Soylent Campaign

I really enjoy this campaign because it gave me an excuse to compare it with snake oil labels. (<a href="https://www.google.com/search?q=snake+oil+label&#38;tbm=isch&#38;tbo=u&#38;source=univ&#38;sa=X&#38;ei=6MibUZmmBam9ygHBn4HoAQ&#38;ved=0CC4QsAQ&#38;biw=1440&#38;bih=726" rel="nofollow">https://www.google.com/search?q=snake+oil+label&#38;tbm=isch...</a>)<p>The characteristic of this kind of marketing that I enjoy the most is the presence of what I call 'linguistic asymptotes.'<p>These are words that imply a product has unparalleled or infinite properties.<p>On the soylent page we have "ubiquitous", "perfectly", "optimized", "automatically", and "optimal" all in the first paragraph.<p>On a sample of snake oil labels we have 'instantaneously', 'cures <i>all</i> aches and pains', 'always', 'strongest', and 'immediate.'<p>It's very difficult for a claim that contains a linguistic asymptote to be true, but it's cognitively very easy to understand and process. You don't have to consider your personal medical history, or cost, or anything else really, because the product is 'always' right for you!<p>Fun stuff.

Wow there is a lot of hate in this thread...<p>A lot of the arguments here seem to boil down to "Much smarter people are working on this and <i>they</i> haven't solved it, who the hell does this KID think he is?!?"<p>That's pretty depressing for a website that, at least originally, was to help startups talk to one another. Shame on you, hacker news. You're smarter than this. By this logic, never ever trust your data to anybody other than IBM because those dumb hacker kids don't know what they're doing!<p>Second: "He's violating ALL KINDS of FDA regulations! [none of which I can name]"<p>Oh is he? Because if you actually look at what he's doing, it appears that he is taking things are <i>already</i> approved from human consumption, and mixing them together. This would be akin to a baker taking eggs and flour and mixing them.<p>What he's selling (although selling is a bit of an incorrect word here) is effectively a big power bar, except his comes in powerdered form. There are some hippies that sell power bars at my local coffee shop. They are <i>terrible</i>. What sort of advanced degrees do you suppose the hippies have? None? Possibly some experience in "baking"?<p>Finally: this is being presented within the context of "an experiment". If you start eating soylent, and you get sick, STOP EATING IT!<p>I'd imagine that I might have similar results if I ate nothing but the hippie vegan power bars at the coffee shop.<p>Personally, I'll be in for whatever the $65 level is.<p>1) Because I think this is neat<p>2) I want to encourage people to experiment with the world around them.<p>3) I'm not an idiot, and if I start feeling sick as a result of not eating any "real" food, I'll stop eating soylent.<p>Geesh.

Guys, please don't do this. We've met at YC, and I think you are great guys, but some things in the video are false.<p>Soylent is definitely not "perfectly tailored to your body" and it probably isn't "everything the body needs", for the simple reason that <i>nobody</i> has any idea what the body needs, let alone how to tailor a perfect diet. Nutrition research is extremely complex and fraught with false findings. When John Ioannidis said that most medical research findings are false he singled out nutrition and genetics as the most problematic fields.<p>False advertising this particular product can be dangerous because a lot of people get obsessed about diet and health, and tend to cling to whatever subset of findings they happen to have heard, and then treat the whole thing religiously.<p>Some nutritional deficiencies become apparent only after <i>years</i> and then possibly only in people with a certain genetic makeup.<p>You are targeting a population that adopts health fads like they were the ten commandments, and are trying to sell a product that has properties <i>you can't possibly know</i>. Please stop because you may inadvertently hurt people.

"Soylent is perfectly balanced and optimized for your body and lifestyle, meaning it automatically puts you at an optimal weight, makes you feel full, and improves your focus and cognition."<p>Bull-fucking-shit.<p>This is a product made by four twenty-somethings, none of whom appears to have a background in nutrition or any kind of health studies. To trust your health to these people would be fucking stupid. Jesus.<p>Also: They've got to be violating some kind of FDA rules. So that'll be fun. When they get sued. Or accidentally harm someone.<p>Please. Do not back these people.<p>-----<p>Edit: What FDA rule do I think they're violating? I don't know, exactly. But I doubt you can say things like "it automatically puts you at an optimal weight, makes you feel full, and improves your focus and cognition" without having some actual data backing you up.

