Soylent: Operations Update

http://blog.soylent.me/post/59466009067/operations-update

by rwissmann • 13 years ago

50 97 13 years ago

blog.soylent.me

Carlee• 13 years ago

How on Earth is ten days enough to test anything in regards to diet? Pretty sure humans don't notice much change in that time, let alone enough to measure? Day to day numbers fluctuate by a lot, so wouldn't it have to be tested over a longer period for it to be valid?

rsynnott• 13 years ago

In general they don't seem so bothered about the scientific method.

thisishugo• 13 years ago

They're at the point of making changes to "taste, texture, and smell" - the dietary side of the formula is nailed down already, and I am willing to believe was tested more rigorously.

mratzloff3• 13 years ago

Why are you willing to believe that?

ceejayoz• 13 years ago

I am willing to believe was tested more rigorously.

Really? Their site launched with a FAQ on safety that essentially read "well, we haven't died yet..."

gnoway2• 13 years ago

They are probably treating it like more of a smoke test. In 10 days you can certainly get a good idea about changes in flavor, texture, preparation, etc. You also ought to get some feedback on whether a formula change resulted in any immediate health concerns.

mratzloff3• 13 years ago

They aren't getting any feedback on immediate health concerns in just 10 days unless they decide to add peanuts or arsenic to the mix.

ig1• 13 years ago

I would assume they mean testing it for factors like taste, etc. which would be immediate rather than doing it for nutritional testing.

gabemart2• 13 years ago

Why would you ask doctors or dietitians for advice about the taste of the preparation?

gabemart2• 13 years ago

I was also alarmed by that paragraph.

    > Various doctors, dietitians, and food scientists 
    > have been reviewing our formula and providing 
    > suggestions as they see fit. We have been listening 
    > to them and testing these changes in our beta 
    > program. Each modification requires making a new
    > batch of Soylent by hand, shipping them to our
    > beta testers, and gathering their feedback, a
    > process that takes at least 10 days per revision.

The idea that the dietary advice of a doctor could meaningfully be tested in a few weeks by a beta program of laypeople with no scientific controls is utterly ridiculous.

Even if you had a large beta program and ran each revisions for 100 days, the feedback would be garbage unless you had proper controls and measurements in place.

voidlogic• 13 years ago

The idea that the dietary advice of a doctor could meaningfully be tested in a few weeks by a beta program of laypeople with no scientific controls is utterly ridiculous.

But you are assuming the purpose of the test is to test the merit of the dietary motivator for the change, the testing described here might just be user acceptance tasting. That is, does this this change make it taste bad? Give you gas? etc

sdoering• 13 years ago

Even the (not very scientific) test from the EU Food-Safety-Agency make 90-days trials on animals (and that does not tell a lot imho).

If you want to know, if you are allergic, a short test should be sufficient. If you wanna know, if allergies might be initiated from the food, 10 days don't do much good. If you want to know, if some known things (nutrition, et al) are missing from the "food" 10 days won't do you much good and might only be detected in really rigorous blood-tests.

If you want to check for problems with unknown unknowns (and there are a lot of things we yet do not know, regarding food and our bodies) 10 days are nothing more then a nice joke. (Sorry, but living with a biologist make me quite cynical, when it comes to things, that might just endanger us.)

A really scientific method is something else. They might stumble upon some things, but I'd like to know, if every beta-tester gets his blood-work done before and after every test. How does the testing process in the first place look like (blood tests as said? just taste? subjective feeling after n-days of new soylent version? and so on).

so everyone will get their complete amino acid profile

No everyone will get a one size fits all amino acid profile. And then comes the problem, that humans aren't "one size fits all". They will probably get a solution, that fits one, two or probably max. three sigma of the targeted population.

To be fair, I love food, so soylent would not be for me. I really think, that a cheap food-replacement that does give most people mostly everything they need in terms of nutrition, might really do a lot of good, if distributed in times of disaster or in regions with problematic food distribution (third world). But that is not the targeted audience as I see it.

