims sounds bulletproof.
- ancarda 13y ago
  I don't see you citing anything. Also, I never confirmed or denied their "claims", I simply stated others have tried it and it's not going to "kill" you or anything. Your original post's attitude seemed to imply it was almost risky to consume this as it's made by people aged "20 or so". Not only do I find your age discrimination shocking, I also take issue with your sarcastic tone. If you want evidence, I can think of two sources: [1] http://discourse.soylent.me/ http://discourse.soylent.me/ -- Plenty of people on the discussion boards [2] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8WpksPED_Q http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8WpksPED_Q -- Week long study
  - drtse4 13y ago
    Are you serious? Even not eating for a week will not kill you and i would not call a link to a forum and a 5 minutes video, "sources". At the moment, other than the blog of one of the founders there is not much to read about this. What about some specialists taking a look at this before start selling it?
    - ancarda 13y ago
      Rob wants to put this through proper clinical trials: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTkuvppi334 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTkuvppi334 As of now it hasn't existed for more than a few months so it's a little hard to give sources for trying it for "years". Additionally, Rob strongly suggests NOT eating it every day. As for problems arising months (or years), there's also a post about that too: http://robrhinehart.com/?p=570 http://robrhinehart.com/?p=570

cal2 13y ago

It appears as if only one of the founding individuals has a degree in anything remotely pertaining to nutrition (David Renteln, degree in "Human Evolutionary Biology"). Speaking as a biochemist who works in the biotech industry, this looks to be like a gigantic train wreck just waiting to happen. At first glance, I would be convinced these individuals know very little about the science behind their product. They all have a bunch of fancy business acronyms next to their name, yet the majority of this group appears to have little scientific background. Website annoyances: - Why is a benzene ring in the background of their logo? Sure, the benzene moiety is prolific and crucial throughout biological systems, but plain benzene is a toxic carcinogen. - Why is their favicon cyclohexane instead of benzene, if that was why they're going for?

w1ntermute 13y ago
As someone else in biotech, I agree with your sentiment. I would advise the guys behind this to go back to making social networking and photo sharing apps and leave biotech to those who know what they're doing. You can't just say "oops" and apologize when you put someone in the hospital, or worse. It's not like if someone hacks your Instagram account.
- fredsters_s 13y ago
  You are EVERYthing that is wrong with startups. I would advise you to quit criticising the audacity of a team that is trying to change the world for the better. How many startups can legitimately say that?!
  - Guvante 13y ago
    How many startups if they obtained their stated goals on a global scale wouldn't impact the world for the better? Risk vs reward. Very little risk in tech companies, quite a few in biotech.
  - w1ntermute 13y ago
    In your boundless zeal for "innovation," you have completely failed to comprehend what I was saying. Putting someone in the hospital is no laughing matter. You can't just "iterate" and "learn from your mistakes" in biotech. We're talking about life and death here, not some filtered hipster cat photos.

marknutter 13y ago

Have you ever bought a red bull? Read the can. It says "vitalizes body and mind." I'm sure a lot of people read than and believe it's true. Heck, it may even be true. But it's not breaking any FDA rules, and it's not a harmful claim any more than the claims the Soylent folks are making. Do we not hold any responsibility for what we put into our bodies?

DanBC 13y ago
"vitalizes body and mind" is carefully constructed meaningless nonsense. "For anyone that struggles with allergies, heartburn, acid reflux or digestion, has trouble controlling weight or cholesterol, or simply doesn't have the means to eat well, soylent is for you." is not carefully constructed. It has clear and specific meaning, but it is untested and not yet proved. Have Soylent really thought about that sentence? What happens when someone with a digestive disorder eats Soylent, thinking they're getting the nutrition they need and then they get even more ill? > Soylent is perfectly balanced and optimized for your body and lifestyle, meaning it automatically puts you at an optimal weight, makes you feel full, and improves your focus and cognition. How can they say this? They have no idea what my body and lifestyle is! I could be a 78 year old bed-ridden patient riddled with cancer or a 17 year old who goes out clubbing 5 nights a week. > By taking years to spoil, They're claiming their nutrients are stable for years. I seriously doubt that.
- lholden 13y ago
  > Have Soylent really thought about that sentence? What happens when someone with a digestive disorder eats Soylent, thinking they're getting the nutrition they need and then they get even more ill? I was having a hard time swallowing (ha) that sentence too. Many digestive problems have nothing to do with the lack of eating biologically correct nutrients. A good amount of acid reflux problems are caused by having a hiatal hernia for example.
- justincormack 13y ago
  In these parts "red bull gives you wings" intended even less seriously. It is not 80-100% of your diet.

tutu 13y ago

Have you even read up on the background of this? He makes a pretty solid argument for what's in Soylent in one of his earliest blog posts: http://robrhinehart.com/?p=424 http://robrhinehart.com/?p=424 Obviously the guy has a background in chemistry or biology. As we all know, you don't have to go to school in a subject to become an "expert" in it.

Ecio78 13y ago
Of course not, but when you need surgery where do you go, to the hospital or to "the guy at the corner of the street that seems to know a lot about how stuff in your body works"?

vhost- 13y ago

I would really like an ingredients list.

frankacter 13y ago
http://robrhinehart.com/?p=424 http://robrhinehart.com/?p=424

dragonwriter 13y ago

> Also: They've got to be violating some kind of FDA rules. Its pretty hard to violate FDA rules when soliciting investment, they'd most likely only run that risk when they start actually marketing product. And even then, the incredibly lax FDA rules around supplements have enabled some of the biggest (and most dangerous) health related scams ever to operate within the rules, so they can probably be okay even then. Usually, this seems to involve placing a disclaimer that the product is not intended to prevent or treat any disease or condition on advertising touting its health benefits (often including explicit claims that the product prevents or treats various diagnosable diseases and/or conditions.) > But I doubt you can say things like "it automatically puts you at an optimal weight, makes you feel full, and improves your focus and cognition" without having some actual data backing you up. You'd probably be surprised.

rglover 13y ago

The FDA has an entire document on allowable amounts of rat feces and insect parts that manufacturers can have in their food: http://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceRegulation/GuidanceDocumentsRegulatoryInformation/SanitationTransportation/ucm056174.htm#CHPTA http://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceRegulation/GuidanceDocuments.... I'll listen to what the kid has to say.

cmccabe 13y ago
So what. Did you think that food was carefully grown in a sterile lab and delivered to you in a vacuum-packed container? It's grown in the dirt, harvested by day laborers, and stored and transported in big heaps out in the open. Word of advice to you, sir. If you care about avoiding rat feces, spoiled food, and contamination in general, buy whole foods. For example, buy apples rather than applesauce. Buy steak rather than soylent. When you can visually inspect the thing, you see a lot of defects that are hidden when you grind or mash it all up.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]