I read this initially assuming it to be a clever spoof on the whole startup / crowdsourcing scene, because of the name: pick something that is obviously a joke product ("Soylent Green is people!") and run with it - start piling on impressive claims, include startup-y backgrounds for the founders, and be really vague about what the product actually is. Given my initial interpretation, I thought the "Is soylent vegan available yet" FAQ was particularly hilarious.<p>Then I started reading the HN comments, and initially assumed them to be tongue-in-cheek replies running with the joke: the typical "this is why it won't work", the usual "this is why it's a bad idea", the inevitable "it's actually amazing, stop being so negative". But that gradually stopped making sense the further I read, with people appearing to take it way too seriously for a simple spoof.<p>So thanks HN, you've managed to confuse me completely. This might be a sign I've been spending too much time here lately.

I'm in for $65, because I've run out of patience with everyone wisely nodding caution and not trying to solve the problem themselves. Like a lot of metabolically disadvantaged people, I feel betrayed and tossed off a cliff by a society that doesn't understand and doesn't care. You want to know how desperate we are? Read this:<p><a href="http://www.shaman-australis.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=35552" rel="nofollow">http://www.shaman-australis.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=35...</a><p>That's the next alternative if Soylent doesn't work. Now either offer a design for a <i>better</i> food replacement, or shut up and get out of the way.

Some people said that it was only a matter of time before this person started charging money for this crank product, and I guess this proves them right.<p>He's making a number of health claims on that page. I'm curious about the legality of doing so; it's not legal in the UK unless he meets some pretty strict criteria.<p>&#62; If not for this waste there would be plenty of food to adequately nourish everyone alive.<p>Waste food is a serious problem and something needs to be done. I'm not sure there's a connection between food waste and world hunger.<p>&#62; 2 million people are killed annually by smoke inhalation from indoor cooking stoves alone<p>This could be an interesting problem. Why do people use really inefficient dirty open fires to cook? Why aren't they using better stoves? It's not as if a stove requires huge amounts of resources.

&#62;Soylent is perfectly balanced and optimized for your body and lifestyle, meaning it automatically puts you at an optimal weight, makes you feel full, and improves your focus and cognition.<p>Citation needed. I'm a big fan of n=1, but making these kinds of claims supported by anecdote and then asking for money based on those claims is ridiculous.

I got curious about this statement: <i>2 million people are killed annually by smoke inhalation from indoor cooking stoves alone.</i> This is just wrong enough to be misleading, since that figure actually includes heating, not just cooking. <a href="http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs292/en/" rel="nofollow">http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs292/en/</a> So soylent wouldn't help in the cases where indoor pollution is caused by heating.

Limited market appeal (folks who eat to live vs live to eat) and it lacks the credibility of a clinical study done under the supervision of folks who have the experience to evaluate the results.<p>So in that way it is simply another "look, eating this probably won't kill you, at least not quickly." product. There are many of these introduced and produced every year.<p>That said, to the extent that this guy can get traction for his effectively artificial food, the big food companies will watch it and talk about it. If there is something to it they might add their own toe in the water, or not. Most recently they have been hammered pretty publicly about how their manufactured food products aren't really much food (see "In Defense of Food" as an example of the narrative)

It's crazy how strongly people react to the idea of this drink. It contains only ingredients that are found in other nutrients. That means the FDA will probably give it a stamp of approval without even giving it a second thought.<p>There's this idea that because we have such stringent laws governing our medicine, we probably have such laws governing food too. But the reality of it is that if you take a bunch of ingredients that have already been established in the market and you throw them together you're allowed to call it food and sell it in the supermarkets.<p>In a macabre way, if this drink _does_ seriously harm someone, and they sue these guys that would actually be a good thing, because these guys are doing nothing different from what the preprocessed food industry is doing. Except that the preprocessed food industry optimizes for minimal ingredient costs and maximal consumability, where Rob is optimizing Soylent for maximal ingredient coverage and minimal consumation need, the exact opposite! We might actually get some sane laws (like the rejected one that said food marketed for children should consist of at least 50% nutrients)<p>Before you question the integrity of this project, please consider that Rob himself has already been living almost exclusively for 4 months. No that does not mean this product is by all means safe or that you should replicate him without doubt, but it does mean he already put his <i>life</i> on the line for the idea of this product.<p>That being said, I do find it a bit disconcerting to see that all the cautionary language of his blog is gone in this marketing site. It wasn't a good idea to hire a sales person for this kind of project, he already has more initial backing than he should need in my opinion.

This <i>would</i> possibly interest me, but including nootropics without listing them seems incredibly scary. It's one thing to include all the normal vitamins and minerals your body needs, but to take it a step further and include mind-altering substances seems absurd and questionably legal.<p>Maybe by "nootropics" they just mean everyday vitamins that have been shown to benefit your brain, but that's certainly not what I think of when I hear that term. Then again, maybe there's somewhere online where they actually list what they're using, but I couldn't find any details on the campaign page.

