Reduced fiber in 1.5

Continuing the discussion from 1.5 Has Arrived:

That doesn’t seem like a good idea. It’s already very low. Seems like fiber has uses other than just to move stuff along.

a growing body of evidence also suggests that fiber may play a role in preventing coronary heart disease, colorectal and other cancers, type 2 diabetes, and obesity. The AI for fiber is based on an intake level associated with the greatest reduction in the risk of coronary heart disease.

The only good thing about low fiber is that it is very cheap and easy to supplement fiber.

I would guess they are keeping it low to cut down on the previous negative reactions in the form of gas, but I agree with you and would prefer the gas over the low fiber.

I have been getting cheap psyllium husk pills/tablets at Sam’s Club and supplementing with those. (Similar would be available at Walmart, Costco, etc.)

1 Like

Yeah, I’ve already been adding fiber to 1.4. I don’t care if I fart some (though I’m not), I just want to keep my microbiome healthy.

It’s not good. But it seems clear they’ve identified fiber as a cause of the gas customers were reporting in versions previous to 1.4. So I don’t expect it to increased anytime soon.

I still say it’s not fiber itself, but the type of fiber they use that causes issues.


I would think its lower because you dont need fiber to push liquid along and gives more time for nutrients to be absorbed in the process


No, definitely the farts thing.


If anything the fiber need is higher when eating solely liquid. (Contrary to what I’ve seen RA used as rational for the reduction in fiber, or maybe just a users explanation of it.)


A lot of what fiber is for is to feed the microbiome in our guts. Pretty important.


I need to supplement with psyllium husk (I’ve been drinking citrus flavored Soylent for a while). I tend to pass hard stools no matter what I eat, including Soylent, and the very small amount of supplemental fiber in formula 1.4 caused me issues with hemorrhoids.

I realize no one likes having gas. I would love to do away with it. But it is natural and I think only caused complaints because of the very low fiber diets people have been accustomed to.

Maybe I’m overgeneralizing, but I assume the Soylent user base is rather young (at least younger than me) and have not yet discovered the need for supplemental fiber. I just want to put my voice out there that this is a problem for me and slightly reduces the utility of Soylent. I would prefer they focus on nutrition (additional fiber, protein) rather than on the taste and texture path they seem to have been moving towards.


Oh man, I was with you till the last line where you mentioned protein.

Definitely agree with the need for fiber supplementation. I do understand wanting to improve the experience of using Soylent. (less gas) That was one of the major complaints in media articles when Soylent first came out.

1 Like

The catch is that a lot of the research looks not at supplemental fiber, but dietary fiber. The difference?

How do you get more fiber in your diet? You eat more high-fiber foods, and therefore less fiber-free foods. So more veggies, and less meat, for example. That has broad - ranging impacts on health because of the extra nutrients in the veggies, but also because you reduce the amount of foods which are potentially harmful in excess, like fatty meats and refined carbs.

The studies show a strong association between higher fiber and health outcomes, but not necessarily a causation.

Meanwhile, when you’re not consuming solids, you don’t need the help “moving this along.”

This is one of the aspects of diet where Soylent really is exploring relatively unusual territory.


Still sounds like a good thing! Unless there’s significant evidence showing the benefits of a low fiber diet, Soylent should include normal amounts of fiber.

That is a good thing to keep in mind no matter what you are looking at. One of the biggest mistakes I find people making (myself included) is the conflation of correlation and causation.


Let me state my point differently… Most of the favorable evidence is not for supplemental fiber, it’s for high-fiber foods. The fiber they reduced in Soylent is supplemental fiber.


That makes sense to some degree, however… we really are consuming solids, in suspension. Since our digestive system extracts most of the water from what we consume, we are still left with solids that need to be dealt with; admittedly less solids, but that is part of what raises these concerns.

How do you separate supplemental from…intrinsic(?) when everything in Soylent considered on it’s own could be considered supplemental in some way?

In context of soylent, I don’t - and am not sure we can.

In context of established dietary research, though, I feel it’s important to bear in mind. Foods that are intrinsically high in fiber tend to be more healthful, and foods intrinsically low on fiber tend to be less so - which means the research findings favoring fiber-rich diets may well be favoring healthier foods, as opposed to the fiber, itself. Fiber may signal healthy foods, rather than being healthful, from a nutritional standpoint.

Soylent is designed to be nutritionally healthful regardless the fiber content, so the fiber content is not a signal of healthfulness.

I’m not saying any of this with certainty; I’m just saying the case for adding raw fiber to Soylent is far, far weaker than general nutritional advice on fiber would imply.

It would be interesting to see some BTT studies on the new, lower - fiber formula, to ensure things really are “moving along.”


Unless there is significant evidence of the health benefits of low fiber, it’s safer to include the recommended amounts of fiber.


Agreed, I just thought the distinction was kind of moot in this regard since the research indicates “food with fiber” is better than “food without”… but this is part of what makes Soylent an interesting experiment. If the research hasn’t been done already, it seems we will find out whether nutrition without fiber is as good as nutrition with it.

Though personally/anecdotally, I knew within a couple days of starting Soylent I would need to supplement it with fiber; as things seemed to stop moving altogether.

I don’t want to put words into MentalNomad’s keyboard, but I think what he’s trying to say is that most (all?) nutritional research on fibre is done using normal non-liquid diets. In that context, fibre introduces an automatic confounding factor. A person with a high fibre diet is almost certainly eating their broccoli and other good things.

In fact, when it comes to healthy eating, I find getting the veggies the most challenging part of the food guide. I don’t know how to cook them, I don’t particularly like most of them (except Virtue), and if I go to a restaurant, they will have way more selections in carbs and protein than they will in vegetables.


I hear you… it all depends on which version you started with.

My first DIY was a Soylent clone with identical fiber levels… and getting things moving was not the problem. Things were moving all the time, at first!