What is Soylent missing?


#1

There are many nutrients which are not necessities.

One example of this is something Rob has experienced himself, fiber.

There can be serious health consequences if this is excluded from your diet.

Another is oligosaccharides or really, any healthy probiotic. The jury is still out on many “health enhancing” substances, but consider this:

Our gut flora are often called an “unrecognized organ”.

They are so essential to our immune function that 70% of our immune system is harbored in our gut.

Can you think of anything else that should be in Soylent, even if just for its role in improving our health?

Comments are welcome.

If you can, cite your references.


#2

I’ve recently thought that Soylent would be missing insoluble fiber. The oat fiber included would include sufficient soluble fiber, but wouldn’t we be missing the other type?


#3

Maybe, I’d have to look into it. The official recipe isn’t really very easy to find.

Soluble fiber tends to ferment in the colon and is a source of energy for the colon in the form of butyrate, whereas insoluble fiber generally ferments in the large intestine and its effects seem less well-studied though I’d guess it has a similar effect on the large intestine as butyrate does on the colon.


#4

Well, I thought the biggest difference between soluble and insoluble was the bulking effect insoluble has on poop i.e. no constipation. http://www.webmd.com/diet/fiber-health-benefits-11/insoluble-soluble-fiber


#5

Clearly, you couldn’t.


#6

Why cite references for common knowledge?

You usually only cite references for facts that are disputed.


#7

No. You cite references when you are stating a fact. It is a common mistake to rely on the idea of ‘everyone knows this’.

You will be challenged on your claims. You might as well be prepared for the challenge if you decide to make any claims at all, regardless of whether you think they’re ‘common knowledge’.


#10

Sorry, bzzzt. Nope. Neither population is immune to cancer or major disease, or lives to be 145 years old (unless their tribal mathematics educational systems really suck, which, well, go figure.)

At some point you have to admit to yourself that even though nobody is there in the forest to hear the tree fall, when it does, the air vibrates. The lack of the ability to diagnose and or recognize cancer does not mean that cancer does or did not exist.

For anyone interested, Vitamin B17 is, in the vernacular of Penn and Teller, dangerous bullshit. Seriously, if you’re going to spout nonsense, try to make it nonsense that won’t poison someone.


#11

As to the gut flora - how much of those are good for us because they break down potentially dangerous chemicals and so forth, and how much are necessary in the metabolic cycle of Soylent? Give us a hypothesis. Name a specific species of bacteria and what it does and why we need to include a so-called probiotic in soylent? I’m not saying it is or isn’t necessary, just that you can only provide specific answers to specific questions.


#12

What?

We haven’t had one like you in a while. Full of certainties and superstitions but no references.


#13

The official recipe will be reveiled when it is finished, see the FAQ: ‘What is the nutritive content of Soylent’ on the campaign page. For now, the only “official” we have is from Rob’s blog. The last I heard the team is working on finalizing the formula.

It makes sense they haven’t released an untested recipe, since they might be held liable for any harm that follows from it.

Because there is no single, true recipe (yet), everybody who wants to try soylent uses a DIY recipe


#19

First off, I’ve read about the Inuit. They’re lifespan is 10 years shorter than Canadians, they believe drinking seals blood keeps them healthy, they commonly commit infanticide, they hang themselves when they are too old to hunt, they live on a ketogenic diet and they’re certainly not a culture to base your health off of.

Second, there are only a few species in the gastrointestinal system known to be beneficial and one I can cite as being necessary. You’ll have to Google as I’m not willing to put in the effort for facts that are well accepted albeit not well studied.

Most they can’t study because they don’t survive well in the test tube.

For instance, fiber is fermented in the colon by bacteria that produce butyrate, an important energy source for the colon. Without butyrate the colon cells begin to digest themselves which can lead to colon cancer.

I’ll add sources later when I have time. Other than that it’s known that bacteria directly regulate our immune system through the body’s own processes (hormone signaling).

Mice raised in a sterile environment (No gut flora) needed 30% more calories to maintain the same weight as their non-sterile counterparts.

I promise I’ll cite sources when I have time but other than that just Google and you’ll find these studies along with many others.


#20

I’ll look into this but I will be looking for published medical articles.