Personally as a 20 something first worlder earning decent money in tech I am interested in this. So part of me wishes they'd kept the advertising focused on that. Because claiming to be able to tackle world hunger with this "long shelf life, easy to prepare, and efficient no waste" product is disingenuous unless they plan on lowering prices &#62; 10x the listed kickstarter rewards. I'm sorry white kids of America but world hunger is a little more complicated than just waiting for you to come along with a powder. Your product will not end subsistence farming. You want to know why? Take a look outside and around for a change, travel, or read for a MINUTE: as pointed out elsewhere "Almost half the world — over three billion people — live on less than $2.50 a day"[1] ($17.50 / week). Your $65/week product... not going to even register for them. So good luck, I mean it, I'm interested in this product because I kind of eat out too much and not well, and this can be a good product, but maybe reign in the marketing kids because it's sounding nearly offensively naive when you start talking about ending world hunger with this rich kids product for food.<p>[1] <a href="http://www.globalissues.org/article/26/poverty-facts-and-stats" rel="nofollow">http://www.globalissues.org/article/26/poverty-facts-and-sta...</a>

Without going on with the almost certainly absurd claim you can be perfectly healthy, indefinitely, eating one shake.. There does seem to be a lot of interest, I think mostly from people interested in the saving of time and still getting good nutrition.<p>To those people, I highly recommend green protein smoothies.<p>They aren't cheap, really, but they are fast and done right they taste good and will take an otherwise mediocre diet to better than 99% of people without much other change (I am not a doctor, just an observer).<p>Some fruit, some leafy greens, some nuts, optionally some protein powder (my favorite had been pea protein, but my nutritionist recommended alternating protein sources every few weeks of doing it regularly).<p>Adding in some thing like vitamineral green and you are really doing alright. Spending about 3-400 USD on a good blender and you can have an über healthy, delicious meal replacement in minutes with about 30 seconds of clean up.<p>A mediocre blender still make the experience less enjoyable when using nuts and tough greens like kale.<p>Expect an 800 calorie shake to cost maybe 3-5 bucks to put together depending on your tastes, whether you go organic, and access to produce.

It's a pity no one on the team has any experience in a relevant field, and the "Is it safe?" answer is absurd. You could say the same thing to deem cigarettes safe.

This is kind of what I wanted to accomplish by building Eat This Much[1], ideally making eating and staying healthy at the same time less of a chore.<p>I'm really on board with the idea, but what got me interested was the notion that it would be easy to adjust the formula to my needs, e.g. choose a different ratio of various powders if I want to gain weight, lose weight, or compensate for some genetic difference.<p>[1] <a href="http://www.eatthismuch.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.eatthismuch.com</a>

I think HN's hatred of Soylent has been increasing exponentially as we get closer to a mass-market release. What's with all the negativity? If you don't like it, don't buy it -- easy as that.<p>It may not be the perfect product, but at least it's pushing some boundaries. I, for one, am excited to get my hands on a batch and let the results speak for themselves.

"We have been testing Soylent on ourselves for several months and the data shows it to have a positive nutritional benefit."<p>No shit. Seriously, who is going to try this powder made by this twenty-somethings guys with no background in any kind of health nor nutrition studies.<p>It reminds me to the Power Balance scam <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_Balance" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_Balance</a>

I'm glad such eccentric projects are pursued – they're how progress happens – but it's still the case that...<p>(a) Both the 1973 Charlton Heston movie and mixed, some-negative health connotations of the word 'soy' make the chosen name for the product problematic.<p>(b) The argument for its safety – "We have been testing Soylent on ourselves for several months and the data shows it to have a positive nutritional benefit" – creates little confidence compared to thousands of years of alternate practice, and strong evidence the human system needs some variety/chaos for optimal health/resilience.

Looking forward to this. There has been a lot of FUD, and I think some of it is valid, so I'm choosing the 1 week supply option to give it a try. I'd like to replace 1 of my meals each day with this, I hate having to deal with cooking and cleaning up in small temporary apartments.

Would be nice if you put nutrition facts on the campaign page. I wouldn't buy without seeing those. Here is what I found ("What's In Soylent?"): <a href="http://robrhinehart.com/?p=424" rel="nofollow">http://robrhinehart.com/?p=424</a><p>The macronutrient breakdown based on calories per gram is 50% carbs, 13% protein, 37% fat, if I'm not mistaken. I'd rather have a bit more protein and a bit less fat, personally.

I'm actually really pissed off at this product -- as with many, I've had both high hopes and reservations since the start of this whole ordeal.<p>With me being a college student with a VERY limited budget I get very little nutrition that's needed for my body to operate normally. I was so turned on to this product because it was initially advertised to cost the creator between $50 and $100 per month. Now, all of a sudden it's going to cost me $230 just to get started.<p>It's starting to sound more and more like a scam; I'm pretty livid.

