Phosphorus Removed from 1.4?


#1

I noticed that the phosphorus DV% in a pouch went from ~130% in 1.3 to 0% 1.4. From the (admittedly little) I know about nutrition, phosphorus is about on the line of what’s considered a macronutrient since the body needs about a gram a day. Is the necessary amount tied up in one of the other ingredients I’m not familiar with, or did it just get taken out?


#2

Not exactly. I can’t find the document at the FDA website, but phosphorus (like potassium) is not required to be listed on the Nutrition Facts panel. So Soylent 1.3 listed 45% but Soylent 1.4 doesn’t list 0%; they opted not to list it at all. I think the phosphorus in Soylent is from the oat flour (and possibly the rice protein?).

Fun fact: I only discovered this (about potassium) because I knew potatoes contain potassium and yet I noticed some potato chips don’t have potassium on the Nutrition Facts panel. I was super confused (“Do only some potatoes contain potassium?”) until I found the guidelines on the FDA website.

As to why Rosa Labs removed the potassium from the Nutrition Facts panel, you’d have to email them to ask. I would but I don’t really care that much about it. It may even be a mistake! Or maybe they dropped below 100% DV per pouch and they didn’t want people asking for their rationale? Hopefully not.


#3

That’s good to know about the required reporting, so maybe it wasn’t actually completely removed, but it looks like the phosphorus used to be in the mineral blend via dipotassium phosphate, but that changed to potassium gluconate in 1.4. I’m not really too worried about it either since I only go about half to 3/4 Soylent in my diet, but I could see it being a problem for the people going full Soylent (or at least something that should be cleared up).


#4

The dipotassium phosphate wasn’t there to add phosphate, it was there to add potassium.

Soylent 1.1 and 1.2 used potassium gluconate.
Soylent 1.3 used dipotassium phosphate.
Soylent 1.4 uses potassium gluconate again.

So Soylent 1.1 and 1.2 didn’t have any ingredient with “phosphate” in the name, either.

Also, the amount of phophate wasn’t on the nutrition label prior to 1.3. Perhaps they added it only because they were adding dipotassium phosphate? Honestly, since 1.3 was providing more than 100% daily, the phosphate stood out as going against their stated goal of exactly 100%.

The latest 1.4 formula is better at hitting their target than the prior formulas - iodine and iron are down.

Here are the last three nutrition facts labels:

Soylent 1.4
Soylent 1.3
Soylent 1.2


#5

1.4 has 70g of oats, which should provide about .3g phosphorus which is only 40% DV. Unless there’s some other hidden phosphorus your suspicion is likely correct.


#6

I saw that they were hitting their targets better for the most part, I was just wondering how they were doing with phosphorus since I really can’t tell from the data and knowledge I have. I was hoping someone would know where 1.4 stood, or at the very least the ingredients that contribute to phosphorus. It looks like oat flour contributes a little, so maybe something else does too.


#7

Hidden phosphorous is everywhere. Thinking RL is trying to hide something is not the reasonable first response.

Seeing if I can find specifics for the protein used in Soylent… Nope.

70 g of oat flour gives about 316.4 mg phosphorous, but I can’t find the phosphorous content of the Oryzatein.

Oryzatein is protein made from sprouted brown rice.
100 g of brown rice flour provides 337 mg of phosphorous and 7.2 g protein

Soylent provide 84 g of protein, right? So that’s the protein from maybe 840 grams worth of brown rice flour, which would contain 2830 mg of phosphorous - any decent fraction of that in the protein powder will provide plenty of phosphorous.

In case you think the phosphorous is all lost when the protein is isolated, a comparison:

100 g of soy flour provides 674 mg phosphorous,
100g of soy protein isolate provides 776 mg of phosphrous

So protein isolate seems to concentrate the phosphorous. That’s not to say that it concentrates it in oryzatein, which is made differently, but the phosphorous is not necessarily all lost, either.


#8

That does sound accurate, the protein should have enough phosphorous. Strange they’d drop it from the Facts label.


#9

Thanks for the in depth response, MentalNomad. That answers my question, and probably a few other people’s as well.


#10

Lecithins also have phosphorus in the form of phospholipids.

Soylent 1.4 has 1,329mg of phosphorus. The IOM recommends 1,055mg / day for those younger than 18, and 580mg for those over. The USDA estimates mean phosphorus intake for males over the age of 9 to be 1,495mg. The FDA DV is 1,000mg so if it was on the label it would be slightly high.


#11

Thanks for the reply Rob, but why was it removed from the nutrition label?


#12

Based on his response, I’d say aesthetics. Having the perfect rda*serving size=100% demonstrates their desire for a precisely engineered food staple.


#13

I also guess they’re trying to avoid unnecessarily scaring people. There are a lot of people inappropriately concerned over excess vitamins or minerals, even though most don’t cause any harm unless taken to wild excesses. Most people don’t know which are a concern and which are not - and since the vast majority of foods don’t show their phosphorous content, most of us don’t know that we’re always getting a lot of phosphorous.

It would be hard to bring the phosphorous content down to 100%, it doesn’t do any harm, and although it’s high in most other foods, it’s almost never labeled. Makes sense to just do the same instead of stirring up controversy.


#14

It doesn’t make sense for them to leave it out the phosphorous content if it’s there, particularly when it was included in the list on the side of the box in all previous formulas. Their whole campaign has been about maintaining FULL transparency in Soylent’s ingredients and content. We were told that this is precisely why they discontinued using the vanilla additive, because the company they were getting it from wouldn’t let them know what the contents were. RL said he wanted to maintain full transparency so he was discontinuing the vanilla. Something isn’t right with this picture.


#15

The list of ingredients and the nutrition facts panel are two different things. The list of ingredients isn’t missing anything (AFAIK).


#16

Have you by chance gone to the Soylent website and looked at the “What’s Soylent made of?” section? It sure looks like they list 1329.28mg of phosphorus. Leaving it off the nutrition label was most likely an over site. I seem to remember a previous version that didn’t list one of the B vitamins and listed another one twice.

EDIT: took down the bat signal


#17

Rob’s comment implies it was left off for aesthetic reasons.


#18

It was only included in the 1.3 nutrition label.


#19

Thanks everyone for the responses. I didn’t realize the website had a different listing of the nutritional values and contents than the box? Why, who knows. But, I did receive my answer from customer service. Their answer was that since it was over 100% DV, they didn’t want to “confuse” people (presumably by listing it as 133% DV on the box). I think it confused more ppl by leaving it off because it lacks the transparency that they said they were striving for, and which was the reason the vanilla flavoring was removed from the product because the contents were proprietary.