12/13/13

The Whole Food Fallacy : Mostly Harmless

Mostly Harmless
All Posts Contact Can entropy be reversed?

The Whole Food Fallacy

by rob

This is a response to: http://www.fourhourworkweek.com/blog/2013/08/20/soylent/, as well as some of the comments In 1828, a young organic chemist named Friedrich Whler committed heresy. Whler accidentally synthesized Urea, a component of many lifeforms, from inorganic components. At the time everyone knew there was a special life force that separated organisms from other matter. It was a long uphill battle to convince the scientific community, but eventually the evidence won out. Regardless, even today many laymen tacitly assume that the holistic makeup of lifeforms such as food rise magically above their constituent chemicals. Everything is made of parts. The idea of holistic food represents the death throes of Vitalism, the fallacious assumption that there is something materially special about forms of life separate from other forms of matter. This is an easy mistake to make. Humans and animals move, breathe, and mate, unlike rocks or soil, but were all made of the same interchangeable forms of matter and energy. A stone dropped in to a pond will take the shortest path to the bottom. A human will take the shortest route to work, and cling to old ideas. Life is complex, but there is nothing about it that disobeys well understood laws of chemistry and physics. I am not sure if consciousness is reducible, but carrots certainly are. Creating a lifeform from scratch is an elusive task, and though great strides have been made recently we still have
robrhinehart.com/?p=874 1/16

12/13/13

The Whole Food Fallacy : Mostly Harmless

limits in our understanding. However, you do not need to fully understand an organism to feed it. Bacteria grown in labs are always grown on a synthetic medium of nutrients called LB. Pets live on synthetic diets and are much healthier and long-lived than their wild counterparts. We dont know how proteins fold but we do know all the metabolic pathways of a human, and our complete elemental makeup, thanks to elemental analysis. Even the grand diversity of the human microbiome contains conserved metabolic pathways. We do not yet know what the ideal diet for a human is, but our present understanding permits us to easily design a diet that is far superior to what most people are eating. Humans have lived on animal flesh and the reproductive organs of plants for a long time, but food has been changing all along. And it still is. The development of agriculture, then preservation, then nutrition, then processing, and now even biotechnology have all vastly improved our food products and lifestyle over their natural forms and immensely increased the carrying capacity of the earth. In fact, the foods we thrive on today are far from natural. How do you think bananas reproduce without seeds? The United States began adding Niacin to bread in 1938, which largely eliminated the deadly disease Pellagra, and iodized salt likely has a lot to do with the steady rise in IQ seen in the last century. This is not to say that all new foods are healthy. Many food companies design purely for the sensory experience of food, leading to products that are over-stimulating, unbalanced, or even addictive. I am amazed that we have cheap chocolate bars, which would have been a kingly delicacy not long ago, but I think we deserve new healthy options as well. Now, to respond to Tims concerns: Food is not a game I agree. What food company is more concerned with the nutrition of their product than its sensory appeal? We are more serious about health than any competitor in the industry. Meal-replacement powders arent new Affordable food substitutes are. No MRP has been designed to be a sustainable source of nutrition. Furthermore, in terms of calorie per dollar, we are easily a factor of 5 better than any of them, and will only get cheaper. Competing with groceries is a new market. And its a big one. Be careful with any terminology Soylent is not a medical product and we make no medical claims. Its not a diet or cleanse either. Its quantified food. Soylent is healthy food without all the unnecessary parts. I suppose you could live on it entirely, but why would you want to? Leisure food is an important part of life and culture. Epistemic arrogance Elemental analysis has given us a finite, complete list of the elements our bodies are made of. This doesnt tell us the different chemical configurations required, such as vitamins, but patients have lived for many years on synthetic diets in a medical setting. It was premature in the 19th century, but its overdue today. Again, beware of zero-risk bias. How nutritionally complete is the average western diet already? Nutrition and people are not one-size-fits-all Our metabolic pathways are largely identical. Everyone makes proteins out of the same Lysine and breaks down glucose polymers with the same enzymes. Its the extra stuff in food that gives people problems. By removing that you can have something fit for almost everyone. Still, people need different amounts of calories. Everyone lives on water, just different amounts. Other common criticisms from the comments, We dont know what we dont know Not good enough. Show me some evidence that food synergy, which sounds suspiciously like a vital force, is essential to thrive. The evidence to the contrary is mounting rapidly.
robrhinehart.com/?p=874 2/16

