Meal Supplements

>Market it to make money or market a product that you're proud to sell.
I can do both. You clearly have different idea of what to be proud of selling than I do.

>100% pure whey isolate, honey, dried berries, no artificial preservatives, the works.
This is the exact kind of crap that people who are ignorant of actual nutritional science think is healthy. I don't care to cater to them.

>The dew and doritos demographic aren't interested in health foods.
I disagree. Laziness is the key factor that drives people to fast food and to soylent, and as long as it tastes good, the dew and doritos crowd will eat it. I've tried every soylent product and the main thing that bothers me about it is the powdered drink mix is the cheapest thing they sell, and it's also the worst-tasting and least convenient for several reasons. I've tried other things like Twennybar which gave me horrible gas and tasted mediocre. I know I'm not the only one who's looking for a better version of Soylent, and that's what I want to make. I just don't know how to deal with all the FUD.

Hilarious. I think PH is actually one of the concerns I've heard.

Only market that plausibly comes to mind are hospitals and nursing homes. They frequently stock shit like Instant Breakfast to in order to fatten up sick old people and anorexics. They surely wont give a shit about organic but it would probably need to be non allergenic.

Otherwise just market it as a meal replacement for busy people who otherwise dont have time to eat a real meal and want to avoid fast food. Some shit to consume during your commute. Teenagers have all the time in the world they are not your best target demographic.

>Teenagers have all the time in the world they are not your best target demographic.
I was gunning closer to the college dorm I-live-on-instant-ramen-and-snacks demographic.

unless your version will cost less than $2 per day don't even bother! scientific nutrition will only replace traditional if it's significantly cheaper.

soylent is fuck expensive around $7.7 per day

btw i eat from around $5 a day on average right now.

>soylent is fuck expensive around $7.7 per day
You can fill yourself up on less than that, but you won't get complete nutrition if you're just gorging yourself on rice and cheap veggies.

>complete nutrition
it's a fucking meme and a gross misunderstanding of human metabolism in my opinion. macro composition is actually not that important, it has been proven plenty that humans can adapt to any variety, you can eat only meat and animal fat or only veggies and nuts or only carbs it doesn't matter so long your calories are met. vitamins and micros are a different matter.

first of all you can't just pump all micros on the needed ratio into one meal and expect everyone to get metabolized efficiently. many of the micros block each others ingestion. that is why most sane dieticians recommend eating "variety".

i'm not saying you couldn't put together a weekly menu that is sufficient and covers all bases from these factory made foods, but soylent is just a shit attempt and way too expensive.

>many of the micros block each others ingestion
No they don't.

So you want
>a good product
>that has GREAT INGREDIENTS!!
>avoids health crowd
>cheap

You ever heard the phrase "you have to give a little to get a little"? Because you are the fucking poster child of people who want everything to be perfect with no loss

learn more about biology neger then come back!

Soylent with heavy vitamin supplementation on the aide would keep you healthy for a couple weeks

Probably feel like wrecked shit though

even the soylent crowd is aware of this btw
discourse.soylent.com/t/micronutrients-blocking-each-others-absorption/491/3

i have no doubt you can live off soylent for a prolonged period i said the meals need more diversity in composition and give the "complete" nutrition in a larger time-frame like 3-7 days avoiding the interference between minerals absorption and other micros interaction.

it's not that difficult to make an A-B-C menu out of it. it should also get a lot more cheaper with economy of scale.

right now tho i would avoid it if i were you.

Stop buying-into stupid pop-science articles you read online. Post a link to an actual scientific article stating that normal levels of micros will cancel each other out if taken all at once. I'll wait.

>even the soylent crowd is aware of this btw
You'll find tons of threads about gluten and other stupid shit on that forum, so what's your point? If you bother to read that thread, general consensus was that they'll cancel-out the effects of over-consumption.

>Probably feel like wrecked shit though
I started feeling better since I started drinking it. But my family's diet is shit, so make of that what you will.

>general consensus was
so let me get this straight you throw in some scientifically proven facts known by all health professionals for a good while, into a forum, filled with soylent enthusiasts, and they surprise surprise come to the conclusion it's not that big of a problem "it will be fine".

yeah okay that totally convinced me.

i will keep on eating real food until it gets a hell of a lot cheaper and also a lot more researched and documented in long term health effect. both equally important really.

I don't give a flying fat fuck what you do. Even if it were proven to be cheaper and healthier you still wouldn't eat it simply for the fact that you don't consider soylent "real food".

That's the biggest red flag that a cunt won't even touch the product.

