News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:How Soylent Ships a Trillion Calories per Month by jamii on Friday June 05, 2015 @03:10PM (#9667435)
I tried soylent for a while and found the experience fairly unpleasant. I switched to http://www.mealsquares.com/ instead. Warmed up, they taste like a dense brownie. The thinking detailed on their website and the level of care that clearly went into choosing a safe recipe gives me a lot more confidence than soylent did eg

> First, there's nothing especially risky or unusual in MealSquares; they're made from a broad variety of ordinary, healthy whole-food ingredients like milk, rice bran, dates, etc. See our nutrition page for the full list. And unlike many commercial baked goods, MealSquares are free of artificial preservatives and flavoring agents.

They also don't require mixing so they work much better as a camping/climbing food.

Re:How Soylent Ships a Trillion Calories per Month by JohnTHaller on Friday June 05, 2015 @03:21PM (#9667520)
Soylent is a different product from MealSquares. MealSquares likes to talk about "whole-food ingredients" but the whole point of Soylent is to get away from that and base the formula on what the body specifically needs... as opposed to what whole food ingredients happen to come close and taste decent together.

Soylent is simple to make, simple to drink, and has a pretty neutral flavor. They tweak it at each new version so the issues with the early versions have been eliminated. Some people won't like that approach and will prefer a "whole food" thing instead, which is just fine.

Re:How Soylent Ships a Trillion Calories per Month by jamii on Friday June 05, 2015 @03:38PM (#9667627)
Their launch comments on hn explained why they believe that using whole foods is a lower risk way to get 'everything the body needs' to actually end up in the body - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7314183
Re:How Soylent Ships a Trillion Calories per Month by raverbashing on Friday June 05, 2015 @04:01PM (#9667760)
"And that's the problem I see artificially constructed meal replacements running in to--if you do the best you can based on the science available, that still may not be enough."

This is an excellent summary. It's not about a "fad" or being "organic" or something like it.

Nutrition is a very complicated subject and while science has shone a lot of light on the subject we still don't know a lot. So sticking to the "tried and true", that is, what people have actually been eating is safer.

Re:How Soylent Ships a Trillion Calories per Month by oldmanjay on Friday June 05, 2015 @05:34PM (#9668320)
When you don't actually know enough to make an honest assessment, then you can't come to an honest conclusion. Calling "whole food" safer is an emotional response not unlike that which make "non-GMO Himalayan sea salt" a thing people buy.
Re:How Soylent Ships a Trillion Calories per Month by tormeh on Friday June 05, 2015 @06:06PM (#9668492)
No, we know people do fine on traditionally healthy food. We do not know whether they do fine on Soylent. My guess is that anyone 100% on Soylent will become malnutritioned either very subtly or over a long time frame. Personally, I think that's fine as the body can handle pretty fucked up diets and no one is really going to go 100% Soylent anyway. Like, I'd replace 80% of my diet with Soylent if they shipped to me and I liked the taste, but I understand why someone would be a little skeptical.
Re:How Soylent Ships a Trillion Calories per Month by seanflyon on Friday June 05, 2015 @06:22PM (#9668579)
> we know people do fine on traditionally healthy food

This is a valid point to an extent, but we don't know that people do fine on a particular subset of traditionally healthy ingredients. We may discover that Soylent lacks some subtle nutrient, but we could discover the same thing with MealSquares.

Re:How Soylent Ships a Trillion Calories per Month by 001sky on Friday June 05, 2015 @07:23PM (#9668811)
The body reflexes to things like mastication, salivation, etc triggered by texture and the presence of actual things in your mouth, so I think the (bias of) argument is more along the lines of reducing the variables away from normal eating. If you look at the military and other people who "starve for a living" (hikers, climbers, explorers etc), these considerations are very self-evident and at the forefront of mind. Its not clear that "wishing them away" (considerations of texture/pallatability) is backed up by any hard science. But I'd be curious to see if there are any leads in that direction.
Re:How Soylent Ships a Trillion Calories per Month by baddox on Friday June 05, 2015 @08:37PM (#9669073)
> No, we know people do fine on traditionally healthy food. We do not know whether they do fine on Soylent.

But we don't really know how far along the scale between dead and in maximum possible health traditionally healthy food gets us. Short of some genuine scientific results, I see no reason to suspect that Soylent is less healthy than traditionally healthy food. It could just as easily be more healthy.

Re:How Soylent Ships a Trillion Calories per Month by paintrayne on Saturday June 06, 2015 @12:14AM (#9669633)
Tens of thousands of years of human history disagree with your assessment.
Re:How Soylent Ships a Trillion Calories per Month by baddox on Friday June 05, 2015 @08:21PM (#9669024)
I don't buy it. Using "natural" ingredients is no less scientifically risky than using "artificially constructed" ingredients, unless of course you have scientific results showing precisely that.
Re:How Soylent Ships a Trillion Calories per Month by fweespeech on Friday June 05, 2015 @03:42PM (#9667657)
http://www.mealsquares.com/nutrition-facts.html

2000 calories of it is 130% of your daily saturated fat...and 126% of total fat.

