Interview with Rob Rhinehart about Soylent

http://www.vice.com/read/rob-rhinehart-interview-soylent-never-eat-again?utm_source=vicetwitterus

by jp_sc • 13 years ago

46 47 13 years ago

vice.com

noonespecial2• 13 years ago

Sounds pretty wild. What's next for the smoothie that Gawker said "looks just like semen"?

The color is a bit problematic in that respect. He should just put in a little coloring. I suggest green.

ChuckMcM3• 13 years ago

Blue maybe, but probably not green which is often associated with algae growth in fluids.

One of the most interesting thing about this whole campaign is seeing who is afraid of it. Now that provides some interesting insights.

noonespecial2• 13 years ago

Yes. I'm being serious about adding a coloring. Most synthetic foods don't have very nice colorings without dyes to help. Blue would be good, a lightish brown like chocolate milkshake would be good too.

The green suggestion was in reference to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soylent_Green, a joke.

dasil0033• 13 years ago

I'm scared of it.

Well let me qualify that. I wouldn't trust my health to eating primarily an engineered food solution as he is doing. In the grand scheme of things it's a lot less scary than the majority of "food" that you see for sale everywhere in the developed world. At least he is trying to create a healthy food rather than something that addicts people and maximizes margins. So I think it's better than the status quo, far less scary than Coca Cola for instance.

But the part that scares me is the idea that a healthy diet can be engineered. As far as I've seen, our understanding of diet and human metabolism is in the dark ages. I wouldn't trust a nutritionist to engineer a diet any more than I would trust a medieval "doctor" to cure me by bloodletting.

So what insight does that provide about me?

adrow• 13 years ago

I think blue is considered an appetite suppressant isn't it?

cube13• 13 years ago

Absolutely not green. Green is people.

kylelibra• 13 years ago

It's already named Soylent, I feel like you kinda have to have a green colored version.

garry• 13 years ago

I've tried the newest formulation and it is actually a light milk chocolate color.

chrisduesing• 13 years ago

There is a big gap between "all the ingredients are safe to eat" and "the ingredients comprise everything your body requires".

ChuckMcM3• 13 years ago

True, one does not imply the other. But if you've read Rob's blog and other material you see that his process was identify "the ingredients your body requires" and then "find those ingredients in safe to eat form." So in this case the list of ingredients is a dependent variable on what your body requires.

parnas• 13 years ago

soy causes man boobs

Blaaguuu• 13 years ago

I'm not sure if you are serious, or trying to make a joke... But last I heard, consuming the Phytoestrogens in soy were found to have no measurable effect on a human male's estrogen/testosterone levels, or otherwise make them appear/act more feminine.

simplethird• 13 years ago

Sure, but I'm pretty sure the reason xenoestrogens are "bad" is because they affect the same cellular receptors as naturally occurring hormones, not because they affect estrogen/testosterone levels. Just because we've measured that something isn't the case, doesn't necessarily mean something (else) isn't happening. It could be doing something we just can't measure yet. Who knows what the long-term effects of greater phytoestrogen intake is for an individual? Or for their future offspring?

As others in this thread have alluded to, we're far from having a correct model that we can believe in with high confidence when it comes to nutrition.

pa5tabear• 13 years ago

His latest recipe uses rice and pea protein.

No soy.

xutopia• 13 years ago

I think the digestive track adapts to what you eat. If you eat only this for a while you may have issues digesting other things down the road. At least this is my anecdotal experience with eating the same damn thing as a student.

jmduke• 13 years ago

On one hand, I really really want Soylent to be successful; it would solve so many problems if we had a ubiquitous, cheap, and above all else effective meal replacement option.

On the other hand, I can't shake the feeling that it's not going to. Even reading this article, my suspicions flared up a few times (I thought invoking McDonalds was strange, and most of his points about nutrition and consumption seemed off-base.) Maybe it's years and years of pseudoscience taking its toll on me, I dunno.

At the very least, I'm interested to see where things are headed.

bluedino2• 13 years ago

I really doubt that it would be cheaper than say, beans and rice. The initial one week supply is $65, which is nearly $10/day.

dmix• 13 years ago

It may succeed competing on convenience (and marketing) not necessarily price.

Something mailed to your door monthly and quickly mixed together vs going to the grocery store for beans and firing up the rice steamer for 15min.

deletes2• 13 years ago

That is just the current price, it will go way down with mass production.

alex_doom• 13 years ago

My one month supply is going to cost me approx. $2.50 a meal. That's pretty damn cheap for the amount of nutrients packed in. Compare going to McDonalds and getting some $1 cheeseburgers and diabeetus.

angdis• 13 years ago

I think it is an interesting product idea if the market is either:

a) People who are starving. If the price is right and it has the right properties as far as shelf life and nutrition, sure, it would make an excellent ration for feeding populations in food emergencies or natural disasters.

b) People for whom eating and food preparation is an undesirable chore. A good example would be combat soldiers who need to eat something and don't care what it is as long as it satisfies hunger and provides nutrition.

