3 ms·
There are already products available to satiate hunger/nutrition without having to cook and aren't fast food and have been around for decades. I'm not going to
by ssharp 13y ago
There are already products available to satiate hunger/nutrition without having to cook and aren't fast food and have been around for decades.
I'm not going to knock Soylent as being dangerous or stupid. Quite frankly, I don't know enough about nutrition to make such a judgement, but I don't think it's design is anything revolutionary, either.
Soylent's angle on this isn't really positioning itself as a "meal replacement", but rather a full "diet replacement". When I eat a protein bar in the morning instead of eggs and veggies, I have no expectation or desire to live the rest of my life eating nothing but those protein bars. Soylent is specifically saying "you can live your life eating nothing but this". That's a ridiculous, if not dangerous, claim to make without having substantial data to back that claim up.
- pothibo 13y agoI agree that meal substitutes have existed for years before Soylent. But when I read their KickStarter campaign, it seemed like they wanted to remove meals completely. Maybe I didn't understand their mission.
- jacquesc 13y agoWhile I agree with you, I think you may have missed his point. Enjoying eating is different than satiating hunger/nutrition. People enjoy eating food that tastes good. Fast junk food tastes good to a lot of people (including me, even knowing the health risks). The only thing that has a chance of replacing this is food that still tastes good, or that you can convince them is good for them (Subway has been pretty successful with this tact). I'm definitely skeptical that something mildly sweet tasting (like watery cake batter) is going to get the masses on board with it.