12/13/13

The Whole Food Fallacy : Mostly Harmless

Why not just put the work in to eating real food? Your computer is slow? Just be more patient. No. Make it faster. By automating the essentials of living we can enjoy life more. Less cooking and cleaning means more math and music. I like Soylent. I use it all the time. My life is simpler, cleaner. My thoughts are clearer, my body leaner. I still enjoy my favorite foods, though my tastes have changed somewhat towards nicer, more flavorful kinds. I find eating is a lot more fun when its optional, similar to taking a road trip versus driving to work. I do not understand the negativity surrounding Soylent. Perhaps some people confuse matters of taste with matters of morality. Some have their cooking and eating habits and seem to be offended that mine are different. I do not think it is unreasonable to desire to eat on my own terms. I would never look down on someone elses eating habits, but I do want people to be healthy. I reasoned that by making eating healthy easier, and cheaper, more people would do so, and it seems to be working. People are not going to stop eating poorly overnight. Perhaps we should make the easy food healthier, rather than asking people to mold their entire lives around it. If the existing options for eating well were adequate more people would do so. Most meals involve little to no ritual or social experience. Most meals will be forgotten. If we had an ultimate staple food replace these we would be much healthier and happier and not have to worry as much about the nutrition of the experiential meals we enjoy for pleasure. I do not enjoy grocery shopping, cooking, or cleaning dishes and I shouldnt have to. I do not like to repeat myself and I do not like having things that I do not need. No one asks me to make my own clothes. Why should I be expected to make my own food? Of course I respect a good designer or chef, I just have other skills and hobbies. Food is great, but most of the time I find what is on my computer or in my books far more stimulating than what is in my refrigerator. I find it very strange that people want us to fail, but it doesnt matter to me. Things are getting better. Even the deluge of negativity from Hacker News is subsiding into mere grumpiness. A decade from now when everyone is healthier well all have a good laugh about it. Published: September 5, 2013 Filed Under: Soylent

151 comments Join the discussion

Best Community
3 months ago

Share

I suppose you could live on it entirely, but why would you want to?

Maybe you should change the names of the purchasable Soylent packages on the website to
robrhinehart.com/?p=874 3/16

12/13/13

The Whole Food Fallacy : Mostly Harmless Maybe you should change the names of the purchasable Soylent packages on the website to reflect this sentiment. Currently the names "One Week Supply of Soylent", "Two Week Supply of Soylent", etc. with the subtitles "enough Soylent to replace one full week&#039s worth of meals", etc. seem to suggest that you&#039re supposed to be taking it as a full food replacement regimen, though it doesn&#039t say so straight out.

To avoid confusion, why not say call the package "21 meals worth of Soylent" instead of "One Week Supply"?
25 A dam

Reply Share

3 months ago

My four-year-old was trying to make a paper airplane today. He gave up because he couldn&#039t do it. To be fair, right now, he does suck at it. But he&#039s four. He&#039s still learning. So he asked me for help. "Daddy, will you help me build a paper airplane?" "Well son, we know a lot about aerodynamics and flight, but really paper just isn&#039t a good material to use to make planes. And really, there are still a lot of issues with drag and wind resistance, ensuring even and proper lift, balancing weight ratios. And even then, all of that depends on elevation and weather and all sort of things we don&#039t completely understand yet. And the plane won&#039t even always fly at the same elevation, so there are a variety of design considerations to take into account. Really, we just don&#039t know enough about flight yet. And even if we do just go ahead and make it out of paper, there are people out there that are far more qualified to do this than I. Here take a look at these Y ouTube videos of champion paper airplanes." If you believe that&#039s what I told him, you&#039re an idiot. This is what it feels like, to me, every time people start claiming "We just don&#039t know everything about nutruition yet." Or "our daily requirements change from day to day." Guess what? That doesn&#039t stop my from stuffing the cheeseburger into my face. It
see more

