7 ms·

Things in plants other than basic nutrients are what keep you alive, well and free of cancer. Soylent is an obviously horrible idea for your health.

by rjurney 12y ago

WizzleKake 12y ago
What things?
- rjurney 12y ago
  Glad you asked. Let's look at Kale: Kale, cooked, boiled, drained, without salt Nutritional value per 100 g (3.5 oz) Energy 117 kJ (28 kcal) Carbohydrates 5.63 g Sugars 1.25 g Dietary fiber 2 g Fat 0.4 g Protein 1.9 g Vitamins Vitamin A equiv. beta-carotene lutein zeaxanthin (85%) 681 μg (76%) 8173 μg 18246 μg Thiamine (B1) (5%) 0.053 mg Riboflavin (B2) (6%) 0.07 mg Niacin (B3) (3%) 0.5 mg Vitamin B6 (11%) 0.138 mg Folate (B9) (3%) 13 μg Choline (0%) 0.4 mg Vitamin C (49%) 41 mg Vitamin E (6%) 0.85 mg Vitamin K (778%) 817 μg Trace metals Calcium (7%) 72 mg Iron (7%) 0.9 mg Magnesium (5%) 18 mg Manganese (20%) 0.416 mg Phosphorus (4%) 28 mg Potassium (5%) 228 mg Sodium (2%) 23 mg Zinc (3%) 0.24 mg Other constituents Water 91.2 g Link to USDA Database entry Units μg = micrograms • mg = milligrams IU = International units Percentages are roughly approximated using US recommendations for adults. Source: USDA Nutrient Database Kale is very high in beta carotene, vitamin K, vitamin C, and rich in calcium. Kale is a source of two carotenoids, lutein and zeaxanthin.[9] Kale, as with broccoli and other brassicas, contains sulforaphane (particularly when chopped or minced), a chemical with potent anti-cancer properties.[10] Boiling decreases the level of sulforaphane; however, steaming, microwaving, or stir frying does not result in significant loss.[11] Along with other brassica vegetables, kale is also a source of indole-3-carbinol, a chemical which boosts DNA repair in cells and appears to block the growth of cancer cells.[12][13] Kale has been found to contain a group of resins known as bile acid sequestrants, which have been shown to lower cholesterol and decrease absorption of dietary fat.[citation needed] Steaming significantly increases these bile acid binding properties.[14]
  - maxerickson 12y ago
    Soylent is going to have no problem providing all of those ingredients. You gotta reach for delicate and complex organic molecules that are not well characterized, not stuff so well understood that it is listed in internet nutrition databases.
    - rjurney 12y ago
      1) Soylent doesn't include the vast library of known life extending phytonutrients. 2) we haven't discovered most of these compounds, we just know plants have them
      - maxerickson 12y ago
        Yeah, that's what I meant, your Kale-sporge doesn't mention those, it mentions things that are very well characterized. I always wonder how many of those phytonutrients can stand up to hydrochloric acid and also get absorbed into the bloodstream.
        rjurney 12y ago
        I think most things stand up pretty well to the stomach. Often though, it is the metabolites of any given substance which do the good, so its after they're processed somewhat.
  - MrJagil 12y ago
    Why would you wait for him to ask before you provided that information? I wish you had originally formulated this reply, into a reply to the article, as to spare us all of one-liners.
    - rjurney 12y ago
      I admit, I was attempting to create controversy to create a thread which would attract viewers. Single, informative comments tend to be less successful here than long threads.
rosser 12y ago
I'm unambiguously, loudly, incredibly dubious about Soylent, and personally think it's ridiculous, but even I don't think it's "obviously horrible for your health".
- rjurney 12y ago
  Excluding plants from your diet for any kind of substitute is a bad strategy for a long life. Eat more plants, live longer.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
- rjurney 12y ago
  The one thing we know for sure is that we haven't discovered most of what about fruits and vegetables causes ppl who eat the to live longer. Cutting the two food groups that actually extend life from your diet is the dumbest thin you can do.
  - brathouz 12y ago
    It doesn't have to be all or nothing. For example, just because Indian food exists doesn't mean you can't include Chinese or Mexican food in your diet. Similarly, just because people consume Soylent doesn't mean they've cut out all other forms of food. A lot of people simply use Soylent for one or two meals (such as breakfast and lunch, Monday through Friday).
    - rjurney 12y ago
      I get this. To be honest, I had gastric surgery last year, so my stomach isn't big enough to process enough plants to get basic nutrition. I have to take lots of vitamins, or I will get malnutrition. Why anyone would CHOOSE to have to eat this way though, if they don't have some terrible health problem, is beyond me.
  - pixie_ 12y ago
    Live longer? How many old people have horrible diets, smoke, and are pretty much on track to die at 70/80? Guess what, you can eat all the kale and fruit you want, but you're going to get old and die, all the while people with worse diets are going to live longer than you. It's not fair, but that's life. Eat some fruit, go for a run, get hit by a bus.
    - rjurney 12y ago
      Have you heard of Nihilist Arbys? :)
brathouz 12y ago
Agreed that plants are great (I've been vegan for 12 years), but Soylent provides a dependable solution for those who need a quick, nutritious meal (such as breakfast) and has opened up interesting possibilities such as sipping down lunch while taking a walk in a park. Plus, you can use Soylent as an excellent base for making smoothies that include other fruits, veggies, etc.
- DanBC 12y ago
  > has opened up The marketing hype was good - similar meal replacement products have existed for many years and so people could have bought something off the shelf of their local Walgreens[1] for their walk in the park, but they didn't appear to realise it until soylent appeared. [1] I say Walgreens because it's the only US drugstore I know. Substitute Boots in the UK or whatever for where you are.
  - dragonwriter 12y ago
    The big difference is that the competing products have been marketed heavily to those who are elderly or have special medical needs that make regular food problematic (specialized forms have also been marketed as weight loss aids, etc., as well.) The big innovation in Soylent is not the product (though there are some differences in the product) but in targeting healthy, upper-income demographics with marketing.
- rjurney 12y ago
  This sounds completely reasonable to me.