Eh. Soylent you could get away with eating it all day [theoretically]. MealSquares you need to supplement with other foods due to the fact content or you'll end up screwing your health with that much saturated fat.

http://www.heart.org/HEARTORG/GettingHealthy/NutritionCenter...

Additionally:

> The American Heart Association recommends aiming for a dietary pattern that achieves 5% to 6% of calories from saturated fat. That means, for example, if you need about 2,000 calories a day, no more than 120 of them should come from saturated fats. That’s about 13 grams of saturated fats a day.

Its 6g per square, so you really shouldn't eat more than 2 and get the rest from other sources. At which point, its a minority of the calories you consume.

Re:How Soylent Ships a Trillion Calories per Month by 3pt14159 on Friday June 05, 2015 @04:03PM (#9667770)
Eh, saturated fat isn't great, but it isn't as terrible as we used to think. Check out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saturated_fat#Association_with...

To me the problem is the sugar content. It's easily double, even for a large man, and almost triple for a small woman.

Re:How Soylent Ships a Trillion Calories per Month by dcosson on Friday June 05, 2015 @04:26PM (#9667901)
The sugar content here does seem higher than ideal, and soylent is about the same.

I'm currently experimenting with making a DIY soylent and I've noticed that if you're trying to get all the carbs from whole-grain, real sources you end up getting a lot of fiber (~50g/day even when doing a relatively low amount of carbs like 35% of your daily calories). A lot of people report feeling bloated and painful from too much fiber. It also adds up in price. So, they supplement with fast-burning carbs like maltodextrin and sugars (soylent is trying out the slower burning sugar isomaltulose).

I'm a little skeptical that something that gets broken down into half fructose and half sucrose exactly like table sugar and HFC is harmless if it just gets digested slowly, that'd be like saying drinking soda is totally healthy as long as you sip on it slowly all day instead of getting too much at once.

Re:How Soylent Ships a Trillion Calories per Month by 3pt14159 on Friday June 05, 2015 @06:16PM (#9668540)
If fiber makes you feel bad it means you are not drinking enough water.
Re:How Soylent Ships a Trillion Calories per Month by crusso on Saturday June 06, 2015 @09:56AM (#9670807)
Make sure you check out http://www.reddit.com/r/soylent/ and the resources there. Lots of people are experimenting with variations of the Soylent formula/concept.
Re:How Soylent Ships a Trillion Calories per Month by fweespeech on Friday June 05, 2015 @04:13PM (#9667825)
One of the sources is:

http://www.nhs.uk/news/2014/03March/Pages/Saturated-fats-and...

Which suggests as the guideline and inclues a 20g limit (which the squares are still over):

http://www.nhs.uk/livewell/goodfood/pages/fat.aspx

> Cutting down on saturated fats is only one aspect of reducing your risk of heart disease, stroke and other cardiovascular diseases. Other risk factors include eating too much salt and sugar, being overweight, smoking and a lack of physical activity.

Yes, there is disagreement but no I'm not going to take "disagreement" as "HEY LETS GO OVER THE DAILY LIMIT!!!"

Re:How Soylent Ships a Trillion Calories per Month by baddox on Friday June 05, 2015 @08:34PM (#9669066)
Why does the sugar content seem too high? It looks right for me based on the usual sources. Perhaps it's too high for a weight loss diet, but I don't think it's intended for that.
Re:How Soylent Ships a Trillion Calories per Month by 3pt14159 on Saturday June 06, 2015 @10:05AM (#9670838)
65 grams of normal sugar if you ate 5 of these meal squares is double the recommended 25-37.5 grams for an adult male. This isn't even counting the sugar alcohol.
Re:How Soylent Ships a Trillion Calories per Month by jimrandomh on Friday June 05, 2015 @03:55PM (#9667726)
The right amount of saturated fat to eat is a major controversy, and I think you're promoting incorrect beliefs here.
Re:How Soylent Ships a Trillion Calories per Month by smackfu on Saturday June 06, 2015 @08:38AM (#9670552)
It's funny how every single part of nutrition seems to be a major controversy.
Re:How Soylent Ships a Trillion Calories per Month by fweespeech on Friday June 05, 2015 @04:14PM (#9667827)
So you know better than the NHS, the people who set the guidelines in the US, etc ...?

Yes, but it exceeds the total daily allowance for the NHS, the US equivalent, etc.