16

Reply Share

S iobhan

Adam 3 months ago

Hear Hear!! Finally.. I think the paranoid reaction to Soylent is all about folks&#039 terror of changeand in particular, America&#039s food addiction. It&#039s hilarious to see the reaction to this product! Ive had severe Gut and food allergy problems for years, (diagnosed by several MDs). And IVE had to learn to laugh about the reaction of many to my restrictionspeople literally harassing me because I wont, (or more accuratelyCANT) eat what they eat. Very few people will even acknowledge my medical condition no matter how long theyve known me. Unbelievably, some have even gone out of their way to MOCK me. Imagine.. I was horrified by this not only clear lack of support, but out and out resentment about my unwillingness to conform to the dietary habits of my cohorts, UNTIL I realized what it was. Now I simply see it as fear based ignorance based on a refusal to even consider change.
robrhinehart.com/?p=874

Deny all you want people, it&#039s your relationship with food in general that&#039s 4/16

12/13/13

The Whole Food Fallacy : Mostly Harmless

Deny all you want people, it&#039s your relationship with food in general that&#039s the problem. I&#039ve worked with addicts all my adult life, and the fear based responses on here are almost all about denial and protecting the proverbial supply . The U.S is so sick with food that the illness most responsible for driving up health care costs is Type II Diabetes. The preventable one. Please.. Any forward momentum that can reduce our ridiculous obsession with food-denial and disease in this country can only be productive.
see more

6 E du

Reply Share

Adam 3 months ago

Reply Share

+1
1 Tom

Adam 3 months ago

Reply Share

Right on! This is me and I agree with you completely.

Ash

Adam 3 months ago

It&#039s because people seem to think they have to switch to an entirely Soylent diet. I can&#039t imagine if they looked at it as replacing a meal here and there they&#039d be as critical. Even if you are talking about eating it pretty much exclusively (in the case of starving 3rd world people for example), isn&#039t it better than starving to death?
Reply Share

Luc

Adam 3 months ago

Reply Share

I feel you man!!! Enjoyed reading your story, thanks!

Jeff

Adam 3 months ago

Reply Share

Thank you for this.

S t eve

Adam 3 months ago

Exactly. There should be no question that soylent is a great meal replacement in comparison to junk fast food.
Reply Share

Avatar

james 8

3 months ago
Reply Share

Just keep doing what you do and bring soylent to market. I'll be buying it. thanks.

Avatar

Mic hael F

3 months ago

5/16

Hi Rob,
robrhinehart.com/?p=874

Avatar
12/13/13 The Whole Food Fallacy : Mostly Harmless

Trying to change how we do food is an incredibly hot button issue as you&#039ve learned. It is socially acceptable for large segments of the population to subsist mainly on fast food burgers, processed mac & cheese, and high sugar sodas, but go and try to provide a food supplement that will probably work exceedinly well for 80% of the population and the trolls come out. One thing you and your team might keep in mind - where many of us get nervous is about the claims you are making associated with it. It is not that we don&#039t believe it has worked well for you and your beta testers and it is not that we don&#039t understand and appreciate the vendor quals you are going through when working with your co-packer, but the claims could damage the brand and it brings out the troll in the most amazing people you would never expect it from (yes, I am talking about Tim "I question your ethics" Ferriss - whose work I had admired and put into practice on many fronts but after his latest adolescent behavior - yes that twitter post is what I am referring to - has driven me over to eye rolling). For those who support it (such as myself - I am anxiously awaiting my month&#039s supply) and who understand just what FDA claims are (and, importantly, are not) and how labels get
see more

Reply Share

Avatar

Theo S pec iale

3 months ago

My friend, you are an awesome human being! Nice words! the concept of soylent is fantastic! im a food lover and even enjoy to cook sometimes. But i totally understand you point of view! we are always trying to make life easier! why not do the same with food what we do with almost everything and every aspect of ours lives!? why not!!? Congratulations! keep the good work and i hope that you bring soylet to brazil an to the rest of the planet
4
Reply Share

Avatar

Hat ers Gonna Hat e!

