@TheAtlantic: Soylent is healthier than the average North American diet http://theatln.tc/29zmNxC http://twitter.com/TheAtlantic/status/752529247714025472/photo/1
You think they could get some newer pictures.
Something is better than SAD? What a shocker.
Next thing you know someone’s gonna tell us that the sky’s blue.
someone’s gonna tell us that the sky appears blue to human eyes
As if color is anything other than how the human brain perceives it.
As if a red flower is really red in a way that’s meaningfully different from how the sky is blue.
Have you heard of the mantis shrimp?
Yep. It perceives a heck of a lot more colors than humans ever will. No real way to imagine what that’s like (especially because it’s interpreting them with an entirely different brain).
And the fastest punch in the world too, comparable to a .22 gauge shotgun at point blank…
So, according to the Atlantic, Soylent is just a notch above junk food, really?..really!
not really. it has more kinds of cones than we do, but tests of its color perception show that it doesn’t differentiate between as many shades as we do.
You reminded me of Richard Feynman talking about waves in a swimming pool.
One interesting factoid in the article is that Soylent is A LOT cheaper than regular food. The article states that the typical American spends $600 a month on food, yet Soylent can be had for a bit more than $200 a month. (That $600 number seems awfully high to me, but maybe…)
The liquid version is based on tapioca-derived starch, soy protein, algal oil, and beet sugar.
According to the nutrition facts, 2.0 uses rice starch. I know we don’t have the formula for 2.0 like we do with the powders, so is there another listed ingredient that could be tapioca starch, or is this sentence from the article simply inaccurate? (I don’t have any concerns about tapioca starch; just have a lot of curiosity about how 2.0 is made.)
Yep, people seem to love comparing Soylent to the absolute cheapest food, but compared to the average meal it’s cheap. Even 2.0 is cheap, by that metric. In the US, anyway.
Maybe the maltodextrin? It is derived from tapioca (AFAIK). Apparently maltodextrin isn’t a starch (according to Wikipedia it is derived from starch), but I thought it was. Maybe the author made the same mistake I did?