[jamesA01]

I want to start a topic on Soylent, which is a food replacement product that recently had an very successful kickstarter, raising nearly a million bucks, and in a few years will be available in stores.

You might have heard of this already, if not you can google it. I'm actually quite excited to be able to talk about it here, since this is one of the few places on the internet with a commentariat smart enough to get it (flattery intended).

Fans of ThreePoundBrain and its advocation of a ruthless examining of unrecognized cognitive bias will appreciatehttp://robrhinehart.com/?p=507 this post by Soylent creator Rob Rhinehart.

It strikes me that the semantic apocalypse is not all bad, and that Soylent represents the start of a new way of doing things more suited to this era.

So Soylent is basically the brainchild of a California programmer who decided that surely there must be a way to simplify food. What he has developed is a recipe which basically decodes the human body AS a machine that needs a particular input to function at its maximum. He debugged himself.

So he simply took all the substances that science currently understands the body to need and combined them into a drink.

This is actually a relatively short list:

Fat, protein, fibre, potassium, phosphorus, sodium, choline, sulphur and a list of about 20 other vitamins and minerals.

Here's what makes Soylent so great. We're all supposed to be smugly cynical post modernists able to reel off a derisory list of references in order to scoff at the complexities of modern life. But Soylent reveals how redundant and moronic this attitude is, since even if you decide 'all that health food crap is too complex, i'm going to just eat whatever', you are still doing the same fundamental thing that Soylent does, only you don't realize it. You are still inputting a specific list of substances into your body which are having a specific type of effect on its functioning. There's no way to escape the fact your body is a machine with specific components which produce specific effects and processes depending on what is input.

There is a DIY community where we make our own soylent recipes and refine the medium. It's located here http://discourse.soylent.me/

As someone who has previously had serious narcotics problems, mental health issues requiring repeated hospitalization, and periods of EXTREMELY bad diet, the effect that Soylent has had on my cognitive functioning is nothing short of astounding. The potential good that can be done with this knowledge and this type of recipe is absolutely staggering. You can make Soylent meals for as little as $2 a day, and that will decrease in the future. I presently have and will soon be ordering OVER A YEARS worth of its ingredients which will fit into 2 plastic boxes and sit in my bedroom. For anyone on a low income I urge you to (cautiously) investigate this. Please be warned that incorrect doses of elements that the body requires on a daily basis, such as potassium, can be toxic. However I would bet hard cash that very few of you on this board are getting anywhere NEAR the RDA of this particular element and many others.

The range of mental health problems, illness, and by extension crime and suffering that can and will be alleviated in the future, when smart consumers start to approach their body as the machine it is, is going to be immense. Likewise the potential for illness and derangement as the plethora of drugs and substances the human body can consume expands. Simply eating 'natural' or 'balanced' is not going to do it. Consider the fact that the dividing line between substances we deem as drugs and as food is somewhat arbitrary.  The big danger that most of us fall for is fear of complexity and the hassle of caloric expenditure on acquiring and assessing new information. However, there is no going back to a simpler time, and we can't just trust our intuitions coupled with what 'feels right', since what we feel is the result of mechanic processes and processes going on within our body that we have little conscious access to unless we educate ourselves.  Soylent and the type of thinking behind it allows us to decode our feelings and sensations and potentially deduce the mechanical causes behind it that we aren't consciously aware of.

It has been very disheartening for those of us doing Soylent to read the media responses to it, so many of which have been dickwitted moronicisms combining a sneery brand of 'humour' with the typical attitude of cynical dismissal of something as a 'fad' backed up with nothing but ignorant gibberish. There have been notable exceptions and I would encourage anyone to do some googling and decide for yourself if the science behind it is legit or not. Just make sure you don't come across the Fox News article where the commenters decide its a plot by the Obama administration to control our brainesssss.