3 months ago

Holy cow! Haters gonna hate, huh? I&#039ve also experienced some of this hate while telling family/friends about Soylent! How bizarre! It seems like every comment on here has some sort of "advice" for Rob. Hey -- let me clue you in -- if you&#039re so smart, why don&#039t you make your OWN product?! "I support Soylent, BUT... <hate> <hate> <hate>". Y a&#039ll are hillarious. Rob (+team) didn&#039t have to do any of this. He taught himself everything, developed the formula himself, experimented on himself, took the risks himself... and now everyone wants to tell him what to do! Like you all are experts! Give me a break. Godspeed Rob! Y ou rock!
4
Reply Share

robrhinehart.com/?p=874

S ly B riFry

Haters Gonna Hate! 3 months ago

6/16

12/13/13

S ly B riFry

Haters Gonna Hate! 3 months ago

The Whole Food Fallacy : Mostly Harmless

^^ RIGHT ON. I've been experiencing similar reactions from people. Everyone becomes an expert, yet no one has done a damn thing themselves.
Reply Share

Avatar

Liang

3 months ago

For many people it is simply not a good idea to quit eating burgers and fries when you can finish the meal with merely a cup of bland Soylent. Its too efficient for them to have a meal within a minute even though it is much healthier than the burgers and fries. The most junk food lovers enjoy the fast food not because it fast and do not care if it is junk. The problem is that we are encouraged by the popular culture to indulge our taste for delicacies which by definition concerns more on the taste rather than health or efficient, and we are so proud to have a no more nutritious but much more expensive meal in a foreign restaurants. This is where the The Whole Food Fallacy comes. It is the first time in history we had a chance to quit the entertaining meal and to spare more time and energy on a full life. Food is great, but most of the time I find what is in on my computer or in my books far more stimulating than what is in my refrigerator.---- Rob Rhinehart I think the target market of Soylent is mainly those themselves like Rob Rhinehart who enjoy entertaining his mind rather than his taste buds or the one who is just too busy to enjoy a meal. And the target market is bound to boom quickly in a developed society where people are too busy to have a good meal.
3
Reply Share

Avatar

CL

3 months ago

One does not need to subscribe to vitalism to call BS on soylent (and micronutrient theory in general). It&#039s quite clear that all food is made out of material substance, and that one need only determine the correct balance of substance in order to live. I do not object -soylent/monkeychow is theoretically possible. What I object to is the idea that we might easily know what the composition is, what components are important, and which are not. Our gut is quite complicated, and the fauna it supports is also complicated. And the interactions between them is combinatorically complicated. This complicated system varies with time, too: maybe I broke a bone and my body needs extra calcium to affect repairs. Maybe I&#039ve been pulling all-nighters coding up a storm, and extra neurotransmitter chemicals need to be synthesized. Maybe the body achieves these goals by promoting or suppressing species in the gut via immune response? Maybe it directly synthesizes it, or extracts it? The point is, the body is not a static factory or a mine that converts foodstuffs into body material -- we&#039re talking about a very complicated system! I&#039ve seen nearly zero evidence that anyone has considered this. Our gut is built to deal with a rich and varied input stream, processing out the subset that
see more
robrhinehart.com/?p=874 7/16

12/13/13

The Whole Food Fallacy : Mostly Harmless

Reply Share

hx k a 7

CL 3 months ago
Reply Share

Congratulations, you&#039ve just proved that food is not possible.

Ris har

hxka 3 months ago

Reply Share

^ This. Thank you for that. Y ou made my day.

John

CL 3 months ago

Maybe I&#039ve been pulling all-nighters coding up a storm, and extra neurotransmitter chemicals need to be synthesized. Maybe the body achieves these goals by promoting or suppressing species in the gut via immune response? Maybe it directly synthesizes it, or extracts it?

So given these circumstances, how would you deal with them normally? And how would the use of soylent affect that response? I would argue that whether you use soylent has little or nothing to do with what you are talking about. So you need more calcium. Drink some milk. Doesn&#039t matter if you had soylent for breakfast.
2 name
Reply Share

CL 3 months ago

so how exactly do you change the food you eat in order to cater to your neurotransmitter chemical and gene expression needs? extra peanut-butter on that 2am PB&J?
Reply Share

E du

CL 3 months ago
Reply Share

So it&#039s better to stay on our healthy Mc Donald&#039s diet?

