6 ms·

I'm also skeptical that one can live well on soylent alone. There's nothing bad in soylent AFAIK, but there's no way of knowing whether soylent is missing anyth

I'm also skeptical that one can live well on soylent alone. There's nothing bad in soylent AFAIK, but there's no way of knowing whether soylent is missing anything vital. With this in mind, I wouldn't be worried if someone replaced one or two meals a day with soylent. But I'd hesitate to replace all meals. I think it's irresponsible that the makers of soylent keep pushing the idea that one nutrient drink can replace all your meals, though I have nothing against the product itself.

FLUX-YOU 11y ago
Soylent is a step up if you currently have an unhealthy diet though, and I'd wager you could make the same argument about an unhealthy diet missing something vital.
- normloman 11y ago
  True. And I didn't make that argument because it should be obvious to everyone. A key difference is that frito-lay doesn't imply you can subsist solely on cheetos.
LoSboccacc 11y ago
same here. if they were to start sales in Europe, I'd buy in to replace the low quality lunches I'm having, but I'd keep a varied diet at evenings. I'm sure soylent has many nutrients I'm not getting enough, but might also miss rare unknown nutrients that body needs in minimal quantity - not to be confused with homeopathy principles, I'm talking about quantifiable quantities of chemicals - I think the first iteration had a similar issue, lacking sulfur or something. because even stuff bad in quantity might be of use to the body and we don't yet know 100% but since we do know that we get by nicely with incomplete diets, I see no drawbacks to a mixed soylent diet.
mcdougle 11y ago
Even though the founder does that, he has explained many times that he doesn't expect most people to replace their entire diet with Soylent. They expect you to do just as you said -- replace one or two meals, specifically the ones where you're in a rush or in the middle of something (work, etc.) and you would've otherwise grabbed a reheatable lunch or some kind of unhealthy fast food.

FLUX-YOU 11y ago

Soylent is a step up if you currently have an unhealthy diet though, and I'd wager you could make the same argument about an unhealthy diet missing something vital.

normloman 11y ago
True. And I didn't make that argument because it should be obvious to everyone. A key difference is that frito-lay doesn't imply you can subsist solely on cheetos.

LoSboccacc 11y ago

same here. if they were to start sales in Europe, I'd buy in to replace the low quality lunches I'm having, but I'd keep a varied diet at evenings. I'm sure soylent has many nutrients I'm not getting enough, but might also miss rare unknown nutrients that body needs in minimal quantity - not to be confused with homeopathy principles, I'm talking about quantifiable quantities of chemicals - I think the first iteration had a similar issue, lacking sulfur or something. because even stuff bad in quantity might be of use to the body and we don't yet know 100% but since we do know that we get by nicely with incomplete diets, I see no drawbacks to a mixed soylent diet.

mcdougle 11y ago

Even though the founder does that, he has explained many times that he doesn't expect most people to replace their entire diet with Soylent. They expect you to do just as you said -- replace one or two meals, specifically the ones where you're in a rush or in the middle of something (work, etc.) and you would've otherwise grabbed a reheatable lunch or some kind of unhealthy fast food.