Things in plants other than basic nutrients are what keep you alive, well and free of cancer. Soylent is an obviously horrible idea for your health.

by rjurney 12y ago

Things in plants other than basic nutrients are what keep you alive, well and free of cancer. Soylent is an obviously horrible idea for your health.

WizzleKake 12y ago

What things?

rjurney 12y ago
Glad you asked. Let's look at Kale: Kale, cooked, boiled, drained, without salt Nutritional value per 100 g (3.5 oz) Energy 117 kJ (28 kcal) Carbohydrates 5.63 g Sugars 1.25 g Dietary fiber 2 g Fat 0.4 g Protein 1.9 g Vitamins Vitamin A equiv. beta-carotene lutein zeaxanthin (85%) 681 μg (76%) 8173 μg 18246 μg Thiamine (B1) (5%) 0.053 mg Riboflavin (B2) (6%) 0.07 mg Niacin (B3) (3%) 0.5 mg Vitamin B6 (11%) 0.138 mg Folate (B9) (3%) 13 μg Choline (0%) 0.4 mg Vitamin C (49%) 41 mg Vitamin E (6%) 0.85 mg Vitamin K (778%) 817 μg Trace metals Calcium (7%) 72 mg Iron (7%) 0.9 mg Magnesium (5%) 18 mg Manganese (20%) 0.416 mg Phosphorus (4%) 28 mg Potassium (5%) 228 mg Sodium (2%) 23 mg Zinc (3%) 0.24 mg Other constituents Water 91.2 g Link to USDA Database entry Units μg = micrograms • mg = milligrams IU = International units Percentages are roughly approximated using US recommendations for adults. Source: USDA Nutrient Database Kale is very high in beta carotene, vitamin K, vitamin C, and rich in calcium. Kale is a source of two carotenoids, lutein and zeaxanthin.[9] Kale, as with broccoli and other brassicas, contains sulforaphane (particularly when chopped or minced), a chemical with potent anti-cancer properties.[10] Boiling decreases the level of sulforaphane; however, steaming, microwaving, or stir frying does not result in significant loss.[11] Along with other brassica vegetables, kale is also a source of indole-3-carbinol, a chemical which boosts DNA repair in cells and appears to block the growth of cancer cells.[12][13] Kale has been found to contain a group of resins known as bile acid sequestrants, which have been shown to lower cholesterol and decrease absorption of dietary fat.[citation needed] Steaming significantly increases these bile acid binding properties.[14]
- maxerickson 12y ago
  Soylent is going to have no problem providing all of those ingredients. You gotta reach for delicate and complex organic molecules that are not well characterized, not stuff so well understood that it is listed in internet nutrition databases.
  - rjurney 12y ago
    1) Soylent doesn't include the vast library of known life extending phytonutrients. 2) we haven't discovered most of these compounds, we just know plants have them
    - maxerickson 12y ago
      Yeah, that's what I meant, your Kale-sporge doesn't mention those, it mentions things that are very well characterized. I always wonder how many of those phytonutrients can stand up to hydrochloric acid and also get absorbed into the bloodstream.
      - rjurney 12y ago
        I think most things stand up pretty well to the stomach. Often though, it is the metabolites of any given substance which do the good, so its after they're processed somewhat.
- MrJagil 12y ago
  Why would you wait for him to ask before you provided that information? I wish you had originally formulated this reply, into a reply to the article, as to spare us all of one-liners.
  - rjurney 12y ago
    I admit, I was attempting to create controversy to create a thread which would attract viewers. Single, informative comments tend to be less successful here than long threads.