>Even if it were proven to be cheaper and healthier you still wouldn't eat it
nah, i would definitely try it out then.
but it's not convincing right now. that is all.

real food for me is something i enjoy eating the composition and origins is less important. food is not just nutrition. it has a social and psychological component that these powders utterly lack.

sure sometimes you really just want the nutrients and get on with the stuff you were doing. eating this crap exclusively is retarded tho.

>nah, i would definitely try it out then.
Bullshit. You might give it a taste test, but you said it yourself "eating this crap exclusively is retarded" which is the entire point of meal replacements.

Unless you have some actual BUSINESS advice, fuck-off already.
You
Are
Not
The
Target
Demographic

lol

Only fucking dumbshit white people eat that paste cuz they can't cook in the first place.

Spotted the nigger.

>which is the entire point of meal replacements.
not ready yet and i would never eat it exclusively anyways as i actually like eating stuff for the joy of it.

you are just a cheeky little cunt with pretension of moral high-ground here you don't tell me where to go and what to try you little nigger.

You're the one with the false pretense of both moral and intellectual high-ground.

>Unless you have some actual BUSINESS advice, fuck-off already.
btw i had actual business advice here: >unless your version will cost less than $2 per day don't even bother! scientific nutrition will only replace traditional if it's significantly cheaper.

make it cheap or it's doomed to be a failure.
you probably can't do better than soylent, so you have to do cheaper.

nah, i'm merely pointing out the obvious. uniform meal rations are a dumb idea you need diversity and you need to make it cheaper than traditional food. otherwise it's not going anywhere.

otherwise maybe you find a few morons who buy one then forget all about it. most likely not even that.

>make it cheap or it's doomed to be a failure.
Fucking duh. I already addressed that as the biggest problem earlier in the thread.

>uniform meal rations are a dumb idea you need diversity
Believe whatever stupid myth you want. It's no skin off my balls.

Make it cheap and nutritionally complete and shelf-stable you'll have customers in the military and for emergency rations.

They kinda already have that though, the so called 'coast guard rations' just they are chalky, gluey pellets rather than a milkshake type shit.

If you feel like you're such a great marketing genius you could start off and just buy that shit in bulk and sell it to the dortios ramen noodle do-the-dew type you think is a good market for such a product.

Typical market for it currently are gov't agencies and survivalist types. Sure if you could sell nutrient slurry to WOW gamers you could probably sell feed pellets to them, right?

it would also be one thing that would differentiate your product from the competition. that is no small thing. you have to tell your customers why your product is better even if you don't actually believe it yet.

making just an other a soylent clone is not a viable marketing strategy unless you can pull the much much cheaper stunt in which case it could work.

I can even begin to describe how retarded you must be to think that:

>meals in liquid form are healthy in the long run
>all vitamins and other trace nutrients can be stored in powder form

Sure, using it as a meal substitute propably isn't a terrible thing, but basing a large part of your diet on this stuff is questionable.

it doesn't really matter if you eat solid and drink water or eat slush, your digestion will sort it out.
people live on medical grade food supplements for years. altho they are usually way higher in sugar content as these people are usually sick and need most readily available energy.

as for vitamins and stuff sure it can be done that's not the problem. the problem is these micros interact with each other and block each other. you shouldn't ever mix your iron zink copper intake if you expect smooth predictable results for example, and iron from vegetable sources is almost useless toxicant for your body. and stuff like that.

it takes real science and research and not this basement pseudoscience to make good food substitutes.

>it would also be one thing that would differentiate your product from the competition.
Being less convenient? Instead of making one pitcher of a day's worth of food, now you need 2-3 separate things with different nutrients because someone who believes crap sciences things you can't just have one.

>making just an other a soylent clone is not a viable marketing strategy unless you can pull the much much cheaper stunt in which case it could work.
There are plenty of other ways to make a more appealing meal replacement. I'm not going to say what I intend to do, but I will say that it's not going to involve splitting it up into different meals, because that's retarded.

>the problem is these micros interact with each other and block each other.
True.

Ultimately, you'd need at least two soylents to avoid clashing absorption, maybe 3. And at that point why not just have 3 ordinary meals a day?

meal supplement or alternative? chili fries supplement a chili dog

>Ultimately, you'd need at least two soylents to avoid clashing absorption, maybe 3. And at that point why not just have 3 ordinary meals a day?
Kinda defeats the purpose doesn't it? Considering no company has ever done this, not even for use in hospitals, that should be the first sign that micros-cancel-each-other-out thing is fake. It's a myth created by people who're heavily invested in food businesses that see meal replacements as a threat and want to crush it instead of compete with it, because it creates a big race to the lowest price tag. Rather than try to compete on the same terms as Soylent it's easier to just discredit the idea entirely with lies.