It seems to be people who do not value food, but have enough money on their hand, to replace it with this product.

mratzloff3• 13 years ago

(This is completely off-topic, but you only needed about 1/3 of the commas you used. For instance, "if you wanna know, ..." does not need a comma. Your final sentence does not need any commas. Etc.)

kbutler• 13 years ago

Here's a classic deficiency case:

"The onset of symptoms of scurvy depends on how long it takes for the person to use up their limited stores of vitamin C. For example, if the diet includes no vitamin C at all, the average onset of symptoms is about four weeks"

http://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au/bhcv2/bhcarticles.nsf/pag...

corresation4• 13 years ago

Even though it isn't for me (I actually like food, finding it one of the greatest pleasures in life), the Soylent story still presents an interesting storyline to me. But I've always wondered: Why the name Soylent? Aren't there some negative connotations to that? Is it...made of people?

An aspect of Soylent that I don't get is the assumption that it gets you out of the drudgery of eating, for those people for whom it is such a chore: the idea of chugging multiple cups of gray, sludgy drink daily sounds like an enormous burden that would grow tiring really quickly. It sounds like something that would make you dread the passing of the day, as another cup of slurry draws ever closer.

I speak at least a bit from experience, as one stage in my life had me working out daily, starting each with a big protein drink. Over time I realized that I was dreading, if not even skipping, the workout because of the protein drink that went with it.

Blahah4• 13 years ago

I've been doing DIY soylent for a few months now. I have to say it really does liberate much of the day, and it isn't at all a chore. It's easy to drink, I just sip it throughout the day. It has only a vague taste, and is a bit like drinking thick water. It might sound like it would be unpleasant or boring, but it isn't. I still have normal meals in the evening, but more and more I've come to feel like going all-soylent.

tocomment2• 13 years ago

Can you post your recipe?

sker2• 13 years ago

I love food too. If I weren't a programmer I would be a chef. But just like sex, I want to have it when I feel like it, not in a rigorous schedule determined by society.

In fact, not eating food as often makes you appreciate it more when you have it. Go three months without eating pizza and then have some, how did it taste? Now eat pizza every day for three months and then have some more, how did it taste?

I currently eat once a day and I would gladly replace some of my meals with this drink. That would allow me to eat, say three times a week, enjoying the food that I really crave. As a food lover, this is the perfect product for me.

corresation4• 13 years ago

not in a rigorous schedule determined by society

Why don't you just eat when you want to? As an adult you do what you feel like doing. This is neither here nor there in the discussion regarding Soylent.

In fact, not eating food as often makes you appreciate it more when you have it.

I fully understand and practice the idea of self-deprivation for heightened experiences (I've followed the consumption habits of Ramadan despite being an agnostic, for example). However this product doesn't deprive you of nutrition or liquids, obviously, and while it does deprive you of taste (or at least good taste), the benefit of real food is that the variety is enormous. You mention pizza, for instance, yet again it isn't the choice of pizza every day or Soylent and then the monthly pizza -- many people with good diets already have pizza so infrequently that it is an enormous treat. The same with a grilled burger. Or a steak. Or a lobster. Or a fresh fish. Or sushi. Or Chinese. Some butter chicken. A turkey sandwich on fresh Rye. Or even, dare I say it, the occasional Big Mac. It goes on forever and ever and ever, such that if I ever lose that delight with food, I'm doing something wrong.

baggachipz• 13 years ago

I've discovered that there are two types of people: Those who live to eat and those who eat to live. I am the former, and Soylent seems to target the latter. I am always looking forward to my next meal. I love to eat, and removing that would be removing a large part of what makes life fulfilling for me.

voidiac• 13 years ago

I think there is a third type in between your two types of people.

fc25• 13 years ago

>the idea of chugging multiple cups of gray, sludgy drink daily sounds like an enormous burden that would grow tiring really quickly. It sounds like something that would make you dread the passing of the day, as another cup of slurry draws ever closer.

