That’s an understatement.
The fat composition is only 20% of the macronutrient ratio, and water is not a macronutrient, therefore the first three ingredients (water, maltodextrin, and soy protein isolate) constitute, at a minimum, 95% of the product.
This is just wrong. I see what he tried to calculate (414 g - 21 g = 393 g / 414 g = 94.9%), but that simply isn’t correct, even assuming that 414 ml of Soylent 2.0 is exactly 414 g (it probably isn’t), he’s assuming all of the other non-fat ingredients together weigh less than zero grams. Hint: Judging from the 1.5 spreadsheet, they won’t! The vitamin and mineral blend alone will probably be like 5.6 g, plus the isomaltulose, rice starch, oat fiber, etc.
We don’t have the information to determine an accurate % yet; all he has determined is that Soylent 2.0 is primarily water. A beverage consisting of ≈80% water? Someone alert the media.
…also, your 45:40:15 macro ratio is incorrect. That is the ratio for 1.5. The ratio for 2.0 is 33:47:20
I made the correction in the post. Thanks!
Did he change it to 33:47:20 (AKA the correct value)? Of course not:
Soylent has a macronutrient ratio of 47:27:26 (carbohydrates:fat:protein) by weight
Why by weight?
I have chosen to address these values by weight, rather than caloric energy because of the inequality of isocaloric values.
He doesn’t like that fat has more calories per gram so he instead compares the macronutrients by weight, even though it is standard to compare macronutrients by % of total calories because that’s what we’re talking about.
I can’t say he’s deliberately trying to mislead anyone, because he would first have to understand what he is writing about.