When not receiving its required nutrition, the body will economize and cognition and functioning will be severely impaired. I had a 'moment' after a few weeks on Soylent that I will only share here . I was walking outside and suddenly realized the depth of my vision had massively expanded and for the first time in years I was noticing more details, all the way to the horizon. This effect has been permanent and I am convinced that it was due to my brain having the nutrition to bring some of its systems 'back online'.  It was a nice confirmation of the fact that our brains are totally blind to themselves, as I had no idea I was missing anything.

[Meyna]

Are you sustaining yourself exclusively on a variety of Soylent at this point? Do you find that there are any disadvantages to a permanent, all-liquid diet? It sounds like the nutrients are all there, but I imagine it would wreak havoc in certain respects physiologically.

[jamesA01]

Nope, that's a common query, but the fact that it is all liquid has absolutely no detrimental effect, since fibre is included. People assume that all liquid must be bad, but its not, and the Soylent people consulted experts on this.

There are people trying to work on solid recipes, but so far noones got anything substantial.

Most people use it for about 80-90% of their meals. Chewing gum helps.

I just made a few orders, and will soon have the supplies to make more than enough to last me beyond 2014, for a total of approx £250, (not including scales, blender and stuff I've already bought etc.)

If anyone on this board has health issues or feels they might have poor nutrition or mental health problems, Soylent is very very likely to help. If not full Soylent then at least getting a proper multivit and mineral and learning some basics about what the body needs.

I should also add I am not an expert on it and better answers to any queries can be found on the Soylent board.

[Madness]

Hmm...

I'm burnt out on my last two posts, I think.

I had thoughts but now I'm more interested in accumulating a dietary thread. I shall be back.

[anor277]

"Soylent", unforunate name for a food.  But of course the name pays homage to the classic sci-fi film of a Harry Harrison work, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soylent_Green.

[Wilshire]

Finally got around to reading your whole post.

Sounds interesting, and I'll admit that I'm skeptical, and a bit afraid of it. I've heard numerous times that the human body is simply not that good at processing "synthetic" nutrients. This is mostly in the context of vitamins, where apparently studies have shown that when 2 people consume the same quantities of vitamins/minerals, one person through pills and the other food, the person going the natural route actually absorbs more of it... I haven't seen the studies myself. Any thoughts on that?

I have personally done a bit of research into protein powder/supplements as compared to meat/other foods. I found that the results are mainly inconclusive. Some show that there is no difference, some show a significant loss when using the powders/shakes. Some showed that a significant difference in consuming high quantities all at once compared to over a whole day, others showed no effect or even the opposite.

There is so much bad science out there it can be hard to get an conclusive results.

What do you say about that in general? Is this Soylent stuff some how accounting for some lower absorption amounts, or is it straight by-the-numbers totals that you "need"?

I'm intrigued by the whole concept though. I mean "eating" for $2 a day is insanely awesome.

Oh here's a question: Have you had difficulty eating regular food after prolonged periods of the Soylent diet? My gf's family is Italian, and if I didn't eat over there they would all hate me (not a joke, but still funny).

[jamesA01]

There are some issues with the absorption of nutrients that the team and their hired hands are working on. I would be somewhat skeptical about making a clear distinction between synthetic and natural, since synthetic nutrients are added to foods all the time.

Most of us consume Soylent three times a day. And there are so many different types of protein powders. I'm confident that in the end whatever type is chosen for the official Soylent recipe will be legit.

Since the body is a machine with measurable properties there is indeed a specific figure for every ingredient it needs. The government set RDA is different in different countries and obviously each body might have different needs in different circumstances. However it stands to reason that Soylent, with its scientific basis is likely to be more accurate.  I submit to you that in a sense you are already trying to eat Soylent. Think of everything you ate yesterday laid out on a table. It could all be deconstructed into smaller ingredients,  which could be measured. Lets say you ate a chocolate bar. Its just a collected assortment of ingredients your body wants to use. However our brains dont know the exact vitamin C content of an orange. We don't have the time to calculate all the ingredients and our brains get us to just grab the easiest most fat and sugar laced thing. With Soylent you get none of the unnecessary junk ingredients.  This is why my Body Odour gets better on Soylent then gets worse again if I eat crisps and coke. Check the board and you'll find many others reporting similar effects.