rosser 12y ago

I'm unambiguously, loudly, incredibly dubious about Soylent, and personally think it's ridiculous, but even I don't think it's "obviously horrible for your health".

rjurney 12y ago
Excluding plants from your diet for any kind of substitute is a bad strategy for a long life. Eat more plants, live longer.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

rjurney 12y ago
The one thing we know for sure is that we haven't discovered most of what about fruits and vegetables causes ppl who eat the to live longer. Cutting the two food groups that actually extend life from your diet is the dumbest thin you can do.
- brathouz 12y ago
  It doesn't have to be all or nothing. For example, just because Indian food exists doesn't mean you can't include Chinese or Mexican food in your diet. Similarly, just because people consume Soylent doesn't mean they've cut out all other forms of food. A lot of people simply use Soylent for one or two meals (such as breakfast and lunch, Monday through Friday).
  - rjurney 12y ago
    I get this. To be honest, I had gastric surgery last year, so my stomach isn't big enough to process enough plants to get basic nutrition. I have to take lots of vitamins, or I will get malnutrition. Why anyone would CHOOSE to have to eat this way though, if they don't have some terrible health problem, is beyond me.
- pixie_ 12y ago
  Live longer? How many old people have horrible diets, smoke, and are pretty much on track to die at 70/80? Guess what, you can eat all the kale and fruit you want, but you're going to get old and die, all the while people with worse diets are going to live longer than you. It's not fair, but that's life. Eat some fruit, go for a run, get hit by a bus.
  - rjurney 12y ago
    Have you heard of Nihilist Arbys? :)

brathouz 12y ago

Agreed that plants are great (I've been vegan for 12 years), but Soylent provides a dependable solution for those who need a quick, nutritious meal (such as breakfast) and has opened up interesting possibilities such as sipping down lunch while taking a walk in a park. Plus, you can use Soylent as an excellent base for making smoothies that include other fruits, veggies, etc.

DanBC 12y ago
> has opened up The marketing hype was good - similar meal replacement products have existed for many years and so people could have bought something off the shelf of their local Walgreens[1] for their walk in the park, but they didn't appear to realise it until soylent appeared. [1] I say Walgreens because it's the only US drugstore I know. Substitute Boots in the UK or whatever for where you are.
- dragonwriter 12y ago
  The big difference is that the competing products have been marketed heavily to those who are elderly or have special medical needs that make regular food problematic (specialized forms have also been marketed as weight loss aids, etc., as well.) The big innovation in Soylent is not the product (though there are some differences in the product) but in targeting healthy, upper-income demographics with marketing.
rjurney 12y ago
This sounds completely reasonable to me.