Why couldn't soylent be a serious medical breakthrough


#1

Why couldn’t soylent be the fluid that they hook into some invalid’s mouth through a tube to keep his/her body strong through a coma? Why isn’t this a form of treatment for anorexia? My mum is just getting off of chemo this year and it’s helped her regain nutritional balance and it’s really shown a difference in her activity since I got her on it a month and a half ago. Her intake is 50-75% of her diet because she can’t handle being full and this stuff just lets her digest without indigestion.

Is Rosa Labs looking into the medicinal branch of the food industry? Also (not totally unrelated) prison food? MREs for our troops? You’ve just got such a great thing here.


Soylent for Anorexia?
#3

Antidotal evidence like this can be helpful in moving to do real clinical trails. Please keep us updated on how your mom is doing. If anyone else has similar experience stories I would love to hear them.


#4

As someone who suffered from anorexia from her teens through her late 20s, I can tell you that Soylent wouldn’t be a solve – the problem isn’t food. The problem is trauma and poor coping mechanisms. You can’t treat an eating disorder just by putting weight on a person. The underlying psychological issues need to be addressed.

However, and I have mentioned this in another thread, I have found Soylent extremely useful and beneficial in my post-recovery life. An eating disorder is something you always deal with on some level, even once you are ‘better’ (think of how an alcoholic needs to always work on their sobriety, even if they haven’t had a drink in decades). By using Soylent, I can get the nutrition I need without having to put much thought into it. And when I do eat ‘real food’, it’s because I want to and it’s pure enjoyment.


#5

Yep - because that is the root of that particular issue.

I’m sure Syolent may be a good helping hand, used in tangent with proper psychological aid. But not nearly as much by itself, I imagine.


#6

retracting this post…


#7

If Soylent would have been available, I would have been on it all my life. I was always underweight because I really disliked almost all food. The stuff I could eat was mostly junk food. I was around 125 pounds at 5’11". That’s pretty skinny. I never bothered getting a doctor to determine if I was anorexic or not. I always wanted to weigh more but could never force myself to eat enough calories. I was able to get my weight up to about 170 before Soylent came along and that is a pretty reasonable weight for my body.

In any case, Soylent was a dream come true for me. Well, 1.4 was. The previous versions were a nightmare for my family having to smell the death farts. I don’t think many people have the same kind of issue as I did, but there are those out there. There was a show called Freaky Eaters. I really identified with a number of people on the show. They tried to convince the people to eat a good diet, not understanding what the problem really was. I think Soylent would be a solution for most of the people on the show.


#8

Since you weren’t body dysmorphic, and actually wanted not to be as skinny as you were, your diagnosis wouldn’t have been anorexia.

I have a very picky palate. When I’m at a restaurant I’m not scanning the menu for the most delicious entree, I’m busy ruling out all the things that are yucky to me. That’ll leave me with one, two, three if I’m lucky things to choose from. Mostly I just want to eat things I don’t hate–and I don’t fancy cooking–so Soylent is just about perfect.


#10

I thought I was the only one that did that. I also have the tendency to eat one thing at a time


#11

My best friend from high school told me she thought it was just me, until her nephew got old enough to turn out to be just like that (although probably with different veto foods).

I like watching cooking competitions on television, and believe the judges about what the most artistic results are, but I’d never eat most of the winners myself. Which makes me really want to try the occasional one that I would eat!


#12

There are multiple products available for tube feeds/liquid nutrition in the medical field. From the commonly known Ensure and Glucerna (diabetic) to products that usually are only for tube feeds like TwoCal. Most of these come pre-mixed in a can, however, which makes them less portable. (However, as they are designed for tube feeding, they need to be very smooth as lumps or particulates can clog the tube.)


#13

That is something that I hadn’t thought of before, but makes complete sense. I can see where you would want to be as smooth as possible, even at the expense of portability, for tube feeding applications.


#14

I am a supertaster. I have to do the same exact thing when I go out to eat. I’ll start with what I know to be delicious and see what, if anything, either rules it out or has to be ordered without that item(s). For fast food, ordering it catsup only usually works. For Italian/Thai/Mexican/etc. I start with what I like, then end up scanning everything to see what is left that is safe for me to eat. If I don’t, I end up violently gagging. As I tell my girlfriend, being a supertaster isn’t a power, it is a curse.


#15

Soylent cannot be a serious medical breakthrough because it’s food. Since the 19th century, Americans have been looking for the diet that will give them a great advantage over those not on that diet and skipping over the part where they look for evidence that such a thing could or should exist.

Soylent is a great innovation in time saving, and there are reasons to believe it may have health benefits as well, but looking for any kind of diet change to amount to a medical breakthrough is an approach with a long history of being wrong.


#16

I still think that there’s something pretty revolutionary about Soylent. One uniform meal type and it can be controlled by a central authority. Even military organizations aren’t quite this controlled, I think. This control condition might go on for many years. Surely this will bring results of statistical significance eventually.