Soy causes cancer. Put a fucking cheeseburger in it.

>meal supplement or alternative? chili fries supplement a chili dog
Meal replacement. A chili dog could be doable. In the late 90's there was The Dilburrito, which was the same basic concept, only with a vegan burrito. It should go without saying, but it made you fart like hell.

Yeah, everyone's terrified of soy for some dumb reason or other. The cheaper and commonly used an ingredient is, the more small businesses will demonize it in a way to make their more "unique" product look healthier.

I'm personally eating the nu3 compleat shit when I don't have time to grab something else.

costs about 4 bucks/meal, 12/day.

Now the reason why people are suspicious of it is because technically you can mix corn starch and flour and sell it as "complete food alternative*"

note that products that acutally made it onto the international market don't actually state anywhere that they're nutritionally complete.

> How do I cater to idiots

you could create something akin to the "raw milk" movement, where you sell people the mixture with the recipe mentioned above.

basically the same thing, 2 hippie cow farmers decided the pasteurization and regulatory papwerwork was too expensive.

>note that products that acutally made it onto the international market don't actually state anywhere that they're nutritionally complete.
The reason for that being?

>How do I cater to idiots
It's not that I want to cater to idiots, I just don't want them to think my product will cause their dick to fly off because it contains a bit of gluten or soy.
But if you cater exclusively to these "all-natural" foodies they'll never buy your product simply because it's not a bunch of expensive separate ingredients that requires a ton of preparation in order to create something resembling an edible meal. I'm trying to find the right balance between "my body is a temple" and "I will literally eat nothing but takeout and fast food for the rest of the week."

>The reason for that being?
I suspect because they can't defend that position in court.

if you sell a product that claims that you need to consume 1.2kg of per day for the rest of your life and nothing else, and someone gets ill or dies, stakeholders can face criminal charges in some countries (even behind limited liability).

all it takes is someone with an undiagnosed intolerance for something that can't parse a certain protein or vitamin out of one of the ingredients and suffers from malnutrition as a result.

>I just don't want them to think my product will cause their dick to fly off

do you want to hear my perspective, what I would look for/buy?

Kinda defeats the purpose doesn't it?
nope i don't see it. it's actually a pretty easy stunt to pull, and most likely it would be received well enough if you had slightly different formulas in sequence with different content focus and taste and color. probably would go very well.
>It's a myth created by people who're heavily invested in food businesses
rofl you can't be serious.
>see meal replacements as a threat
if they saw it as a possible threat they would jump on first it because it meant it will be good business you nigger cunt.
fucking tinfoil hat reasoning all over.
>because it creates a big race to the lowest price tag.
there is already a big race to the lowest price tag all over the food industry you neger.
>Rather than try to compete on the same terms as Soylent it's easier to just discredit the idea entirely with lies.
they are not selling soylent type stuff is because there is no solid demand for it. they would sell their mother marinated and canned if it was in demand.

>probably would go very well.
I disagree. That's not the kind of risk I want to take. It runs counter to the experience I've personally had with soylent & my problems with it. You're trying to make it more like "real" food, I'm trying to do the opposite. If the product bombs and I can't get the money back, at the very least I can eat it myself if the shelf life is long enough. Then I've got a write-off and I'm saving money on food.

>if they saw it as a possible threat they would jump on first it because it meant it will be good business you nigger cunt.
You're thinking "businesses" I'm talking about all the different food-related news, tv, magazines, culinary schools, small resteraunts, diet "gurus", and the investors there of. They all want to shit on this because it'd hurt their bottom-line if the idea got popular. They see it as a personal attack, which is why most of Soylent's publicity is negative. Rob Rhinehart was pretty smart to name it Soylent, just to add another layer onto it for even more free publicity. Very Trump-like.

>Soylent's publicity is negative

soylent's publicity is negative because it was a shit product for too long and even gave you the shits at one point.

and their marketing department (if any) is shit as well.

soylent is a pioneering company. their product is shit. just like oculus, just like myspace.

>soylent's publicity is negative because it was a shit product for too long and even gave you the shits at one point.
I've never heard that in any of the news I'd seen. It was all "This man never wants to eat again!" or some dumb reference to Soylent Green. Every news source painted it out to be some pure-evil product, or tried to compare the taste and texture to jizz or something, but rarely addressed actual problems with it.

where'd you get your news from?

i mean obviously you know about news bubbles, right?

arstechnica.com/science/2016/10/reports-of-violent-vomiting-diarrhea-from-bars-has-soylent-on-the-defense/

Soylent bars are new news. I'm talking old news, back when Soylent was still just a drink, roughly around the time it was crowdfunding. Now it's got a consumer base large enough that this kind of news has negligible effect on sales.

i've got an article from 2014 too,

but if you want me to do your work for you you're gonna have to pay me.