E ugen

CL 3 months ago

robrhinehart.com/?p=874

When your bone breaks, do you start buying more calcium rich foods? Or just eat the same familiar meals as before? That&#039s what most people do anyway, without giving one minute&#039s thought on whether there is any calcium in their diet -- or even knowing the element is required for building bones, for that matter. The only reason they are even alive is precisely because they have this "very complicated system": the reason it is very complicated is so that it can cope with broken bones and adapt to almost whatever garbage you throw in, as long as it gets the bare minimum it needs. 8/16

12/13/13

needs.

The Whole Food Fallacy : Mostly Harmless

That&#039s why you can live by just following "vague craving". It&#039s what wild animals do, but at least I would be eating apple pies and potato chips all the time if I only did that. While the composition of Soylent may not be 100% fully informed yet, it most likely is more informed than the the daily special in your nearest restaurant. I&#039d say we have a much better chance of getting everything necessary by consuming a baseline of engineereed nutritional package (e.g. Soylent) and then following those cravings for, say, 1/3 daily calories.
Reply Share

Avatar

B uffora 2

2 months ago
Reply Share

PLEASE ADD XY LITOL!

Avatar

3 months ago

While I understand the utility of Soylent, I disagree with the framing of this article. It isn&#039t necessarily that "whole/raw/organic" foods are shown to be better that is preventing me from considering purchasing Soylent. The deal-breaker for me is that, despite Rob&#039s best intentions and careful design, this product is inevitably missing some aspects of the human diet that aren&#039t understood to be nutrients. Teas, herbs, and spices are recognized as important to mitigating undesirable symptoms such as inflammation. Despite their recognized uses, we just don&#039t have an understanding of their full effects on the human body. What level of theobromine would you include in Soylent, Rob? Are its effects compromised by being put in solution with the other ingredients in Soylent? Furthermore, what is its half-life in the body? Is it valid to mix everything in Soylent all at once, rather than distributing out nutrients over the day, so as to avoid a spike/drop effect? I can&#039t help but feel that we don&#039t know the answers to the last few questions I pose here, and until then I&#039ll remain drinking my tea and cooking my meals. Furthermore, I will enjoy the meal-times I have alone to think, or those in which I am with friends to socialize as part of my dining experience, because life just isn&#039t about fitting the most work possible into a day.
2
Reply Share

name

J 3 months ago

How can we be absolutely sure that combining meat and dairy is safe? Kosher regulations state that it&#039s forbidden. Everyone who has ever eaten a cheeseburger has died. Therefore, cheeseburgers should never be eaten.
1 1
Reply Share

Avatar

Tamas

3 months ago

9/16

Rob,
robrhinehart.com/?p=874

Avatar
12/13/13 The Whole Food Fallacy : Mostly Harmless

Y our idea/product about food gives 90% of the human population better nutritional value compared their intake now. Don&#039t get bothered by the critics, who after commenting, going to the store and stuff some starchy shit into thier face. Keep walking, Bests, Tamas

Reply Share

Avatar

S t uffe

3 months ago

Rob, I just want you to know your idea and product is the shit and you are going to make a lot of money and a meaningful contribution to mankind. Fuck the haters what else could you wish for? They are all brainwashed by this new age spiritual bullshit. Its the first commercially funded religion, ads on television preach empty words like natural or wellness so companies can sell more stuff we don&#039t need, but the vast majority pay up and eat it raw food. Never mind the drones Rob, in the end your product will win by merit. But now get back to work, I want Soylent in Europe asap :)
2
Reply Share

Avatar

Jim

3 months ago

Many commentators are pointing out that the name Soylent was formerly used in a movie, and that it was a food in that movie. Those commentors apparently think that Rob was not aware of the movie, and that his choice of the name was an amazing coincidence. They are describing the movie to Rob. I find that to be very interesting.
2 1
Reply Share

Avatar

Cat t leHerder 1

a month ago

Way too much logic and reason. Most people don't like it.
Reply Share

Avatar

JLTS 1

3 months ago
Reply Share

I, for one, am on the same page as you, FWIW.