As a physician with a degree in biochemistry, I am no expert but will throw in a few thoughts.<p>1) All foods are broken down into their respective molecular constituents (free fatty acids, glucose, amino acids, etc) through a series of enzymatic reactions. These nutrients are ultimately absorbed through the wall of the bowel or what remains passes as feces. This is true whether you are eating lettuce, ribs, a slice of bread, or this soylent product.<p>2) Frankly, I see no difference in this product from any other meal replacement powder available in bulk at any nutrition store. If we ever see a nutrition label, I suspect it will look strikingly similar to Slim Fast.

Oh good, it has antioxidants! Which have been shown to actually increase mortality slightly when given to healthy people[1].<p>I really like the idea, but until they apply some real science to it, I'll pass.<p>[1] <a href="http://summaries.cochrane.org/CD007176/antioxidant-supplements-for-prevention-of-mortality-in-healthy-participants-and-patients-with-various-diseases" rel="nofollow">http://summaries.cochrane.org/CD007176/antioxidant-supplemen...</a>

Feels like they are jumping the gun in terms of saying this could help with malnutrition in developing countries. Starving and malnutrished people can't just drink a meal replacement shake and be fine, especially kids. There are many other factors that must be taken into consideration. For example see <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plumpy%27nut" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plumpy%27nut</a> . I saw this on 60 minutes a few years back.<p>"Plumpy'nut is a peanut-based paste in a plastic wrapper for treatment of severe acute malnutrition... They are also relatively high in calories, which means that a patient receives a lot of nutrition from small amounts, important because malnutrition shrinks the stomach."

While their high level goals (eliminate hunger, reduce stress on agricultural and environmental resources) are laudable, this project suffers from the same arrogance of doctors in the 1960s who said mother's milk was primitive and could be replaced by artificial formula.<p>Now, in hindsight, we know what a mistake that was, as natural breast milk contained compounds which decreased various cancer and health risks.<p>I cannot help but think they are going down the same road.

This went from "interesting self-hacking experiment worth watching" to " train wreck of a health and liability hazard" in a fairly short time.<p>Not good.

Still doesn't answer how this is much different than just another kind of diet shake.

Per "Poe's Law", I would not rule out the idea that this is an extended prank/art-project.<p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe%27s_law" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe%27s_law</a>

The most depressing thing about this whole thing is the alarmingly high number of commenters here who seem to not have the most basic grasp of how science works, and what types of evidence are necessary before something can be deemed safe.<p>Here is a hint, folks: it is called a random controlled trial. Until these Soylent guys conduct a few of those and show that their product is not only just better, but also safe for consumption, it needs to be dismissed and ignored.

How well does this stack up against the milk-and-potatoes diet?<p>According to the popular science/history book <i>1493</i>, it is more-or-less a complete diet in itself. The two datapoints it uses to back this up are a story about two Polish scientists who ate nothing but potatoes and milk (or milk products, like cheese and butter) for a year, and remained in perfect heath for the duration, and the claim that prior to the Potato Famine, 25% of the Irish population was already surviving on nothing but milk and potatoes indefinitely, and they were regarded as a healthy and hale race.<p>A 2000 calorie diet of milk and potatoes (4 cups 2% milk, 5.5 300g potatoes) costs around $65 / day. Preparation time involves as little as microwaving a potato and pouring a glass of milk.

I get that the name "Soylent" was originally coined in a book that did not involve cannibalism in any way, but it still seems like a very bad choice of name. "Soylent green is people" is much more well known than any allusion to <i>Make Room! Make Room!</i> can possibly be.

It's interesting to see everything went from supportive on soylent to very negative after they published this campaign. I wonder what has changed?

I can't help but feel that this is such an 'engineers' solution to something that isn't really a problem - whilst I agree that a cheap, reliable and efficient way to feed a lot of people is something that the world is sorely in need of, I can't understand why someone would opt for this through choice and not necessity.<p>Which is nothing more than a failure of my imagination, of course, and I'm not seriously suggesting that anyone who does is defective in any way, but I feel like most of life's greatest pleasures come directly from the preparation and consumption of food. To want to get rid of these pleasures in the name of efficiency is a strange argument to my mind.<p>I'm 100% behind the vat grown meat brigade on this one.

Rob has been testing (and modifying) Soylent for mere months. He has a bunch of human Guinea Pigs that have been testing various mixes for mere weeks. How is a Kickstarter-esque campaign the logical next step?<p>It sounds like the guys behind this are impatient, overconfident and reckless. Worse than that, they're preying on those caught up in how fashionable crowd-funding is these days. I doubt very much that a website like Kickstarter would actually get behind a project like this, which is why they've had to roll their own website.<p>If these guys had a background in Bromatology and did their due diligence before launching this campaign, I'd be skeptical. Just imagine how confident I am, given the reality.

I hope they eventually state all of the potential allergens that are in this. As I've gotten older I've become very sensitive to various foods (especially anything with lactose in it) and this sort of thing appeals to me, but if it had lactose in it, say, it could be.. interesting ;-) Ditto for people with peanut allergies and the like.

I've been following this for a while, and I'm excited to see it start to come together. I hope a lot of people aren't turned off by this pseudo Kickstarter, and wonder why Kickstarter turned them down in the first place.

Although I love the concept, backing a team that does not even have a single chemist or nutritionist in it is worrying.

I think the biggest issue I see here is that they are selling a dietary supplement and they don't have a licensed or even a trained nutritionist or doctor on their startup team.<p>That's pretty scary to me. Who is the person who is certifying this as safe for meal replacement?<p>Where is the clinical study that was done before this was released to people?

I truly hope this is successful, not in the sense that these guys monetize it and become millionaires, but that the world in general does need a way to supplement our diets in a more sustainable way.<p>What irks me though, is the lack of a true clinical trial.<p>This fundraising effort is for the supplement itself when it really should be for clinical trials to prove the stuff is safe and works.<p>Perhaps they are scared of the results, or perhaps they really believe in their product, either way this is in the wrong direction and people COULD get hurt.

The logo seems to be a benzene ring. When I see that I think "poison" not "health"

I've been following the Soylent articles since they were posted and have been pretty interested in it. Definitely going to have to give thought to backing this.

Although some of the lofty stated goals of this project seem commendable, this is one of the worst ideas I have heard in a long time. I can't tell if it's a joke, but I hope that it is.

Yes, because a handful of smiley tech nerd kids know nutrition better than professional researchers with decades of experience, backed by hundreds of millions of dollars annually.

Do they really expect to market this without even listing whats in that thing? And why does not a single person in their team have any credentials in the area whatsoever?

Anyone ever heard of the kickstarter clone they are using? <a href="http://www.crowdhoster.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.crowdhoster.com/</a><p>it seems to just be a implementation of Selfstarter with a backend to process payments, but at the same time they boast "Free to use"... how can a payment processing be free?

I'm extremely interested in this...concept.<p>But for someone trying to hack nutrition this way, you would think they would open the ingredients, or at least offer research sources.<p>Knowing the contents of Soylent isn't going to stop anyone from buying it (convenience), but it would allow people to understand some of these bold claims.

What does Soylent taste like? What does "the body doesn't have to get rid of unused waste" mean? I'm reminded of the episode of <i>Seinfeld</i> where Kramer goes on an all-yogurt diet for a week. :\<p>Also, it's a little disconcerting when the only founder with any food or biotech background is the sales guy.

Out of curiosity, if Soylent really does provide every nutrient the body requires, would that mean a user would no longer have to defecate?<p>My reasoning is if every nutrient is absorbed and used, there is no physical waste left, and all toxins and byproducts would be expelled through urine.

I believe that Soylent uses Whey protein, because of common allergies to Soy protein... which is amusing, since an intolerance to milk protein runs in my family, and appears to be quite common too.<p>In fact, an extremely common request of clinical nutritionists is for a non-diary product, especially for ones aimed at children.<p>I strongly urge Soylent to try and gain the help of someone with experience within the established industry and get their assistance. Whilst us hackers might be happy to take the risk at this stage, someone with industry experience and knowledge of product development and production would bring invaluable skill. Plus, they'd be best placed to answer any questions about FDA issues, etc<p>Disclaimer: I have a family member who works in this field

I'm going to put $65 up for this as I've been eager to try Soylent since it first popped up on HN.<p>Clearly this is a very controversial topic, but the general attitude for most of the supporters (myself included) appears to be that if no serious negative effects have been exposed from consuming Soylent in three months, it must be safe to <i>try</i>.<p>Is there any possibility that consuming Soylent for a while (say, a week to a month) and then stopping cold-turkey could be significantly harmful to one's digestion? Maybe? I guess we'll find out when the first round of supplies is consumed.<p>Another thing, props on the campaign and having already been funded, but let's hope the next promo video does less to seem like a run-of-the-mill infomercial... :\

A request for those who might go on the Soylent diet, starting in july (a month before the estimated shipping date), during your Soylent diet:<p><pre><code> 1. Record your current height 2. Record daily: weight + timestamp, sleep start time, sleep stop time, food consumption (http://www.livestrong.com/thedailyplate/ perhaps to help or alternatives), exercise, and how you feel physically (tired, energetic, sleepy...). 3. Blog about your experience and contribute the data to science. </code></pre> No point in bashing or hyping this up, we'll have some data points in a few months.<p>Disclaimer: I will not be participating in this experiment, but am interested in the results. =D

<i>Is soylent vegan available yet?</i><p><i>Not yet. This first run will be the regular vegetarian soylent, but it is lactose free, kosher, halal, and absent of all known allergens</i><p>I believe soy is an allergy to some people. What does "absent of all known allergens" mean then?