There is literally no one that says "Everyone should eat 30g of saturated fat a day"

Re:How Soylent Ships a Trillion Calories per Month by douche on Friday June 05, 2015 @07:34PM (#9668858)
I don't understand the saturated fat hate. Cultures have existed that have gotten 50% or higher of their total calories from nearly pure animal fat sources. Eskimos (or is the politically correct term Inuit or something else now?) lived on blubber, and only started experiencing the whole heart disease/obesity epidemic when switched to a more "conventional" grain-heavy diet.

I wouldn't trust the USDA to tell me what to eat as far as I can throw them and all of their agriculture lobbyists. RDA's are a joke.

Re:How Soylent Ships a Trillion Calories per Month by fweespeech on Friday June 05, 2015 @09:45PM (#9669243)
...you mean the people that lived 10+ years less than everyone else, even in the modern era? That is the lifestyle you want to emulate?

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2013/12/18/inuit_life_exp...

Okay. Enjoy.

Re:How Soylent Ships a Trillion Calories per Month by douche on Friday June 05, 2015 @11:03PM (#9669447)
Did you even read the article that you linked? It's not a great article, but the reasons listed therein have nothing to do with diet.
Re:How Soylent Ships a Trillion Calories per Month by delluminatus on Friday June 05, 2015 @03:55PM (#9667725)
They actually address this point specifically on their Nutrition page. I am not an expert so I have no basis for comparing your claims to theirs, but it seems like they are at least sensitive to the issue, as it were.

Fats: Those worried about saturated fat content should be assured that our saturated fat (and cholesterol) content derives from healthy sources, not industrially produced fats. Milk, eggs, cocoa butter, and sunflower seeds; these are nutrient-dense and healthy sources of energy. All our sources of fat have shown numerous benefits in long term studies. Lacto-ovo vegetarians have significantly extended life spans compared to people eating normal diets, vegans, and even regular vegetarians. Dark chocolate lowers blood pressure as well as being an antioxidant and nutrient source. Sunflower seeds are a rich source of vitamin E and demonstrate anti-inflammatory properties. Most of our polyunsaturated fat derives from raw sunflower seeds. Given the very high vitamin E content of sunflower seeds, we are confident that our polyunsaturated fat is stable, not oxidized. We will be sourcing our sunflower seeds from the high oleic acid varieties to reduce polyunsaturated fat content further.

Re:How Soylent Ships a Trillion Calories per Month by Retric on Friday June 05, 2015 @04:25PM (#9667896)
That's 50% more expensive than soylent, and has a significantly shorter shelf life. If you want something approaching food while backpacking etc. you may want to just go for MRE's.

Also xylitol, lactase, potassium citrate, rice bran, and vegetable glycerin are not really 'whole foods' by most definitions.

Re:How Soylent Ships a Trillion Calories per Month by jamii on Friday June 05, 2015 @07:16PM (#9668785)
I tried MREs for a while - they are fine for camping but too high in sugar and salt for regular eating. They are also very bulky (two of these per day - http://usarmy.vo.llnwd.net/e2/c/images/2013/05/30/298090/siz...) and leave behind a lot of trash.
Re:How Soylent Ships a Trillion Calories per Month by mrbill on Friday June 05, 2015 @04:57PM (#9668118)
I tried out MealSquares when they were first available. Ate three of them before I ended up throwing the rest of the package in the trash. Really unappetizing and inedible, unless they've changed the recipe since then.
Re:How Soylent Ships a Trillion Calories per Month by zyxley on Friday June 05, 2015 @08:51PM (#9669115)
I got a chance to try one recently (last month), and, unfortunately, I have to echo the sentiment. The best comparison I can make to the taste and texture is something like an extremely dense and gritty version of a very dark rye bread. Despite the creators' comparisons to muffins or brownies and how people say they have too much sugar, there was no sweetness to it at all.
Re:How Soylent Ships a Trillion Calories per Month by nether on Friday June 05, 2015 @06:43PM (#9668660)
Mealsquares is probably healthier, but it's also much more expensive at $20 for 2,000 calories, vs $9 for Soylent. They're priced like energy bars (Clif bars, probars etc.).
Re:How Soylent Ships a Trillion Calories per Month by cncool on Friday June 05, 2015 @09:13PM (#9669168)
It's 90 dollars for 30 squares. That's 133.33 cals/dollar, or 15 dollars / 2000 calories.
Re:How Soylent Ships a Trillion Calories per Month by rokhayakebe on Friday June 05, 2015 @08:31PM (#9669053)
I think it is $6 per 2000 calories. Can you redo the math?
Re:How Soylent Ships a Trillion Calories per Month by Jipha on Friday June 05, 2015 @10:01PM (#9669278)
It's $15/2000 cal for 30 squares or $17.86 for 7 (the sample pack).
Re:How Soylent Ships a Trillion Calories per Month by emmab on Friday June 05, 2015 @05:20PM (#9668252)
I use soylent when I have appetite issues because drinking is easier than eating when I don't feel hungry.