I'm worried about using Isomaltulose as a main carb


At the Soylent homepage, they show Soylent’s main ingredients for macro nurients with pictures. Soy protein, canola oil, Isomaltulose. And I am worried about using Isomaltulose as a main carb.

Unlike the usual main carb we would eat when not on soylent, Isomaltulose is half glucose and half fructose.

While replacing table sugar(sucrose) with Isomaltulose is not only fine but even healthy, replacing main carb (probably starch, which is what we would usually consume as a main carb source) to Isomaltulose means you consume your carbohydrate half fructose.

Whereas glucose is a final product ready for your cells to use, only liver can break down fructose. Thus every fructose you consume goes straight to your liver. In your liver, excessive fructose easily turns into lipid for storage which makes you fat and can cause nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. This is just a fraction of what excessive fructose can do. You can just google the word fructose and find half of the results are about how fructose can be bad for your health. The following is an excerpt from what I found.

"Virtually every cell in the body can use glucose for energy. In contrast, only liver cells break down fructose. What happens to fructose inside liver cells is complicated. One of the end products is triglyceride, a form of fat. Uric acid and free radicals are also formed.

None of this is good. Triglycerides can build up in liver cells and damage liver function. Triglycerides released into the bloodstream can contribute to the growth of fat-filled plaque inside artery walls. Free radicals (also called reactive oxygen species) can damage cell structures, enzymes, and even genes. Uric acid can turn off production of nitric oxide, a substance that helps protect artery walls from damage. Another effect of high fructose intake is insulin resistance, a precursor to diabetes."

[spoiler]According to this writing, the writer says today’s 55 gram of average fructose intake of americans is worrisome. And since you consume 185 grams of total carbs a day on a full Soylent diet, making roughly half of that fructose is very far from healthy.

Isomaltulose is excellent when using them as sugar replacement since it is really low on GI index, but using them as main carb for our body and taking half of your carbohydrate as fructose is a huge mistake.[/spoiler]

---------------------------> forget that, I got it wrong. I naturally assumed maltodextrin consists only small part of Soylent’s carbohydrate. Because isomaltulose is one of the four “Carefully selected ingredients” posted on product introduction page with big pictures representing three macro nutrients. But it turns out there is more maltodextrin than isomaltulose. I guess it would be more appropriate to put maltodextrin in that “Carefully selected ingredients” instead of isomaltulose.


Importantly, there’s also maltodextrin in higher quantities than isomaltulose, so of the 185g of carbs in soylent, at most 46.25g of that is composed of fructose (assuming half of isomaltulose is fructose), which is less than the average US intake as you say.

In addition to all that though, this study looks at the long-term effects of isomaltulose and doesn’t find anything concerning.


Importantly, there’s also maltodextrin in higher quantities than isomaltulose

Is that true? I naturally assumed maltodextrin consists only small part of Soylent’s carbohydrate. Because isomaltulose is one of the four “Carefully selected ingredients” posted on product introduction page with big pictures representing three macro nutrients. I guess it would be more appropriate to put maltodextrin in that “Carefully selected ingredients” instead of isomaltulose.

I will carefully have a look at that study tomorrow, I think it will take much time due to my poor english though :sob:


Yeah, though maltodextrin is extremely high GI and very cheap so they don’t want to label it too prominently I’d assume.

Ingredients lists are always done in mass order, with the first listed ingredient composing the most of the recipe by mass. So when you look at the 1.8 or the 2.0 nutritional information and see maltodextrin listed above isomaltulose, it means the recipes contain more maltodextrin than isomaltulose.

Yeah no rush, I saw it linked in another discourse thread on the topic and just verified the conclusion as opposed to reading the whole study, so I can’t say I’ve read the whole thing either!


If that’s the case in every country, I think I’ll consider going to Jimmy Joy. The first thing in the list is oatmeal which I know is far better than maltodextrin.


Whilst this is true, bear in mind that oatmeal is only ~60% carb, whilst both maltodextrin and isomaltulose are both 100% carb.