I can't believe this is anything other than a carefully constructed joke.<p>I guess that a few months from now we'll see a New York Times article explaining how a fake startup with a fake product managed to raise seed capital.

I'm calling it: Soylent is the Pets.com of this investment cycle. Ironically dog food is probably more nutritionally balanced than Soylent, which is almost beyond parody.

If you want to see why this is a terrible idea if you care about your health, with plenty of cites to peer-reviewed science, read "In Defense of Food" by Michael Pollan.

If any of you are foolhardy enough to try this stuff, please please please get your physician to do a full workup before, and do regular repeat checkups.

You know, some of the things that ended up being super successful (Velcro, shopping carts) are the things that a whole bunch of people initially panned and rejected.<p>I feel pretty confident that this is the case right now. A lot of people here are shitting on these guys for creating something that completely contradicts our notion of nutrition. I for one, support this new venture and wish them the best of luck.

Let's stop and think. This is a <i>good thing</i>. The truth is, none of us know whether or not it's snake oil. Just because we don't have enough information to prove it isn't a farce (besides the founders' insistence on their good health), does not mean we have enough information to prove that it is. Is it dangerous? <i>Highly</i> unlikely. The vast majority of early adopters will probably be people at least somewhat characteristic of this community, meaning smart enough to know that if something makes you feel awful, you should probably stop eating it. If you bought a month's supply, maybe you get burned a few hundred bucks and it wasn't the best decision. If you bought a week's supply, you tried it for a few days and felt terrible, just make the intelligent decision and stop eating it (or drinking or whatever the process of consumption should be called). Whether or not the people behind this are looking out for everyone else, we don't know. But let's be honest, neither is McDonald's or even the businesses stocking microwave dinners in grocery stores. They're in it to make a profit, not to fill you with the proper nutrition. Frankly, the goal of many of the businesses in the food industry is to cause customers to crave the product, often at the expense of nutrition (i.e. by loading with sugar, conditioning the brain to crave more). To say that they know better than these 20-somethings who have been collecting some actual data besides "hm, tastes good" is exceptionally naive. Your average gym rat eats far healthier than a microwave dinner diet. This could be bad. But none of us have the data to prove it. Until then, I'm hopeful. Innovation in this industry is long overdue. To say that these 'kids' are too young or inexperienced to make a real innovation and prove us all wrong, is a shame, especially in this community. Is it perfect for everyone? Doubtful. Is it better, on average, than the diet many of us are consuming? Well, that just might be true. Who are we to say it isn't?

Is it me or is the nutritional breakdown of the drink not listed anywhere?

&#62; vegan<p>I don't even really believe soylent is legit, but it's interesting enough to plunk down money for. However, this is kinda a deal-breaker.<p>How exactly is Soylent currently not vegan?<p>EDIT: Re-reading <a href="http://robrhinehart.com/?p=424" rel="nofollow">http://robrhinehart.com/?p=424</a> , it's implied that this uses whey protein. I've used hemp protein rather than whey before.<p>Also, it'd be green then. ;)

I have a soylent-like thing that I've started eating, and I've personally found the impact to be wonderful. It's arguably easier, and it's potentially healthier.<p>It is extremely inexpensive, delicious, vegetarian/vegan-if-eggs-are-omitted, flexible, nutrient rich, high in fiber, high in good fats, relatively "slow-cal"/low glycemic index, wheat gluten-free, protein rich, easy to digest, and very quick to prepare.<p>Pre-cooked in large quantity weekly/every-two-weeks:<p>- quinoa (2 minutes total prep time, in a large cheap rice cooker) - sweet potatoes (4 minutes total prep time -- simply baked in foil 30 mins to a side at 425 F) - beans (I do black beans, Mexican style -- this can take a fair bit longer, but they're super tasty, and can last 2-3 weeks if portions are frozen)<p>In the morning ...<p>Ingredients - olive oil (1/4 to 1/2 a cup) - pre-cooked quinoa (3/4 - 1.5 cups) - pre-cooked sweet potato (1/2 - 1 cup) - pre-cooked beans (1/2 - 1 cup) - eggs (1-4) - greens (kale/spinach/chard/whatever) - salt and peper - hot sauce!!<p>I pour the olive oil in a large cast iron skillet (cast iron is the best!). I then add the cooked quinoa and fry at high heat for maybe five minutes -- the quinoa should absorb most of the oil (there should be no smoking or anything!).<p>Then I add some beans and some sweet potato (skins on! and, for the last few mornings I haven't had beans so it's been sweet potato only) and mix it all up. Then comes some chopped up vegetables (kale/spinach/chard). When the vegetables are 70% cooked or so I add one to four eggs (this morning it was four). I mix the eggs in with the rest of the hot conglomeration and cook them very briefly, being careful to avoid having them spend too much time on the hot skillet (which makes them rubbery).<p>I then put the hot mess into a bowl. If I have avocados (as I do now) I chop one up and mix it with some salt and lemon juice and put it on top of everything. I usually douse it all with hot sauce, repeatedly.<p>I estimate that my breakfasts are typically between 1800 and 2800 calories, though some days (like today) I only get through a part of it, in which case I save it for later. If I get through it all, it usually means I don't have to worry about eating anything more than a snack at dinner time. This has the benefit of avoiding the afternoon food-coma caused by lunch.<p>I wash the meal down with some homemade carrot-ginger-apple-greens-beet juice (mixed in with a bit of creatine).