There's absolutely no issue with eating normal food after Soylent. Most of us have the occasional snack or social meal. However Soylent actually makes me feel satiated,  which is a new feeling for me. Usually no matter how full I feel I will always crave more sweets. Not on Soylent. I'm down a jeans size already.

[Wilshire]

Yeah I understand the concept and the reasoning behind it. But its not me making the distinction of "synthetic" and "natural", but rather the body itself. But yeah in its most basic form there should be no difference. However, the whole is not always equal to the sum of its parts.

How do you account of the differences in height/weight/gender? How do you "know" the dose of each nutrient is correct (and not just building up in your fatty tissue and slowly killing you )

The substance called TPN (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parenteral_nutrition), is administered through IV's to people who can't eat (surgery, accidents, etc.). This stuff is highly regulated and exactly calculated on a per patient basis. The issue being that a small OD of many of our required nutrients can be deadly. For example, a 10cc injection of Potassium will kill you almost immediately.

TPN has been around for a long time, and I guess the major difference between that and Soylet is that it isn't ingested but rather injected.

However it stands to reason that Soylent, with its scientific basis is likely to be more accurate.

Not necessarily. RDAs probably come from better funded government scientists. I'm not saying Soylet is bad, but the idea that a computer programmer with no formal training in the medical field can come up with a food substitute more accurately than teams of government funded biologists seems a bit odd.

[jamesA01]

There are different recipes for male and female. We also calculate our daily caloric needs first,  most people's recipes are different. I don't know how the official Soylent will deal with these issues.

I understand your point about Potassium, its why noone making their own recipes goes over the 3.5g daily RDA (unless in the early stages of ketosis when you need an extra gram. We are all very careful and critique each others recipes. Did you know that the average person almost never gets enough Potassium? Magnesium deficits in modern diets are also playing havoc. Soylent can potentially fix these, hopefully even educating people along the way.

But I will admit that you are right,  since I can't afford bloodwork or in depth medical tests I don't know if my personal experimentation in Soylent is doing some hidden harm. Even in spite of the range of amazingly positive effects its had on me, it could still be doing something else. My previous diet of mainly junk food was so bad that I'm prepared to take the risk. If it turns out I've made a mistake I would be happy to tell the community so noone repeats it. Mr. Rhinehart didn't ask any of us to start making our own, we just did it. In fact he warned us all not to in case we messed up. I'm so enthused about this stuff I'm glad I tooj the risk.

Mr. Rhinehart may be a programmer but he now employees many other nutritionists to make sure he develops the safest and healthiest of products.

[Wilshire]

I'm glad to hear that there are plenty of intelligent people involved with this. This certainly isn't something that everybody should just jump into and start making their own Soylet product. I guess I didn't realize that, at least in the community, its not being rolled out as some kind of "one size fits all" kind of thing, which is really good.

On a side note, I read this article about doctors who are "prescribing" fruits/vegetables. They talked how how (obviously) your diet can affect your health, etc. etc. Lo and behold, people who started eating healthier lost weight and had more energy!  The problem they mentioned is that its hard to get people to actually eat healthier, because it take a more time and effort than just rolling up to a window and getting a burger.

It would seem that the potential benefits of something like Soylet are seemingly endless if it can be made safely and tailored properly to each person. It might be best to keep something like this in a small, close knit, community. I foresee problems with it being placed in the public domain, but not for any real fault of Soylet itself.

[jamesA01]

But why bother with the effort of eating vegetables? Why not demand FAST FOOD that's also healthy, or why not MORE healthy than eating carrots and celery all day?

