> "And as for the rat (singular -- not "rats" plural as the title says)"

As someone who has (unfortunately) had to deal with rats before, there is no such thing as a singular rat. A singular rat you see represents many you do not in the vicinity.

By the time you can see a single rat on a simple walk-through of the facility, you have an infestation on your hands.

I'm not a real fan of chewing food, but having done a similar diet before I prefer it. Turns out that even though me and food don't always get along, after 3 weeks on a liquid diet the cravings for real food for me come back. There are plenty of weightlifters who have done similar full-liquid diets for years before soylent, this data exists but has been largely ignored since it's from a different kind of community. Anyways - 30 days isn't enough, many items take longer to produce issues. Vitamin C comes to mind, it's destroyed by sunlight, copper (copper is good for destroying a few biological agents it seems, birth-control and Vitamin C, oh it's uses - but we need it as well so it'll be there in soylent in trace amounts), and age, but so little is needed to avoid scurvy, and it takes about 3 months from your last consumption of it to produce adverse results, that it wouldn't be an issue... in the short run.

To address your comment about animals: I saw animals that are littered with disease standing above the product. Standing, breathing without masks, talking without masks(which means trace amounts of spit), in standard clothes that've probably been exposed to much. The rat was far less disturbing than seeing the people who were handling the product.

Contrary to the blood-work, there is a issue that presented itself after 30 days. Not a nutrient deficiency, but a chewing one: he mentioned he started chewing gum due to his jaw aching. As far as I know chewing is supposed to help keep the jaw healthy (an expert/dentist has been sorely lacking from these soylent discussions, I imagine they'd have much to say about chewing, jaw, and tooth issues that crop up), and as someone who hasn't done a great job of that in life... I certainly wouldn't want to mess with jaw health anymore.

Yeah, I was pretty appalled to see one of the founders/employees measuring ingredients out of a box on the floor while wearing dirty espadrilles (canvas shoes). I suspect that if you look at the skepticism/support in this thread you'd see a strong correlation between people who have worked in food service at some time in their lives and those who haven't.

> There are plenty of weightlifters who have done similar full-liquid diets for years before soylent

Name one competitive weightlifter, powerlifter or bodybuilder that lived primarily on a shake made from powder for years.

As in people doing these diets years before soylent, not years on said diet. My grammar might not've been clear enough.

EDIT: Specifically I'm thinking of the hundreds (if not thousands by now) of people on T-Nation/Testosterone Nation who've done the 1-month Velocity diet, which is (or was, I haven't been there in years, but that particular diet has been around for at least 5 years+), a protein shake diet with very little solid food. There are years of people doing it for a month and relating their experiences, highlights and downfalls, and I'm sure there are several more experiences in that world that would provide better data points. However, it has the issue of being mostly anecdotal evidence.

I wouldn't consider the 30 day test to be remotely significant. Maybe when we're talking about years Soylent can be considered safe...

What about all of the foods in the grocery store than can kill you over years if eaten as a primary source of a diet? Are those considered "safe"?

* Not trying to advocate Soylent. Just trying to point out that there are a lot of foods in the grocery store that can kill over time (and many are marketed as full meals intended to be eaten regularly).

Eaten that way? Obviously no, they are not safe. That is why you should never suggest that they are eaten that way.... Don't eat only pears; It would be a stupid and dangerous thing to do.

You know why Soylent is receiving more criticism than pears? Because unlike pear vendors, they are suggesting that you eat their product that way.

There is an entire category of foods meant to be eaten as 'meal replacements', sold in grocery stores etc. Google it. Soylent is perhaps the best of the lot; its tailorable to your activity level etc. And yes you can eat Soylent for an extended time and feel better than if you ate McD's all the time, which millions of people do and yes, they live to tell about it.

The criticism is overheated and silly. Eat what you like, everybody else does. Lets cut out the unsolicited advice and scare tactics, it sounds silly and timid.

That seems like a pretty circular argument. Do you mean the ones that aren't supposed to be eaten as a primary source of a diet? Or do you mean the ones that are, indeed, harmful if they make up too much of your diet?

Either way, I'm not sure how that argument is supposed to build confidence in Soylent.

> What about all of the foods in the grocery store than can kill you over years if eaten as a primary source of a diet? Are those considered "safe"

This is very disengenous. The makers of Soylent have come out and said Soylent is the only thing you need to eat to have a full and balanced diet.

I can't think of a single other food at a grocery store that has made a similar promise as I dont' believe any food can do this.

You must be the dude still holding out on cell phones because of the microwaves?

Considering the earliest signs of scurvy start at the one month mark, I don't consider suspicion of a 30 day trial to be overly cautious.

What are the early signs of scurvy? I didn't see mention of that in the Vice article.

A feeling of general crumminess, tired all the time. Then comes the breathing problems and bone aches.

Per usual, there's a very informative wiki link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scurvy#Symptoms

I'm not seeing that quote in the link, but I have to say I think it's pretty sad if the only reason somebody goes outside is to get food.