Avatar

Jeff

3 months ago

There will always be naysayers. But look at the amount of support and pre-orders Soylent has been getting. There is a huge demand for convenient nutrition! Hell, I've been eating nothing but cheerios, top ramen, beans and rice, and the occasional Ensure shake, and have no doubt that Soylent would be a vast improvement over my curent diet in terms of nutrition and balance.
1
Reply Share

Avatar dok 3 months ago robrhinehart.com/?p=874

10/16

12/13/13

The Whole Food Fallacy : Mostly Harmless

Avatar

dok

3 months ago

Keep up the good work. As a Master&#039s student that has to work 40-50 hours a week on top of studies, soylent will CHANGE my life. Not all of us can spend hours shopping, cooking, planning etc. In addition the money savings would allow much more flexibility in my lifestyle.
1
Reply Share

Avatar

3 months ago

proteins & flavor for a big name supplemental drink company I find it more than plausible for your product to be feasible. I think your methods are correct. Consulting with industry professionals outsorceing etc. As long as what you put out to the public is as safe as possible with use of quality ingredients as well. What doesnt come with risk these days? Certainly the crap most people consume do. Being in healthcare currently I see many inadequacys & ineffiencies. Y ou do the best with whats available. nothing is absolute. Y our product appears to adress my needs. Short being wealthy & or a pro athelete who has the time, money, knowledge & motivation to eat right? I feel your product has the potential to do more good the harm as long as done correctly which I feel you are doing. Many execs dont go to the lenghts you are. Y ou have the motivation to solve a problem many people have without the greed & I applaud that. Hopefully once your company is better established you will be able to lower the cost making available to more. Anways I am just a simply person felt that was needed. hope you succeed.
1
Reply Share

Avatar

A nas t as ia

3 months ago

Rob, having read all above I&#039d like to mention few points: - most people reflect their own problems. In average, people like to talk about what they think, what is good for them, what is bad for them, what they approve/don&#039t approve... They reflect their own problems/understanding/misunderstanding, etc. So, look at this in a positive way - you get a free poll results on the perception of your product by various customer groups. That&#039s vary valuable information which you may work with for your further product marketing. - any product needs a proper marketing approach. So, following the received feedback it might be good to look for the product image improvement (e.g. name, target group, claims on the problems solved by the product). - legal machine can kill any product. Therefore, the legal advice on the marketing approach and claims might be very useful. - it&#039s not the time to make the conclusion whether the product is good or bad. The various tests (e.g. for the mentioned above cases) might be very beneficial for both addressing
see more

1
robrhinehart.com/?p=874

Reply Share
11/16

12/13/13

The Whole Food Fallacy : Mostly Harmless

Avatar

Jon

3 months ago

To answer the question "Why are critics more worried about Soylent than they are about the typical unhealthy American diet?" My answer is this: A Big Mac might be very unhealthy, but presumably you aren&#039t eating nothing but Big Macs. Even if most of your meals are unhealthy, most people tend to switch them up enough that you&#039re at least getting some different nutrients from each meal. Soylent, on the other hand, is being marketed as something that can replace meals altogether, which can be the sole component of your diet. Therefore it&#039s at least potentially more dangerous than Big Macs or other unhealthy fare. If you aren&#039t getting the nutrients that you need from your Big Mac, you just eat something else for your next meal. If you aren&#039t getting the nutrients that you need from a product that claims to have everything you need, you could develop serious problems. And from a liability perspective: If someone becomes seriously ill due to a lifetime of fast food consumption, it&#039s difficult to point the finger at anyone single meal. If someone becomes seriously ill due to several months&#039 of Soylent consumption, it&#039s quite easy to identify the culprit if they&#039ve eaten almost nothing else during that time. IANAL, but I think at the very least Rob needs to be much more careful with making offhand comments like "I suppose you could live on it entirely, but why would you want to?" Statements like that
see more