For many (most?) other people food is intimately tied in with culture and epicurean tradition. This product won't go over well in places like Italy and France, for example.

cgag• 13 years ago

b) Is me and a lot of people I know, probably most people I'd think, every meal isn't an important part of culture, no one is proposing eating/drinking exclusively soylent.

loki540• 13 years ago

I'd add another market category - people who are interested in a diet that has the correct ratios of fats/proteins/carbs (and the other nutrients) that will optimize one's energy. I've always been intrigued by the zone diet's claims that following the appropriate results in feeling much healthier and having more energy, but have found that cooking meals following that ratio is too tedious / time consuming.

gmays• 13 years ago

b) is interesting. In 2008/2009 I spent a year in Iraq on a small military advisor team. We went out in teams of 6-9 and lived with the Iraqis. Most of our MREs were expired (they expire quickly in 100+ degree heat) so we ate a lot of Iraqi food. I also brought tubs of True-Mass to mix with water. It worked pretty well, even over 1-2 weeks ops.

From this experience, I've always been interested to see how soylent turns out. Even back here in the rear nutrition is a chore. I eat to stay alive, not for the experience. Heck, I go to Costco and pay $3.77 for a slice of pizza, hotdog, and a drink whenever I can.

My major question about soylent is its nutritional value. I work out 2x a day, 5-6 days a week. I have a Syntha-6 protein shake after each workout with some fruit and orange juice. I'm curious if soylent will provide the same level of nutrition I currently get.

If it does, it'd be excellent under demanding physical conditions like combat operations and high performance athletes. I'd eventually like to see different mixes, i.e.: weight loss, weight-gain, distance athlete, etc. Hell, I'd pay a premium for it. My wife pays around $200/wk. for Bistro M.D. meals because she doesn't have time to cook. I'd pay something similar if I could get a high performance meal replacement that I could eat every day, for every meal (maybe different flavors to mix it up), and didn't taste like shit.

So how long until we see the ultra-lean startup that forgoes the in-house gourmet chef for a soylent dispenser?

reggieband• 13 years ago

It's interesting to see an industry traditionally dominated by marketing/advertising being taken on from the perspective of engineering. I have a strong suspicion that the management team isn't right for the long term and if they really hope to compete in the food industry or supplement industry they will have to get bought out.

I was a bit surprised when I tracked down the price - $65-$75 for a weeks supply means $10+ per day. Although I cannot imagine replacing my entire diet with this I could see supplementing or replacing the occasional individual meal. IMO, the price would have to come down from $10 for that to be reasonable.

bjourne• 13 years ago

Doesn't someone already own the trademark for Soylent? Here is Rob's trademark application dated February 21, 2013: http://www.markhound.com/trademark/search/sBxK5WeM7 It seems (to me) incredibly unlikely that someone hasn't already at least tried to trademark it for use in protein shakes or other foodstuffs. And whoever owns the rights to the movie Soylent Green might want to have a word with him if his food supplement ever becomes popular.

deletes2• 13 years ago

Nobody noticed this but Soylent actually made its debut in the matrix. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2oEnJfZ9joY

Truly the food of the future. (controlled by machines.)

kevbin• 13 years ago

I don't get the appeal to those of us w/ easy access to a wide variety of inexpensive, high-quality foods stuffs. Eating a varied diet is one of life's great joys, not a problem that needs to be solved.

Even if you want to avoid the joy of eating, isn't Ensure Complete Vanilla already a sufficient meal-replacement-that-looks-like-seminal-fluid drink?

jmuguy• 13 years ago

I'm sure this stuff will be just as successful as baby formula. And I mean that in the most sarcastic way possible.

robbiet480• 13 years ago

Another up and coming Oakland based company!

pallandt• 13 years ago

An overlooked consequence of long-term replacement of solids with liquids for nutrition is the fact that dentition is going to most likely change, I'm referring especially to teeth position.

Daily chewing is applying pressure to teeth and keeping them 'set' in the position you're familiar with.

While researching some wisdom tooth extraction possible long-term side effects, I was surprised to find out how much can teeth migrate, start receding etc. if one is not able to chew on both sides for example.

I don't remember the source(s), but I saw real pictures of people with this problem. There were multiple causes too, not just as a consequence of extractions gone wrong.

A lot of people are focusing on the issue of meeting nutritional requirements, but I'm curious on seeing a real dentist's opinion on the possible long-term effects of such a diet as well.

Interview with Rob Rhinehart about Soylent

Related Stories