5 ms·

I keep seeing Soylent pop up on blogs and stuff and I don't know what the big deal is. He made some shady claims before about things like "suffering from a seve

I keep seeing Soylent pop up on blogs and stuff and I don't know what the big deal is. He made some shady claims before about things like "suffering from a severe iron deficiency" in just a few days, which was magically fixed when he remixed the formula. I'm also shocked that he's marketing it to this extent and still doesn't say anything about the ingredients. People have allergies, people have dietary restrictions. How is this at all different from a protein shake at the Health Food store?

robertlaing 13y ago
I agree. (And it reminds me too much of baby formula, which is proven to be less healthy than the real stuff)...
gilgoomesh 13y ago
> I don't know what the big deal is. It's basically junk science (or a de-facto scam) by a guy who is doing well at marketing himself. Food replacements already exist. The biggest is a product called Ensure. There are others. It's not clear that there's a need for Soylent at all. You're right, iron deficiency can't be detected in a few days (3 months would be closer to the time frame required assuming you had healthy iron levels to begin). Most of the other continual reformulations he discusses also seem pretty ridiculous on the timeframes involved. Basically, this guy doesn't seem to have any understanding of stochastic experimentation, limiting confounding factors or limiting free variables.
- baddox 13y ago
  What about the product itself is "junk science"? All you've said is that there are already similar products.
  - gilgoomesh 13y ago
    The junk science is Rob Rhinehart's ad hoc approach, as documented here: http://robrhinehart.com/?page_id=184 http://robrhinehart.com/?page_id=184 Adding ingredients, perceiving a difference in how he feels and then modifying the formula, claiming that he has "improved" based on testing. He's not controlling for multiple changing variables, not sampling over a decent time period, not comparing to a control, not measuring his blood, vitals or other basic properties. He might as well be throwing things together randomly. Using measurements and scientific terms without the rigour and actual method of scientific experimentation is junk science, by definition.
    - steveklabnik 13y ago
      > not measuring his blood I thought he was getting weekly blood tests?
- Tloewald 13y ago
  I did some googling about ensure: http://www.naturalnews.com/002698.html http://www.naturalnews.com/002698.html It doesn't seem to me that any product made with high fructose corn syrup as its main ingredient represents a credible attempt to make a healthy food product (just using sugar would be healthier).
  - gilgoomesh 13y ago
    High fructose corn syrup is just a sugar. Your opposition to HFCS sounds a little skewed. HFCS is not substantially different to other sugars biological effect and is not really any more or less healthy. From Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-fructose_corn_syrup_and_health http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-fructose_corn_syrup_and_he...): > Epidemiological research has suggested that the increase in obesity is linked to increased consumption of sugars and/or calories in general, and not due to any special effect of fructose alone.[1] If you're worried about "not natural" then meal replacements are not for you (unless you've had your stomach or jaws surgically removed). They are heavily processed and artificial by design.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
Tloewald 13y ago
He has blogged the ingredient lists after each iteration, for what that's worth.
schiffern 13y ago
>I don't know what the big deal is. It took me a long time to figure this out too, but when it hit me it was blindingly obvious in hind-sight. Soylent is idiot-proof food. Can't choose? Can't cook? Can't clean? Can't balance a meal to save your life? As it stands these people coast by on kraft dinner and ramen, and suffer for it. Soylent is a convenient, relatively cheap ($7.50/person/day), relatively healthy default option. You can eat it without thinking and bad things won't happen. Heck, you don't even need a kitchen. Whether or not the current incarnation lives up to these ideals has yet to be demonstrated, but that's why the idea appeals to so many people.
- codahale 13y ago
  relatively healthy [citation needed]
  - schiffern 13y ago
    Yes, relatively healthy. You'd be amazed at the crap diets some people subsist on.

robertlaing 13y ago

I agree. (And it reminds me too much of baby formula, which is proven to be less healthy than the real stuff)...

gilgoomesh 13y ago

> I don't know what the big deal is. It's basically junk science (or a de-facto scam) by a guy who is doing well at marketing himself. Food replacements already exist. The biggest is a product called Ensure. There are others. It's not clear that there's a need for Soylent at all. You're right, iron deficiency can't be detected in a few days (3 months would be closer to the time frame required assuming you had healthy iron levels to begin). Most of the other continual reformulations he discusses also seem pretty ridiculous on the timeframes involved. Basically, this guy doesn't seem to have any understanding of stochastic experimentation, limiting confounding factors or limiting free variables.

baddox 13y ago
What about the product itself is "junk science"? All you've said is that there are already similar products.
- gilgoomesh 13y ago
  The junk science is Rob Rhinehart's ad hoc approach, as documented here: http://robrhinehart.com/?page_id=184 http://robrhinehart.com/?page_id=184 Adding ingredients, perceiving a difference in how he feels and then modifying the formula, claiming that he has "improved" based on testing. He's not controlling for multiple changing variables, not sampling over a decent time period, not comparing to a control, not measuring his blood, vitals or other basic properties. He might as well be throwing things together randomly. Using measurements and scientific terms without the rigour and actual method of scientific experimentation is junk science, by definition.
  - steveklabnik 13y ago
    > not measuring his blood I thought he was getting weekly blood tests?
Tloewald 13y ago
I did some googling about ensure: http://www.naturalnews.com/002698.html http://www.naturalnews.com/002698.html It doesn't seem to me that any product made with high fructose corn syrup as its main ingredient represents a credible attempt to make a healthy food product (just using sugar would be healthier).
- gilgoomesh 13y ago
  High fructose corn syrup is just a sugar. Your opposition to HFCS sounds a little skewed. HFCS is not substantially different to other sugars biological effect and is not really any more or less healthy. From Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-fructose_corn_syrup_and_health http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-fructose_corn_syrup_and_he...): > Epidemiological research has suggested that the increase in obesity is linked to increased consumption of sugars and/or calories in general, and not due to any special effect of fructose alone.[1] If you're worried about "not natural" then meal replacements are not for you (unless you've had your stomach or jaws surgically removed). They are heavily processed and artificial by design.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

Tloewald 13y ago

He has blogged the ingredient lists after each iteration, for what that's worth.

schiffern 13y ago

>I don't know what the big deal is. It took me a long time to figure this out too, but when it hit me it was blindingly obvious in hind-sight. Soylent is idiot-proof food. Can't choose? Can't cook? Can't clean? Can't balance a meal to save your life? As it stands these people coast by on kraft dinner and ramen, and suffer for it. Soylent is a convenient, relatively cheap ($7.50/person/day), relatively healthy default option. You can eat it without thinking and bad things won't happen. Heck, you don't even need a kitchen. Whether or not the current incarnation lives up to these ideals has yet to be demonstrated, but that's why the idea appeals to so many people.

codahale 13y ago
relatively healthy [citation needed]
- schiffern 13y ago
  Yes, relatively healthy. You'd be amazed at the crap diets some people subsist on.