“Since the early 1950s, both amygdalin and a modified form named laetrile or Vitamin B17 have been promoted as cancer cures. However, neither of these compounds nor any other derivatives are vitamins in any sense,[3] and studies have found them to be clinically ineffective in the treatment of cancer, as well as dangerously toxic. They are potentially lethal when taken by mouth, because certain enzymes (in particular, glucosidases that occur in the gut and in various kinds of seeds, edible or inedible) act on them to produce cyanide.[4][5][6][7][8] The promotion of laetrile to treat cancer has been described in the medical literature as a canonical example of quackery,[9][10][11] and as “the slickest, most sophisticated, and certainly the most remunerative cancer quack promotion in medical history.”[3]”

Yeah that’s messed up. Don’t kill anyone here please.


#21

They are general helpful in breaking down carbohydrates and yes, dangerous substances which would not be a part of Soylent. They also regulate and train our immune system though.

I’m not anywhere near an expert on this but fiber, it’s fermentation and the colon are a key example of how removing products fermented by bacteria could be dangerous


#22

I agree that flora are good, but they [can also be bad][1], and transplants have been successfully used in the bad cases. I’d like to find out what effect eating Soylent would have on the flora and the

Elixium, what some guy with a tv announcer voice said in the 60’s is a not a “reference.” That video is pure garbage.

They did actual “science” (have you heard of that? it’s pretty neat) on Vitamin B17, and there’s a ton of it referenced on the Wikipedia page. I don’t need more than 10 references to studies, but for a lark, I did a contrastive reference against the links you posted, and all of the claims are refuted. Over and over.

Sorry, there aren’t any reclusive super-healthy civilizations shut off from the West who avoided all the evils of civilization.

Cancer hasn’t been cured by eating apricot kernels. Apricot kernels contain cyanide!!. Stop referring people to eating dangerous stuff. [Eating apricot kernels can make you very, very ill][2].

You are behaving like an idiot. I mean idiot in the literal sense, not the personal pejorative. Advising people to consume substances that can seriously damage their health is [foolish and stupid][3].

Also, the word troll does not mean what you think it means.
Troll is :trollface:.
What I’m doing is called a reality check.
[1]: https://www.google.com/#bav=on.2,or.r_cp.r_qf.&fp=f9bb04992b5de6af&q=fecal+transplant
[2]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyanide_poisoning
[3]: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/idiot


#25

Since the early 1950s, both amygdalin and a modified form named
laetrile or Vitamin B17 have been promoted as cancer cures. However,
neither of these compounds nor any other derivatives are vitamins in
any sense,[3] and studies have found them to be clinically ineffective
in the treatment of cancer, as well as dangerously toxic.
They are
potentially lethal when taken by mouth, because certain enzymes (in
particular, glucosidases that occur in the gut and in various kinds of
seeds, edible or inedible) act on them to produce
cyanide.
[4][5][6][7][8] The promotion of laetrile to treat cancer has
been described in the medical literature as a canonical example of
quackery,[9][10][11] and as “the slickest, most sophisticated, and
certainly the most remunerative cancer quack promotion in medical
history.”

This is the opening salvo on the wikipedia page. I’d steer very clear off that thing.


#28

Being a popular product on Amazon means nothing.


#30

Anyway, you can add whatever you want to your Soylent. The rest of us will stay clear of cyanid. Lets close the thread?


#32

I’m going to be very blunt here. You’re wrong.

The Hunza people are not magical. Their diets were pretty crappy. They lucked out and got some of their micros from their water sources, but otherwise, had nothing special except perhaps genetics on their side. Their life expectancy was measured at 52 years, +/- 7. They have a quaint tradition of measuring lifespan by “personal estimations of wisdom.” That resulted in all sorts of nonsense being spewed in popular publications of the time.

Your position was debunked 90 years ago. They’re not cancer free. They have the same incidence of cancer as any other population, except that the other ills endemic to their poor nutrition killed them before cancer could reach as high a proportional incidence as it does in a society where all the other problems are solved.

You’re wrong, stop peddling poison.


#34

Since when does something being available on Amazon have anything to do with it being safe? Amazon is an internet marketplace. They have no global safety regulations they need to follow. They provide an interface for people to sell stuff. They are not an arbiter of consumer safety.

http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/32/5/1121.long




There are literally hundreds more where that came from. I believe you mentioned “willful ignorance” earlier? Touting Amygdalin is not only bad science, but it brings false hope to people with cancer. It does not work, and is poisonous of itself.

There is no clinical evidence of its efficacy, and endless clinical evidence of its danger.