I guess some people just don't care about taste as much as they care about superior nutrition that uses less resources to produce and transport, and less time to prepare, consume and clean up.

corresation4• 13 years ago

uses less resources to produce

You've run the numbers on this?

nagrom• 13 years ago

There is a use case that you maybe didn't think of:

I love to eat. I love to eat too much. If I make two portions of a meal with the intention of eating the other one later, I'll often just eat both. Where food is concerned, I'm like a labrador dog; I have no willpower. Everyone I know in my family is like this.

I'm mildly overweight, but only just because I play sports, hike and go to the gym a lot. I'd love to have a way of eating ideal my calorific intake with no fuss or special eating time because it would make it much easier to avoid overeating - I could still eat proper food a couple of times a week for the sheer pleasure, but not every mealtime would become a hazardous temptation to eat way, way too much. Soylent looks like a possible way of achieving that.

xanadohnt• 13 years ago

There are also Red and Yellow flavors of Soylent, from the movie. Green is the "new and improved" flavor. And though I haven't been able to source a direct reference, I think the connotation is only the new, Green flavor has the human secret sauce. Soylent is a total-food substitute for the apocalyptic / dystopian future.

It's still not a great name because it will always bring the negative connotation for those familiar with the movie. But I see where the inventor was going with it.

minikites• 13 years ago

Exactly, Soylent Red and Yellow are fine. Soylent is a portmanteau of "soybean" and "lentil", from the book that provides the story for the movie.

ImprovedSilence2• 13 years ago

> An aspect of Soylent that I don't get is the assumption that it gets you out of the drudgery of eating

Maybe not everybody is going to use it as a straight meal replacement. I for one like to think I would enjoy a glass for breakfast. Or maybe even for a quick working lunch, you know, on those days I'm too busy at work to stop and smell the roses and go out for an 1.5hr lunch break.... I've seen sooo many people get up in arms about completely replacing food. "ZOMG WHY DON'T YOU PEOPLE LIKE FOOD" etc.. Really, I'm fascinated by the nutrition needs of the human body, and I think trying to cram everything into a drink is a curious concept. And yes, on those days I'm on the road, I think it would be better than stopping at say, Mcdonalds or Subway. Likely in both taste and health.

Also, Only Soylent green is people. All the other soylents (red? purple? I don't remember the colors..) were legit food I believe. I do enjoy the irony though...

corresation4• 13 years ago

I've seen sooo many people get up in arms about completely replacing food. "ZOMG WHY DON'T YOU PEOPLE LIKE FOOD" etc..

The whole point of Soylent is that it is a 100% food replacement. If people just want to skip meals...just skip them! Or have a glass of milk.

The human body does not operate on the edge of deprivation, and quite contrary you could go quite a long period of time eating just rice. This notion that every meal must provide a full-spectrum nutritionally complete intake is not nutritionally or practically valid.

on those days I'm too busy at work to stop and smell the roses and go out for an 1.5hr lunch break

It takes literally seconds to throw together a sandwich. Or to microwave some leftovers. Etc. Pitching Soylent compared to infomercial-style broken food habits (you muss! you fuss!) has always seemed very dishonest to me.

marknutter2• 13 years ago

I think the name "Soylent" is brilliant. It's memorable precisely because of its association with Soylent Green. Nobody is actually going to make the naive mistake of believing it's made of people.

jonathanjaeger2• 13 years ago

I don't know how many different formulas they'll make in the future, but I'd love one with some sort of crushed up powdered oats mix instead of maltodextrin or other not-so-great carb sources. There are very few meal replacements in the supplement market that aren't filled with maltodextrin or sugar alcohols. I'd love something that's the equivalent of a meal I could put in a blender (e.g. banana, natural peanut butter, oats, and maybe some protein powder) without all the added chemicals.

