I love food. I enjoy buying it, cooking it, growing it, and, best of all, eating it. So when I first heard of Soylent, a food replacement product, I imagined living a life in which dinner meant combining a white powder with water. A dystopia for me is an apparent utopia for the 6,000-plus people who gave nearly $800,000 to successfully fund Soylent's crowdfunding campaign.
The idea of living without food isn't just now becoming popular (though I've been seeing plenty of news stories on the subject recently). Forty years ago the science fiction movie Soylent Green, from which the product is undoubtedly named, explored a world in which everyone lives on highly processed wafers. (As far as we can tell Soylent is not people.)
The fact that one product that claims to give you all the nutrition you could ever need is becoming a reality is disturbing to me, but Soylent gives some convincing reasons why it could be a good thing. Their main argument is that it takes less time and effort to get the nutrition you need. For those of you who don't have a work-life balance, this could come in handy. Plus, the creators argue, you could save money on food costs. And then they make the environmental case: it doesn't go bad for years, and would help cut down food waste and reduce food transportation costs. Here are the inventors making their case:
And here's what's in it "loosely based off the recommendations of the FDA."
So what's it like to live exclusively on Soylent? The Register tried it for a week. Here's their take:
Though our week with Soylent has lessened our initial crushing cynicism, we'll wait for the results of sustained academic study before we pass judgement on it as an actual meal replacement. On the other hand, we've just spent a week on it and didn't lose weight, didn't go crackers, and haven't felt hungry (though we did lust after typical food).
Soylent is definitely on to something here. A big part of the food industry is aimed at getting people to eat food more efficiently with highly processed on-the-go items that aren't all that good or good for us. So it helps me to think of Soylent not as a food replacement but a supplement, and replacement for those fast food items. And for people forced on to a liquid diet for medical reasons or otherwise, this could be extremely useful. Maybe there is a place for Soylent in our food future, alongside the 3D printed pizza, but not instead of it.
Woww!!! I totally got it in a well manner. Thanks keep on. http://outbacksavings.com
Nothing new here. My wife has been selling a meal replacement shake that was developed by real nutritionists and physiologists and has been on the market for over 20 years. It has actual FDA approval (you can check) and is used by Olympic athletes (you can check). Not only can you buy from her, you can sell it yourself and make oodles of cash - is Rob offering you that chance? http://www.allsports.usana.com
When we learned that this idea received nearly 800k in funding, we weren't so much surprised as disappointed. So we had to pen a response as to why this stuff is so awfully dangerous. It's titled Soylent Subterfuge: When a Bad Joke Turns into a Business http://www.priceplow.com/blog/soylent-subterfuge
This product doesn't make sense where food is plentiful and eaten to be enjoyed. There are other places on our planet where food, refrigeration, and cooking fuel is scarce and I think they might "enjoy" not starving, plus if it combats malnutrition diseases that would be another plus.
Soylent Green was also crowdsourced.
As the movies was from 1973 [b](http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0070723/?ref_=sr_2)[/b], name recognition may [b]NOT[/b] be a factor. Recent studies I have read have indicated that humans are losing certain abilities, such as the number of teeth (already we don't need our "wisdom teeth"), our appendix has been vestigal for over 150 years, and even our brain capacity (volume) is less than it was 200 years ago! Doctors are always reminding us to "eat more healthy food" or to "get more fiber" in our diets, yet this product would do the opposite! One organism that I can think of "slurps" up its food - - the common [b]house fly![/b] Maybe as a SUPPLEMENT to normal food but never - [b][i]NEVER[/i][/b] - as an "only" food!
the name has to go.
... do you need before "eating people" becomes acceptable? Soylent Green was feeding grandpa into a grinder and coming out with wafers that were both nutritious AND delicious -- not something that's socially acceptable today. What about feeding grandpa into the grinder and using the result t compost the fields that you use to grow your delicious and nutritious wafers? Or is something like that acceptable only when it's someone ELSE'S grandparent?
Regardless of the merits -- or lack-thereof -- of the product, the science fiction horror story name is horrifying. Maybe I'm wrong... maybe "name recognition" will guarantee its success.
It may not be people, but it's not food. And some of us are old enough to remember the movie. Who would name their company Soylent? Food was made from dead people. I thought GMO's were horrible...this might take the cake.
So, is this an early April 1st entry? Ummm.... so how old to be sent to the happy hunting ground and be recycled?
The super long shelf life and easy preparation will make it ideal for stocking your zombie apocalypse survival shelter.
Who wants to eat a product that will make them think of cannibalism? Seriously, the name has to go.
Soylent Green. :)
ROTFL