Reply Share

Avatar

Mabel

3 months ago

I think everyone&#039s jumping on this bandwagon too soon. While I like the idea of a generic food that I can just eat and go during busy times of my life, I&#039m going to reserve judgment until I see some real science backing it up. Besides, I do really enjoy eating good, well-prepared food; I just hate doing the dishes.
1
Reply Share

Avatar

Trut hMonger

3 months ago

The name SOY LENT is just dreadfully poor marketing. Anyone who is a film buff (or over 45) knows the name Soylent comes from "Soylent Green," a 1973 film in which a mysterious food substance is found to be made from the bodies of humans killed for population control. The infamous climax of the movie is where Charlton Heston breaks down and exclaims his big realization: "SOY LENT GREEN IS PEOPLE!!! IT&#039S PEOPLE!!!" Even people who have never seen the movie know this notorious line, famously parodied by Phil Hartman in this classic 1993 SNL clip. Copyright implications aside, why would any sober entrepreneur want a product name with such a disturbing association? When it comes to creating a desire for the product, the name SOY LENT fails hard, as does Human Chow (likening people to dogs?). How about a descriptive name like LifeShake, VitaShake, or NutriShake; or a flashy name like Swig or PowerGulp; even a funny name like Hurry Slurry would be more alluring than robrhinehart.com/?p=874 12/16

12/13/13

Swig or PowerGulp; even a funny name like Hurry Slurry would be more alluring than SOY LENT or HUMAN CHOW. Please contact me for further marketing consultation. ;)
1
Reply Share

The Whole Food Fallacy : Mostly Harmless

Neil

TruthMonger 3 months ago

I think a lot of the interest around this product has been generated by the name. I know for myself, if I heard of a product called LifeShake I would just associate it with the "health food" industry and ignore it.
3
Reply Share

K at i May a

TruthMonger 2 months ago

I have no problem with the name. If you've ever studied any Dan Kennedy material you'd realize that it has a lot more marketing potential than "LifeShake" or whatever (plus I think there are already shakes named with some of those names, I know for sure a NutriShake exists)
Reply Share

name

TruthMonger 3 months ago

CamelCaseWords are so 2000s. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CamelCase

Reply Share

Avatar

S am

3 months ago

A smarter response would be to acknowledge physiological differences (metabolic) among individuals and a smarter business model would be to offer Soylent in different formula&#039s based on variations in activity level and body composition - that would likely address the criticisms currently being directed at your product. The idea that everyone has the same metabolic needs is not found in any evidence based research and defies common sense.
1
Reply Share

Avatar

A ndrew

3 months ago

Can you please address potential long term issues to our digestive system. Humans have a complex digestive system used to breaking food. By elimating that process of digestion, what are the unseen effects. A huge portion of the bodies structure would become redundent and the potential disease like side effects would be come astronomical.
1
Reply Share

name

Andrew 3 months ago

Why doesn&#039t McDonald&#039s have to address "potential long term issues to our digestive system" from its fast food hamburgers? Humans have been living on feeding tubes for decades now. Should the designers of feeding tube formulas have to answer for why their products are incomplete?

robrhinehart.com/?p=874

13/16

12/13/13

The Whole Food Fallacy : Mostly Harmless

feeding tube formulas have to answer for why their products are incomplete?
1
Reply Share

A ndrew

name 3 months ago

Are you comparing the product to McDonalds or test tube feeding?. McDonalds has been proven to have woeful long term side effects, and yes it does have to address the health effects of its products. Test tube feeding is done as a worst case scenario for people who cannot function under normal circumstances. Soylent is being being marketed as a food replacement for potential fit and healthy professionals.. Lastly, that was a complete non-response and an avasion of a specific question. Please provide me with a scientific address for my initial questions. If I am to buy the product then I would require sufficient answers to my concerns.