Blahah4• 13 years ago

My DIY blend uses oat flour. There are a lot of soylent recipes out there - the hacker school soylent recipe [1] is a nice oat-flour based one with a decent default nutritional profile.

1: http://www.cookingfor20.com/2013/06/18/hacker-school-soylent...

edit: also note, the only synthesised 'chemicals' most recipes include are potassium gluconate and calcium citrate. Everything else is a food or food extract.

jonathanjaeger2• 13 years ago

Thanks! I'll check it out. And when I was referring to chemicals I was talking about the broader meal replacement supplement market, not Soylent.

wsc981• 13 years ago

I find this project interesting, especially since it seems to be able to lower my cost of living (currently I buy for around 300 EUR a month of food, using Soylent should be able to lower this to ~220 EUR from what I understand). Yet, at the same time I worry how healthy it would be on the long term. For example, research has shown that vitamin pills are often detrimental to ones health and could even increase the chance of getting cancer. I wonder if Soylent uses much the same ingredients of vitamin pills.

StevePerkins• 13 years ago

For the life of me, I can't understand why this is such a trendy topic on HN. If you walk into any grocery store or pharmacy, there are at least two aisles stocked with nothing but meal-replacement shakes.

One of the aisles is targeted at young people, with marketing themes around bodybuilding or triathlon training. The other aisle is targeted at senior citizens, with marketing themes around osteoporosis or longevity. There might be a third aisle, or a portion of one of the other two, targeting mostly women with themes of weight loss. However, it's pretty much the same stuff in the bottle on any aisle.

Soylent looks to be a online aisle, targeting the exact same stuff to tech-savvy hipsters, with themes of lifehacking and and classic sci-fi cinema.

I'm sure that your particular Brawndo is special because it has electrolytes, or whatever, but I don't understand why the underlying concept of a meal-replacement shake warrants so much coverage. This concept isn't the least bit novel.

sker2• 13 years ago

The main difference is that most of those meal replacements lack many nutrients, that makes them useful as a replacement for a meal or two every now and then. Soylent is attempting to provide every single nutrient required by our bodies, thus making it a permanent replacement for food.

MDS100• 13 years ago

No you are wrong. MRP companies are just more careful regarding marketing. Taking a "failing is ok, we'll fix it later" approach to your own health is a terribly retarded approach. Especially because long term effects can take months and years to manifest (lack of nutrients).

bloopletech3• 13 years ago

You gave the reason yourself: The existing market is segmented, and none of those markets shouts 'average HN user'.

Compare the marketing/segmentation of the existing products:

Senior citizens: For old people / a worse replacement for regular meals / medical.

Women losing weight: I'm fat / unhealthy / a worse replacement for regular meals / temporary, once I've lost the weight I'll switch back.

Bodybuilders: DUDE, CHECK OUT MY LATS. I ALWAYS DO 10 x 10 DP SETS AND THEN SLAM DOWN A PROTEIN SHAKE. DUUUUUDE.

Soylent: For many people, on many occasions, food is a hassle, especially when trying to eat well. It allows one to enjoy the health benefits of a well balanced diet with less effort and cost.

Now which of these is going to attract, and which is going to repel, the stereotypical HN user?

Of course these are stereotypes, but this is marketing, and segmenting often uses stereotypes to push people into making different purchasing decisions: As an average HN user, I'm going to feel weird/wrong buying a women's weight loss shake, or a senior citizens medical food, or a gym expert's protein shake, but I'm going to feel great buying Soylent, because I fit into the marketing.

My point is that none of the existing products on the market market all these points: * An equal replacement for food, instead of a worse substitute on one axis or another (at least nutritionally); * An all the time replacement, not just for a specific purpose; * Market direct to the consumer (this seems to be the issue with some of the replacements used in hospitals).

Now, whether Soylent actually meets these claims, or whether the stereotypes are actually relevant to the contents of the products themselves, is largely irrelevant at this point. This is marketing, and HN users are gullible to it like everyone else. (Personally, I'm rooting for Soylent)

Re the name, which a bunch of people who seriously fail to see why that name: because it is rebellious in exactly the way average HN users are suckers for.

cantrevealname• 13 years ago

This is marketing, and HN users are gullible to it like everyone else.

