If Soylent is one end of the nutrition spectrum


#1

If Soylent is one end of the nutrition spectrum…

…then this is definitely at the other end. (the bad end)

Happy St. Patrick’s Day.

5740 calories
805 g sugar
161 g fat
0 nutrients or nutritional value

All at once.


#2

Oh my goodness… I can only imagine the sugar crash that would result from this… Soylent has spoiled me in this regard. I hardly ever do lines of sugar anymore.


#3

Mmmmmm diabetes :smile:


#4

Apparently, the guy is a professional eater and does all kinds of challenges. (Some up over 10,000 calories in a sitting)

I can’t believe that he is so skinny and hasn’t died yet.


#5

lol, he probably doesn’t eat for a week after these challenges.

I can’t believe his constitution to handle all this food at once. Dear lord…

He should do a 10,000 calorie Soylent challenge :smiling_imp:


#6

Hah! Reminds me of this 24 000 calorie challenge.


#7

Professional competitive eaters typically regurgitate, rather than digesting all the stuff they eat.

The stomach is usually trained with water - quickly drinking very large amounts of water to stretch the stomach, and regurgitating it, and then repeating. Keeps the stomach muscle flexible, and able to expand a great deal. Over time, the stomach grows.

The other part of the training is learning to deal with how to physically eat different foods quickly. Kobayashi was famous for being the first to start dissecting this part of the process; he was the first pro hotdog eater to pull the dogs out of the buns to eat separately - and he dunked the buns in a cup of water to wet them. The dryness of the buns was the biggest impediment to eating more of them per minute.


#8

I think the opposite end would be water.

With a pinch of arsenic.


#9

So, I’m sort of a fan of “competitive eating.” And Matt Stonie is one of my heroes, because he holds the world record in bacon (182 strips in 5 minutes). :pig:

Because competitive eaters cram so many calories two or three times a month, their diet is usually pretty good outside the eating circuit. Most exercise a lot also. And staying thin gives them a competitive edge. Because the stomach expands as it fills, skinny eaters have less fat in the abdomen for the expanding stomach to push against. This results in thinner competitive eaters having more room in their stomachs.

I’m a lesser person for knowing this…


#10

That makes sense. I just watched a video of another youtube eater and it seems they tend regurgitate after these challenges. I could imagine if he did digest a lot of it that they typically wouldn’t for a while… I mean; I know I wouldn’t.


#11

Well, that is very interesting. Just glancing over all the videos he does, it seems like he does this quite often. (Even going to like all-you-can eat shrimp at Red Lobsters and things like that.)
There may be a genetic predisposition to making him good at this type of thing.


#12

He takes suggestions from people and does what they suggest in a video. Maybe someone should ask him.


#13

I don’t think I could get through 3 of these. Thats a lot of sweetness to get through in one sitting :open_mouth:


#14

[citation needed]

A 12 OZ shake has 512 calories.
Source:
http://www.mcdonalds.com/getnutrition/itemDetailInfo.do?item=793&showFlyOut=no&countryCode=US&liveData=true

Assuming those six shakes are 22 ounces, then ALL OF THEM COMBINED is 5178 calories. Not a single shake.
a Single shake is more like 1000 calories – STILL HORRIBLE, but not as bad as your misleading post.


#15

The 22 oz McDonald’s Shamrock Shake is 820 calories:
http://www.mcdonalds.com/getnutrition/itemDetailInfo.do?item=793&reverseTrackedItemId=795&showFlyOut=no&countryCode=US&liveData=true&mode=recalculate

He had 7 of them.

820 x 7 = 5740

Math is your friend. It was not misleading. Don’t be a troll.


#16

Here is Stonie taking down 120 twinkies in 6 minutes: