This article screams of idealized eccentricism. Soylent is not the revolution in itself, but the precursor to start thinking about holistic approaches to nutrit

This article screams of idealized eccentricism. Soylent is not the revolution in itself, but the precursor to start thinking about holistic approaches to nutrition. I wouldn't bet my morning cup of coffee on Soylent because it lacks the field testing capable of proving it's worth. To put all one's faith in Soylent on the basis of a 20-year old engineer's word is not good enough. To compare him to the Wright Brother's is eccentricism at best, because he has not revolutionized anything yet. Rather he has presented an alternative option worth studying for nutritional research. A 20 year old body can handle many obstacles and rebound from malnourishment, but with age that becomes unlikely. To be short: I wouldn't feed it to a starving orphan until Rob Reinhart is sitting on an autopsy table and the fully report comes back conclusive that Soylent is an approved longer-term approach to meal replacement.