Because you can buy one of these:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B000NDME6C/ref=s9_simh_gw_p121_d3_i2?pf_rd_m=A3P5ROKL5A1OLE&pf_rd_s=center-4&pf_rd_r=1XF5TZD2D1T6N5RKV6FN&pf_rd_t=101&pf_rd_p=418450047&pf_rd_i=468294

Which contains more vegetable than you'd be able to get if you spent all day eating an entire market stall of the damn things.

(Not to say that eating fresh fruit and veg isn't a damn good idea, only that we can always do better).

Admittedly its expensive, but the principle is right. There's no reason it can't become cheaper in the future. There's no reason we can't manufacture the actual ingredients in vegetables on a mass scale, a lot faster, more efficient and more refined than actually planting the seeds and waiting for the sun and the soil to do it for us.

[Wilshire]

I can defiantly see your point, and I don't personally disagree with it. There are people that will just never believe that something "artificially created" will equal the nutritive value of something "naturally created", even if its identical down to the molecular level. There is a widespread negative stigma towards synthetic goods, and in some cases for good reason. Its  a shame that something with such posibility has to fight and uphill battle from the start.

Just look at diamonds. This kind of this is exactly why "synthetic" diamonds are cheaper than "real" ones, even though a properly synthesized diamond is exactly the same as its "natural" counter part (and also because one company controls the entire diamond industry and is itself artificially inflating the costs and just keeping the "fake" diamonds out of the market for their own business purposes, but thats a different story entirely )

Also, I like eating and even cooking (form time to time). There's just nothing quite like a home cooked meal, especially when someone else makes it for you.

[Madness]

I'm decided that the Semantic Apocalypse is Shadowrun.

I can't divide the time I want to put in forty minutes this morning to research for this thread and I never seem to make it back to offer cogent arguments in the evening so I apologize to the Quorum for not addressing other points I want to - like checking antecedents histories (for instance, how these dietary criteria are decided).

While I want to get into the meat of this thread, I have an analogy that I feel doesn't belong in the equally enticing drugs thread.

There is, and has been for a number of years, a DIY community (more than one) grown about the concept of 'Stacks.'

james made the point in the drugs thread about drugs simply altering neurophysiology, which I think is a good point, but one that misses some implicative marks. I think it's a good point because it provides a framework for reflecting on the patterns far outside one's ken. I would amend his statement, in light of that framework, to suggest that to your brain, anything that you ingest, is a drug. But more on that when I get around to engaging the other threads.

Stacks communities consist of a whole swath of the disciplinary breadth constituting neuroscience - as james has suggested the Soylent community attracts people qualified with more expertise - but also DIYers who are simply interested in fulfilling the first stage niches of social adoption.

Joe Rogan's even got his own line of Nootropics.

Literally, I've read hundreds of discussions about different stacks - people who adopt a regiment of intake - like james is talking about with diet here.

I felt compelled to add this to the conversation here as I don't feel my writing is going to touch on that in my initial foray into the drugs thread.

Diet is interested with preserving the function of organs generally, not specifically one organ, which I do think is a perspective lost in the Stacks communities. It doesn't matter if you ingest in order to facilitate cognitive function, if the functional preservation of your organs is ignored.

There's no reason we can't manufacture the actual ingredients in vegetables on a mass scale, a lot faster, more efficient and more refined than actually planting the seeds and waiting for the sun and the soil to do it for us.

Excepting vested interests, friend.

[Wilshire]

There's no reason we can't manufacture the actual ingredients in vegetables on a mass scale, a lot faster, more efficient and more refined than actually planting the seeds and waiting for the sun and the soil to do it for us.

Excepting vested interests, friend.

The agricultural industry has a LOT of money. They could probably fight any number of legal battles that they knew they would lose, but simply do it for so long that the new developers go bankrupt. Or, at least, delay developing technology for decades (see: alternative fuels). Over what? I don't know, but I'm sure they could find something.

[Royce]

Joe Rogan's even got his own line of Nootropics.

He is chewing alpha brain like candy on his show