I really hope they're able to ship to Canada soon. :( I just donated $50 to the cause until then.<p>I believe in the general cause so much, that even if there's only 1% something good will come out of this particular project, I'll happily take that chance.

Only one individual and only three months is far from enough to claim that works. I bet you can go better (and safer!) with military rations. Pretty sure the army/air force would have those experiments nailed down in the 50'

"... antioxidants, probiotics, and nootropics. It's everything the body needs." - Soylent video<p>"It's a single cell protein combined with synthetic aminos, vitamins, and minerals. Everything the body needs." - from The Matrix

Anyone else pick up on the fact that they claim to be allergen free? They use whey protein in the drink, so way are they even close to allergen free.<p>They also have a poor understanding of what constitutes an allergen.

This is an interesting parallel to another article on the front-page right now:<p><a href="https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5743419" rel="nofollow">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5743419</a>

I've started a wiki page on Slant.co for people to outline the main arguments why Soylent may or may not be healthy since these threads can be very hard to follow all the great discussion going back and forth!<p>Please help me flesh it out so it can help people come to their own conclusion about Soylent's safety: <a href="http://www.slant.co/topics/695/~is-it-safe-to-replace-my-diet-with-soylent" rel="nofollow">http://www.slant.co/topics/695/~is-it-safe-to-replace-my-die...</a>

STILL sticking with that absolutely horrific name, I see? You should seriously give out DVDs of the film as rewards.<p>How about a sleeping pill named Quietus[1]?<p>[1] Children of Men reference, film version

I personally don't find the promises hard to believe. Losing or maintaining weight is all about energy in/energy out. If you keep a consistent kcal intake controlling weight will be easy. For the cognitive effects it's easy to understand once you realise how taxing it is to digest food. Anyone who has been fasting or been on a lean diet knows that it makes you much more vibrant and sharp.

Let people take risks. They can die if they'd like.

Ever since I heard about this project I've been trying to make my own version.<p>I've found it's surprisingly hard to make something healthy that doesn't make me gag. So far I tried egg protein powder mixed with chia seeds, olive oil, plain yogurt and a banana.<p>I'm now thinking I'd be better off with something solid that I could eat on the go. I haven't seen a good recipe though.

The launch of this campaign is about a month and a half late. It would have been much more appropriate to launch on April 1st.

Relevant XKCD (the current one!) <a href="http://xkcd.com/1215/" rel="nofollow">http://xkcd.com/1215/</a>

I don't understand why they had to name their product "Soylent". It doesn't even contain soy. Many people avoid soy products and/or have negative associations with it (GMO, Monsanto, phytoestrogens, allergy).<p>Why would you alienate potential customers with a product name that beings with "Soy"?

This is poorly motivated:<p>1. I can make a Hot Pocket in about 3 minutes. While the microwave is running I can browse my email on my cellphone etc...<p>2. Some instant food is unhealthy, perhaps healthy instant food is market for disruption?<p>3. Are we living in a society where people can't stop for 3 minutes to grab a bite to eat!?

Aside from the possible health issues, I'm kind of disappointed with the price. It's pretty expensive!

I apologize for behaving badly and deleting most of my posts. I've cooled off now, but am still very concerned for people being taken in by this.<p>This gif pretty much sums up my feelings on the matter: <a href="http://i.imgur.com/twkp3So.gif" rel="nofollow">http://i.imgur.com/twkp3So.gif</a>

If Soylent actually takes off and becomes popular (I really hope it doesn't btw. See my other comment for why), I wouldn't be surprised if some of the big food companies come down on them really hard. I mean, just imagine what this product would do to the food industry.