This is important because Jimmy Joy’s second ingredient is their vitamin mix, which they decide to include maltodextrin in. Maltodextrin will take up the vast majority of the weight of that mix, simply because micronutrients are generally fairly lightweight.

However, we don’t need to do any calculations to work out the amount of maltodextrin in Jimmy Joy fortunately - we know from this forum post from one of their workers that Jimmy Joy has approximately 25% of its calories coming from maltodextrin. Three servings is 2112 calories (three sets of 704 calories), of which ~25%, or ~528 calories, are coming from maltodextrin. As a pure carb with no fibre, maltodextrin has 4 calories per gram, so must have ~132 grams of maltodextrin. This is more than Soylent I believe.


Thank you for your help GenesisFoodSolutions!
I will cafefully consider what you’ve said choosing what goes in my body.


A serving of Soylent has less fructose and more fiber than half a small apple. I don’t have my sources on me at the moment but I can probably find them tomorrow.

The GI and GL for previous versions of Soylent have been moderate at worst.



Can we get the GI and GL of 1.8? Your FAQs seem to be out of date by 2 versions. Can we also have the amount of isomaltulose in 1.8?


I asked joylent several times how much maltodextrine their product has and, believe it or not, they said they didn’t know. Consequently, I didn’t buy it.


As per one of their representative’s posts on their forum, about 25% of calories.


Wow… that makes me speechless… even somewhat scary.
Guess there is no perfect -lent product.


The person answering the email said they didn’t know. I find it hard to believe that there isn’t a very specific recipe used to make the product with exact quantities of each ingredient used. They may just not want the general public to know the specifics of their product.


The closest, based on micronutrient mix and hypoallergenic nature, are Super Body Fuel’s products.


Fructose isn’t bad for you. It’s simply the type of sugar that fruit produces.

Also, I’m working on my second 30 day soylent challenge and both times I’ve lost a lot of fat. So clearly unintentionally gaining fat isn’t a problem.


If you’re concerned about maltodextrin, Rob had an interesting response in a post, which I’ve pasted below. Judging maltodextrin broadly appears to be a bit too general to be constructive.

"Maltodextrin is a category, not a chemical. There are different DE (dextrose equivalent) values. Longer chains take longer to break down and taste less sweet. We use a low DE version. The source matters as well. Corn, rice, and tapioca maltodextrin have different ratios of (1->4) and (1->6) glycosidic bonds. More of the latter takes longer to break down. Corn is faster than rice which is faster than tapioca. We use only tapioca maltodextrin, which is more expensive than corn.

This is still faster than oat powder. We use about 2/3 slow carbs 1/3 tapioca maltodextrin which I’d say is ‘medium’. We are currently running tests to verify our overall GI but it already looks to be quite low"


I am so glad you made this post. I couldn’t explain my muscle cramping and now I know why. I can’t have fructose! I never realized this was in soylent. I’m also gaining weight at an alarming rate. I haven’t been able to figure it all out. The only thing different in my life is Soylent.
I’ll have to discontinue using it before I end up obese with serious muscle problems.


Of course I know fructose is not some kind of poison, fructose is widely present at natural foods.

My point was that fructose can be bad if you take this “as a main carb source” instead of glucose.

Plz read all my writing.

But none of this matters now because now I know there’s only small amount of isomaltulose in Soylent.

I really look forward to your challenge, I’ll definately check it out :slight_smile:


I say the same thing about soy as a protein source, but nobody cares. Corn & Soy are too heavily subsidized, making them too cheap for Rosa Foods to want to replace. They tried Algae, since its easy enough for them to produce, cutting out the need for a supplier, but there were too many complaints.


A bottle of 2.0 has only 400 calories and 9 grams of carbs, of which only a fraction is fructose. You say that while drinking Soylent you are “gaining weight at an alarming weight” and you are concerned that it will cause you to become obese. Dare I ask, exactly how much of this product are you drinking every day?