Exactly, and here's another example: What's the difference between Diet Coke and Coke Zero?

Answer: Diet Coke is popular with women, so some men won't drink it. Hence, introduce the more masculine Coke Zero, but basically the same thing. But make some tiny little tweaks to caffeine content and sweetness to create plausible deniability about it being identical.

Reference: http://foodwatch.com.au/mailbag/item/q-what-s-the-difference...

marknutter2• 13 years ago

Why does the whole "but this product already exists" argument suddenly hold water when it comes to Soylent but not the myriad other tech startups?

zacharypinter2• 13 years ago

For whatever reason, Soylent seems to trigger a visceral reaction in a lot of people.

Arguments like "but this product already exists" probably reflect more on the arguer than the product.

That said, I found the arguments urging caution around significant/unproven diet changes to be quite compelling. I'm intrigued by the idea and very interested in following the product, but I don't intend to be an early tester myself.

fingerprinter7• 13 years ago

I literally cannot fathom how this is 1. interesting to people 2. new and novel and 3. always trending on HN.

People can and have lived on liquid food for quite a long time. This isn't new, this isn't particularly interesting or groundbreaking in anyway.

Why the fascination on HN? Can someone explain it to me?

obibring• 13 years ago

I could not agree with you more.

tokenadult2• 13 years ago

Why the fascination on HN?

Isn't this a YC-invested company? Other than that, I agree with you. I'm not interested in Soylent the product, nor am I interested in Soylent the company. I tell my friends to be wary of using the product.

hermaj2• 13 years ago

I'm starting to think this has to be a viral marketing campaign / social experiment.

It's an interesting premise that people would entrust their long term health to unqualified individuals, who lack the resources to employ qualified individuals, simply for an extra hour everyday.

cabalamat2• 13 years ago

It's an interesting premise that people would entrust their long term health to unqualified individuals

I trust my diet to an unqualified individual (me), as do most people.

simply for an extra hour everyday

An hour a day is 6% of your waking life.

fc25• 13 years ago

The stuff that goes in Soylent and their quantities come from FDA recommendations.

smtddr3• 13 years ago

I think I've heard of past attempts, but they didn't seem to catch on? This Soylent stuff seems to be "proving" itself; or at least not debunked enough to drop it just yet. If it truly does work, I think a lot of 3rd world countries would benefit from it. So at least for me, I'm interested in the developments of Soylent. In general, I'm interested in any tech that TRULY is world-changing even if it's not in the form of a computer. Now do I think it belongs on HN? That's a bit debatable, but if people are upvoting it(and not gaming the system) then it has the right to be here just like anything else. Maybe HN is slowy changing to be more than strictly 0s & 1s news?

curveship• 13 years ago

On a global scale, Soylent is very very expensive. Their current pricing is $65/week. Many nonprofits feed someone for $50-100/year in the third world. The price would have to come down to 2% of the current value to be considered. That's unlikely with such a heavily industrialized product.

fingerprinter7• 13 years ago

But this is what I don't get. We literally already have this. Some cancer patients live on a liquid diet for YEARS already. We have complete liquid nutrition. It's a solved problem.

Now, the application can be debated, but soylent doesn't seem to bring anything new to the table.

It feels like this is just old solution with new marketing.

fc25• 13 years ago

Older products like Ensure weren't good enough to go "all in" on liquid food because they don't have 100% of everything we know we need.

Avshalom2• 13 years ago

Soylent only probably has 100% of what it's testers know they need and who knows how much of what they don't know they need. Ensure is good enough that people live on it, they don't loudly trumpet it as a complete replacement because 1) the market for that is small and it makes you look like a quack 2) people have a variety of nutritional needs based on life style, genetics. Hell ALTITUDE will change your nutritional needs.

jgrahamc2• 13 years ago

I've heard that claim repeatedly, but Abbott disagrees with you and everyone else who says it. Look at Ensure Complete: http://ensure.com/products/ensure-complete-shakes

"Ensure Complete, one simple choice for 4-in-1 nutrition. Each delicious shake provides balanced nutrition and targeted muscle, heart, immune, and bone health benefits. It’s a simple choice to get the right nutrients in the right amounts to help you stay strong. Take charge of your health and your nutrition with Ensure Complete!"

From their FAQ: http://ensure.ca/en/faq/

"For how long can I use Ensure? Ensure products deliver complete and balanced nutrition that is always beneficial. There is no time limit to using Ensure products. In fact, long-term use is encouraged if you’re at a nutritional risk (for example, if you’re an older adult)."

"Can Ensure replace a meal? Yes. Ensure products are complete and balanced, when used in appropriate amounts they can be used to replace meals."

mipapage• 13 years ago

Perhaps simply watching it all unfold as opposed to just going and buying something.

Personally I am curious as to how it works out; I've never been one to buy gels or sports drinks, preferring to make my own because I know what goes in them and can tweak it for me. I get this vibe from the Soylent project.

fosap• 13 years ago

Exactly. If you want to live on liquids alone you could just stick to milk. I know a cheap person that lived on nothing but oats and milk for quite a while to save money. Nothing I'd do for a new laptop or other equipment.

frakkingcylons• 13 years ago

Has anyone published a post about their experience with Soylent where they didn't use it to replace all their meals, but just maybe one or two of them a day? That's the use case I'm interested in.

ImprovedSilence2• 13 years ago

I agree completely, I would think that's the exact use case most of us are interested in. It sounds like the perfect breakfast drink or quick on the go lunch.

delluminatus2• 13 years ago

Soylent is probably overkill for this use case. As long as you eat a reasonable healthy real-food meal every day, all you really need from a meal replacement are some macronutrients and maybe electrolytes. I mean, you could drink yoghurt for breakfast every day and be fine.

Soylent is designed to completely replace food which is a much harder & much more expensive proposition than simply giving you some energy until dinnertime.

Leander_B• 13 years ago

In my country this is called a meal replacement. I live in the future..

juice13• 13 years ago

Here's an interesting analysis of Soylent: http://www.priceplow.com/blog/soylent-subterfuge

I would think twice before committing to a soylent-only diet.

tokenadult2• 13 years ago

My uncle was born with a digestive tract defect that was not detected until he was of middle age. (The only sign that he had any health problem at all was that he was of only average height, in a family in which all his five brothers were tall.) He was on total parenteral nutrition

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/druginfo/meds/a601166.htm...

for something like twenty years before dying last week at the age of ninety-one. It's basic medical background knowledge that keeps me from being impressed by the Soylent shot in the dark, and it is reflecting that human nutrition is both

a) mostly a hard problem, and

b) mostly a SOLVED problem

that keeps me from making gee-whiz comments about the Soylent project here on HN. The great thing about a free-enterprise economy with minimal regulation is that if you like this kind of thing, you can spend your hard-earned money to buy Soylent. If your eating behavior includes experiential or social outcomes better met by eating a variety of foods you cook and chew, you can join me in eating a little of this and a little of that over the course of a year. The Soylent company is YC-invested, as I recall, so press releases from the company will continue to be posted here, but meanwhile I will pursue a variety of micronutrients and a variety of pleasant experiences by eating a varied diet with my family and friends.

Shorel• 13 years ago

Can we get a Keto version of this?

Bonus points for a Paleo friendly version.

As it is now, I would never get close to that carbohydrate-based drink.

gavinpc• 13 years ago

Does anyone remember the early post from this guy where he said that he just wanted to stop spending so much of his time and energy on food? Now it's all he does. He "wakes up every day thinking about it."

Now that's ironic.

Soylent: Operations Update

Related Stories