4 ms·
Aligns reasonably well with my (short) experience. I got a bag from a friend and ate a jar of Soylent every morning for breakfast for about a week. It was in fa
by saulrh 12y ago
Aligns reasonably well with my (short) experience. I got a bag from a friend and ate a jar of Soylent every morning for breakfast for about a week. It was in fact pretty great: I'd pour out N calories, where N was how much I figured I'd need to eat to get to $nextmeal, and then I'd drink it and be on my way. The stuff has really nice properties as far as hunger goes, too; it has neither the lead-brick problem that I get from things like chicken and dumplings nor the gone-in-fifteen-minutes problem that I have with fried rice. I generally ate as much as I wanted and felt perfectly full until right when I'd expected to be having lunch or dinner.
To answer the people who think it can't possibly be healthy, honestly, I don't have time to fix most of my diet. I can put in all the time I want to make sure my dinners are perfect, and I generally do, but I'm too rushed in the morning to have anything other than cereal. And I have to have lunch out so that's impossible to get right. Even if Soylent doesn't have "the proper carb-fat ratio" or something, it's better than what I have right now.
So, summary, I have some on order and the rest of you can say "I told you so" if I get cancer in thirty years. Given what some other people survive on I doubt you'll get the opportunity.
- simonebrunozzi 12y ago"Given what some other people survive on I doubt you'll get the opportunity." - yep.
- cconroy 12y agoI couldn't find the ingredients list -- but because it is not fully understood what food contains there may be missing nutrients in soylent that a well-balanced diet would have.
- saulrh 12y agoDisagree; we've had the tech for a while to keep coma and locked-in patients healthy (or healthy modulo extremely sedentary lifestyles). Same thing with cat food and dog food. Soylent is a trivial extension.
- fasteo 12y agoDisagree; change "healthy" for "alive" and we could agree. This is somehow the same distinction between mortality and morbidity. IMHO, mortality stats are pretty useless and we should always look at morbidity stats.
- Ntrails 12y agoThat depends entirely on what we're using the stats for, for pension valuation I'll stick to mortality! Glib/nitpicky I know, but all stats are useless in some context - the trick is to get the right tool for the job. Dismissing an entire dataset as useless is just missing the point.
- fasteo 12y agoFair comment; I was thinking on health costs (I have a chronic disease and I tend to view everything indexed to health). On an individual basis, I will rather be dead than unable to have an autonomous life, but this is completely a personal preference.
- frankacter 12y agoAs of April 2015: http://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0421/5993/t/14/assets/files_Complete-Soylent-Nutrition-Facts-1p4.pdf?2850945328223203203 http://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0421/5993/t/14/assets/files...