Reply Share

Avatar

Ric hard

3 months ago

I&#039ve just begun to dig into metabolic pathways and I can tell you the first thing I found was that people have metabolic issues that are quite different. Check out MTHFR, up to 45% of the general population carries it meaning that up to half of the people this product will go to wont be able to metabolise folic acid very well. Folate is also not easy, but unconverted folic acid may cause cancer. Some people can&#039t process sulfur or have increased needs for vitamin C and B6 - obviously most people are unaware of this but that doesn&#039t change the fact that getting synthetic folic acid from this product and cutting back on sources of natural folate like spinach and bananas could be quite unhealthy.
1
Reply Share

Avatar

Lara

3 months ago

I hesitate to step in but I feel it is salient to the topics. I study gender differences in infectious disease settings. Inbred mice (so they have the same genes) show remarkably different responses to the same challenge.

In the same vein although we do largely have the same metabolic pathways the efficiency of each is high moderated by environment. That means identical twins can have significantly different metabolism because one of them works a night shift job. That aside I do actually want soylent to succeed. Not because its a good product but innovation requires a starting point. As more people take soylent, people like the busy dad, working mums etc. We will be able to see any deficiency disease occurring and alter as necessary. I think the ultimate market for soylent won&#039t be the silicon valley testers we&#039ve seen so far but institutions that have mass feeding like schools and hospitals. If soylent can be14/16 robrhinehart.com/?p=874

12/13/13

The Whole Food Fallacy : Mostly Harmless

seen so far but institutions that have mass feeding like schools and hospitals. If soylent can be as good as it claims/wants then it provides a perfect solution for cost effective , nutritional feeding.
see more

Reply Share

Avatar

Jon

3 months ago

The fact that there exists controversy about specific foods and diets - even among dietitians should be all the evidence that you need that we don&#039t have a good grasp of what nutrients the human body needs or how they interact with each other. Some dietitians thinks eggs are great for you, while others say they&#039re as bad as smoking cigarettes. Some swear by low-carb diets, while others will say that vegan diets are best. These controversies wouldn&#039t exist if it were just a matter of analyzing the components of foods; dieticians would simply examine the elemental components of each food or diet, and arrive at pretty much identical conclusions based on how closely the food/diet conformed to the "ideal" amount of various nutrients. The fact that this does not happen should tell you something. If there is such a wide divergence of opinion on the healthiness of certain foods among people who have actually spent their careers studying nutrition, what makes you so sure that you have figured out anything resembling the ideal mix of nutrients?
1
Reply Share

name

Jon 3 months ago

There doesn&#039t have to be ONE single formula of Soylent! That&#039s the beauty of the concept! It can be easily customized to your needs, based on your lab results and other quantitative and qualitative data. Can you customize your own diet with food from the grocery store? Of course! But most people won&#039t. They&#039ll simply eat whatever has been advertised the most, rather than calibrating their diet to their individualized profile. Soylent is simply an easy way to calibrate one&#039s nutrition very very precisely.
Reply Share

Avatar

c ric hards on

3 months ago

An interesting response, and I generally agree with a lot of what you said, and have defended your approach. But I would strongly disagree with this statement: "Nutrition and people are not one-size-fits-all Our metabolic pathways are identical. Everyone makes proteins out of the same Lysine and breaks down glucose polymers with the same enzymes. " That&#039s true in a way, but completely false in another. Please take the time to read, "Biochemical Individuality," by Roger Williams. In fact we are all very, very different in our ability to absorb and use nutrients. And having been in the nutritional field for a few decades, that has been demonstrated to me time after time. A dietary robrhinehart.com/?p=874 approach (or supplement) that works wonderfully for one person might be neutral
15/16

12/13/13

The Whole Food Fallacy : Mostly Harmless

A dietary approach (or supplement) that works wonderfully for one person might be neutral for another, and harmful to someone else. That&#039s not from theory, but from practice, and theory supports it. And of course what we want to do is not just to survive, but to thrive. And between us, we have very different abilities to break down foods, to absorb nutrients. And not only is it different between you and I, it&#039s different for you and I at different times, and under different conditions and stressors.
see more

Reply Share

P aul

crichardson 3 months ago

Indeed, and while we all need carbs, protein, and fats, not everybody requires them in the same ratios. Personally I would be looking for different versions of Soylent tailored to ecto-, endo- and mesomorphs.
2
Reply Share

Load more comments

Previous Post Next Post Email Me RSS Feed I have a Twitter account.

robrhinehart.com/?p=874

16/16