Hacker News Reader

Comment by mattzito | Hacker News Reader

The thing that bothers me about Soylent is the arrogance that the incredibly complex interplay of how the food we eat interacts with our body can be distilled down to a simple formula - X g protein/kg bodyweight, etc.

We still don't directly understand how certain vitamins may interact with each other, how much the ratios of Omega-3s to Omega-6s affect overall health, whether there might be other chemicals that affect overall longevity and health, and so on.

I understand convenience, but why should we think we've "cracked the code" of the totality of nutrition?

View on HN

> I understand convenience, but why should we think we've "cracked the code" of the totality of nutrition?

I don't think Rob and is collaborators are making that claim at all. From the OP:

"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."

He clearly states that they are making no claim to providing the ideal diet. They are simply on a mission to do something better than we have. I cannot predict the future so it's possible that he and his partners get rich and stop trying to improve the formula.

I would hope that instead they continue their research and further refine their formula over time and science finds out more about our bodies and their necessary nutrients.

I understand, but from the soylent webpage:

"What if you never had to worry about food again?

For many people, on many occasions, food is a hassle, especially when trying to eat well. Suppose we had a default meal that was the nutritional equivalent of water: cheap, healthy, convenient and ubiquitous. Soylent will be personalized for different body types and customizable based on individual goals. It allows one to enjoy the health benefits of a well balanced diet with less effort and cost."

That's very different than things like Ensure, where they talk about how it's an adjunct to regular eating.

They're making the claim that food can be entirely replaced by Soylent.

> They're making the claim that food can be entirely replaced by Soylent

I don't see where, in this quote, that claim is made. The claim is made that you wouldn't have to _worry_ about food. That is, for the meals where the only concern is sustenance (i.e. the only meals you actually worry about), Soylent offers a "worry-free" approach. There's meals that you eat for culture, enjoyment, or something other than sustenance, but these don't involve worry.

That reads to me as more of a vision statement, not a claim they're currently making about their product. Maybe I'm being overly charitable.

As a vision statement, it seems fine. Google hasn't yet "organized the world's information", just a lot of it - occasionally we still need to resort to other means.

>I don't think Rob and is collaborators are making that claim at all.

Perhaps they have stopped, but they certainly were making that claim when they were asking for money. This is what they once said on the crowdfunding site (emphasis mine):

>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.

I was pretty upset at that claim. I think some of Tim Ferriss's statements are directed at those kinds of marketing claims specifically. Maybe they have backed off on that?

... Did you read the article? He addresses this directly.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com