Macronutrients - 40% Fat


Version 1.5 has 40% fat, 15% protein, and 45% carbs. These percentages haven’t changed much over the versions, but I’m curious the general opinion. 40% fat seems very high and 15% protein very low.

What’s the logic behind these numbers?


The latest research, I guess.

It’ll change again, eventually. Never seems to be a static thing for too long.


1.5 has 80g of protein per bag. This is enough for up to a 220lb. sedentary human. Soylent is not designed or intended for athletes.

As for the fat content there really is no scientific/health reason to limit unsaturated fats. The lions share of the fat in 1.5 is monounsaturated fat. Diets high in monounsaturated fat have been shown to raise good cholesterol. The AHA recommends everyone should keep their saturated fat intake under 7% of calories and anyone needing to lower their bad cholesterol should keep it under 5-6%. 1.5 has 4.5% of its calories coming from saturated fat.

The current macros are quite different from 1.3 and before. The major stated reasons for the change where to eliminate the severe gas issue some users where experiencing, increase satiate, and I believe lower the GI.


I agree with horsfield.

Also, you need to weight the traditional concept of healthy macros against the concept of a liquid diet; in a liquid diet, carbs tend to be absorbed more quickly. You need to be careful about sugar loads. Fats do not impose that particular problem.

The best advice I seem to garner from the literature to design your macros is this:

  1. Set the protein intake based on needs (vary by person and activity).
  2. Add essential fats (a tiny amount.)
  3. Add a modest amount of carbs (to provide brain energy, to replenish glycogen, to provide quick energy.)
  4. Fill out the entire rest of the total calorie count with your choice of healthy fats or healthy carbs. At this point, it’s just calories, as long as you’re not picking inherently unhealthy sources.


Thank you for your thoughtful responses. However, horsfield, the article you cite on protein requirements seems to be saying the opposite of your point. The author argues against “current perceptions that protein intakes above minimum requirements have no benefit
and may pose long-term health risks.” The author cites 15% as the minimum… this seems to be a common opinion among nutritionists. The author goes further and discourages a ratio of 15%, especially during weight loss… which a number of people on these forums specify that they are doing.

The point about the liquid diet is interesting… I’ve wondered a lot about how that changes things. Don’t get me wrong, I’m a big supporter of Soylent as a concept… but these protein and fat levels just seem off and it seems to be glossed over.


Yet if they reduced the fats by 5%, and raised the protein by 5%, it would be fit for a larger range of humans.


Actually it does support my point. It states that protein requirements should be based on a person’s weight not a % of calories. It states that the minimum amount of protein should be 0.8g per kilogram of body weight.

80 / 0.8 = 100kg
100kg = 220.462lb


Soylent is also not intended for people trying to lose weight, as it turns out, for the same reason. Because protein needs are based on body weight, if someone is restricting their calories, protein necessarily needs to be a larger percentage of their diet, and what Soylent provides just won’t cut it for many.


I read that article and immediately ordered some protein powder to add to my soylent. A large part of me wants Soylent to handle it all… But it is just not going to. For me anyway.


Soylent is intended for sedentary individuals. Soylent is not intended for someone on a diet. These are pretty big statements. Maybe Soylent needs to specify this, because a search through these forums comes up with lots of posts by people who say they workout regularly and/or are on a diet.

I’ve never seen someone say “be careful, you shouldn’t do that while on Soylent.”


It’s not necessary dangerous to lose weight or exercise while on Soylent but I will admit it is definitely suboptimal. I’ve said on other threads that I think they should have a blend geared toward active individuals. Judging by some points made on this thread, accidentally started by me, I now also think they should make one geared toward weigh loss. Fortunately we have the DIY sight and other manufacturers with recipes to fit these needs.


It’s not just for sedentary people, but if you are trying to bodybuild or are a serious athlete (ie work out for more than 10hrs a week), then you probably need to look into your nutritional needs beyond Soylent. But the dieting thing seems a little more major to me: probably more than a little because it applies to me, but I would guess that it’s a more common situation.

But at the base of it, people who diet probably don’t get enough protein in general, so I wouldn’t lay it all at the door of Rosa Labs. But I think it definitely should be more well known than it is.


In Australia the CSIRO is a government funded research organisation and basically in Australia is the top research facility.
In Australia, high-protein low-fat diets have been heavily promoted by the CSIRO. A few years ago the CSIRO developed and heavily promoted a ‘Total Wellbeing Diet’.

This change in Soylent 1.5 to a high-fat, low protein diet is exactly the opposite of recommendations from the top research facility in Australia.
“Recent research has proven that a combination of a high protein diet with low GI foods has been associated with greater weight loss and healthy weight maintenance. Eating foods that reduce your glycemic index, combined with exercise, is one of the best ways to lose weight and improve your overall health and wellbeing.”


It seems to cost $149 to join, or am I not understanding?


I don’t work for the CSIRO, I’m not trying to sell their diet plan.

But CSIRO has done massive amounts of research into high-protein low-fat diets. They say it works.

Soylent says “We base all of our nutrition decisions on commonly-accepted and replicable findings by the scientific community.”

Question - Why is Soylent providing a High-Fat Low Protein diet when the scientific bodies in Australia say high-protein low-fat diets are the best? @Conor


@geneven the The CSIRO Total Wellbeing Diet started out as a single book explaining the diet with a limited number of recipies. it has since grown to encompass multiple books (recipes) and the online service.
I’m not sure what the online service gives, I believe it is things like meal planners and online consultation services for tracking ones diet progress.

It is a diet, initially with the intent for weight loss. Australia is heading toward obesity (if not there) and the science institute did a study on weight loss diets and what makes a diet effective.

@battlespace1’s point is the CSIRO’s research recommended High protein Low Fat for weight loss & healthy living.

edit, sorry not OP’s point


The high cost for simple membership struck me as odd for a government institution. You’d think that they would give advice for free if they are trying to save Australia from an obesity epidemic. Or maybe I just don’t understand Australia.

BTW: Is there something special about Australia that companies should follow their dietary guidelines over others?


2 out of 3 Australians are fat. I’ll pass.


I think it’s way overstated to say it is suboptimal to lose weight or exercise while on Soylent. For one thing, shouldn’t everyone exercise? For another, considering the obesity statistics in the US, shouldn’t practically everyone lose weight? I am hoping to do both, so you are saying I may be in danger? I doubt it. Actually, I am exercising. Should I stop?


citation needed
with evidence, in context against other nations with obesity problems.