Guys, do not worry. When they will raise enough money, they will fund 10 or even 100 appropriate researches that will prove the credibility, safety and superiority of this product to natural food. And everything will be ok. They have been doing that for ages.

Startup idea: Soylent Restaurant.<p>Only one item on the menu. No need for a kitchen or trained chefs. I'll be rich!

I'm surprised this is even legal.

LCHF. <a href="http://www.kostdoktorn.se" rel="nofollow">http://www.kostdoktorn.se</a> or <a href="http://www.dietdoctor.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.dietdoctor.com</a><p>Eat till you are full. Normalise your weight.

Does anybody know about international exporting restrictions for goods such as this? My freight forwarder restricts food and beverage, but not sure if it's technically classified as such?

- I don't care how much money these guys make out of this<p>- I don't care what they do to their own bodies<p>- I do care that they don't have any rigorous testing done before offering this to the public without disclaimers.

TL;DR The guy's marketing is questionable, he makes misleading claims, hasn't done proper testing but the product or a spin-off still has the potential to be useful to many people.

I'm amazed the key question hasn't been asked or answered yet:<p>Does it taste good?

Is Soylent better for me than carrot juice, oatmeal and eggs? Now I just chose three random foodstuffs, but at least I know what they are and what they contain.

Ok, so just to be clear... this is real? And not an elaborate Charlton Heston joke? Well color me surprised that... they used the name Soylent.

www.soylent.me doesn't work.<p><a href="http://www.downforeveryoneorjustme.com/www.soylent.me" rel="nofollow">http://www.downforeveryoneorjustme.com/www.soylent.me</a>

Hilarious. After 3 years and 2M$ spend they will reinvent the bread. Now we only need similar startup to reinvent the water and maybe air :-)

Has it been vetted by FDA? What is the long term effect of having a supplement instead of regular food? Where is the controlled trial data?

Assuming this product is made from Soy (ingredients aren't listed), I would caution any male from inducing it in large quantities.

What, it's only at version 0.6!? I'll usually wait until my food at least matures to version 1.0.

'Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants.'<p>If only this genius and effort behind 'soylent' were put to good use.

Is it just me, or can you barely hear the guys on the video? They need a microphone.

"I ran 3.14 miles non-stop. This is an irrational improvement."<p>[checks date]. Late for April Fools.

The founder needs a public speaking class. He talks like Dexter.

It's a real bummer that they don't send it anywhere outside US

Why was this flagged? 123pts at 2 hours should not place 39th?

You guys are f* crazy. This has a place in the world because many people don't know how to eat or don't even know what is good food. Free piece of advice: Move to a southern country and spend less money in health treatments

1:07 "no waste" -- did he just say he doesn't poop anymore?

guys guys guys. . .<p>"It's made of people."<p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Sp-VFBbjpE" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Sp-VFBbjpE</a><p>This is marketing genius

I had a feeling this wouldn't hit Kickstarter.

Ignorant crooks wanting to make a quick buck.

When will the green version come out?

The audio on their video is sooo bad!

Is crowdhoster trustworthy?

is it people?

does soylent expire?

Most people have already screwed themselves with the traditional "American" diet. I can see why this would be enticing. I, for one, prefer raw food - vegetables and animals I can hunt myself (when I can). I wouldn't call it Paleo - I would call it NORMAL EATING. I also run every day and do some moderate lifting every other day with yoga every night. I feel great, actually, and don't need something that looks like raw cocaine to put in my body. I don't trust food bought from the internet, no matter how it looks or what the reviews are. Farmer's markets are where its at - buy local and buy raw, everything else is a waste of time.

Ugh, every discussion about soylent follows the same pattern.<p>person #1: But he hasn't proven it's safe!<p>person #2: But you haven't proven that it isn't!<p>person #1: But he doesn't have a PhD or any qualifications in food science!<p>person #2: But you don't either! And anyway the real experts admit they don't know what they're doing anyway. The fake experts are busy pushing colon cleanse products and miracle diets.<p>person #1: But he's playing with people's lives! Think of the children!<p>person #2: But so are the guys who invented the Doritos taco shell, the twinkie, and the super-sized french fries. Why the double standard?<p>How about injecting some reality into this debate and admitting that <i>nobody</i> is going to actually eat nothing but soylent every day. OK, maybe possibly the original inventor will stick to it for a while, but I can't imagine anyone else possibly doing this. Most Americans can barely make it between meals without grabbing a snack. Do you really think someone is going to eat nothing but green snot for a year? All these arguments are irrelevant, really.

Good god, $184k as of this writing. Are people retarded?