Nah. Finding "an" article is irrelevant.

of course, information is irrelevant.

A tiny cherry-picked sample is irrelevant.

>inb4 climate change is a hoax

you don't even see what your problem is?

It is a hoax.

I don't know that small businesses demonize it. Seems to me that it's promoted as a health alternative to the same idiots who are afraid of gluten. But it causes cancer.

Soylent was a stupid name to settle on. The first thing anyone thinks of is that soylent green is people. It's people.

>But it causes cancer.
Except it doesn't. Prove it.

>Soylent was a stupid name to settle on. The first thing anyone thinks of is that soylent green is people. It's people.
That was the point. It markets itself.

I kinda liked soylet but for a product that was supposed to be a fast and lazy meal, I was too lazy to make it.

Have to blend it or its consistency is shit. Have to wash anything it touches immediately or the shit dries on like glue. Powder is fine as hell so it clouds up everywhere when you're making the shit.

Figure all that shit out and I'll buy it.

>scientifically proven
>calls other people idiots
lel

>You're trying to make it more like "real" food, I'm trying to do the opposite.
no i'm trying to fix the main issue with it i have from scientific standpoint. i actually use my brain and not driven by some weird fetish.

it wouldn't really complicate the consumer experience, but it's certainly contradictory to the "make it cheaper" goal as it will be somewhat more expensive to have 5 or 7 different formulas.
>I've never heard that in any of the news I'd seen.
bad products were shipped and some people had bad reaction to various formulas. the latter can't be avoided really. the former is more problematic, the production facility hygiene problems were off putting to many. i see it more as a childhood issue. with a certain scale it would probably all go away or closed by the fda.
>Figure all that shit out and I'll buy it.
the only way would be pre-mix bottles but it adds to the price all over the production and delivery chain.

>9020
make a forum for ex-soylent people and let them vote on what they want the ingredients to be

>no i'm trying to fix the main issue with it i have from scientific standpoint
Then you should try some real science for a change.

>bad products were shipped and some people had bad reaction to various formulas.
I already addressed the soylent bars being newer news than what I was referring to.

>make a forum for ex-soylent people and let them vote on what they want the ingredients to be
That's a pretty good idea.

>I kinda liked soylet but for a product that was supposed to be a fast and lazy meal, I was too lazy to make it.
That's part of my problem with it. They made a bar & a pre-bottled drink, which are far better products in my opinion.

>Have to blend it or its consistency is shit. Have to wash anything it touches immediately or the shit dries on like glue. Powder is fine as hell so it clouds up everywhere when you're making the shit.
Yeah, all of these things annoy the crap out of me. I don't ever blend it, but I fill the pitcher half-way with water, add the powder, top it off, shake then add more water until it's full, then let it sit over night & the consistency is ok by the next morning. If I forget to make it, I end up not having any the next day. Cleaning just the pitcher is a pain in the ass, adding a blender would be infuriating. And if you don't finish it all in 2 or 3 days it goes bad & you've got to throw it all out.

I'd rather make individually-wrapped bars, because the powdered drink idea is shit. Having to chew & swallow it also makes you take your time, so you don't just chug it until you feel bloated, like I often did when I first started. I also needed a drink to rinse my mouth out (and for caffeine) and often end up pissing like a racehorse afterwards because of all the fluids.

>the only way would be pre-mix bottles but it adds to the price all over the production and delivery chain.
I think making it in solid-form is the ideal approach, because you can minimize the water content, so it should reduce the final product's weight/volume.

>I think making it in solid-form is the ideal approach
just make sure it's green!!

>just make sure it's green!!
I wouldn't be calling it "soylent", so what would be the point?

Make it nutritionally complete and 8.9% ABV and you got my dollars.

Not going to happen.

6% is all I'm looking for

No dice.

First start looking at the DIY section of Soylent's website: diy.soylent.com/recipes
Thousands of recipes for you to work with

It's not that people doubt whether the ingredients are safe, it's that they doubt whether they are effective. Many supplements are not proven to be effective. At the end of the day it's less likely you will encounter issues eating potatoes and broccoli and supplementing as needed (ie. D, B12) than drinking supplement shakes for every meal.

Just make sure it doesn't contain animal derived ingredients. There would be no point in adding them and their inclusion would mean at least 2% less sales.

ive been drinking soylent for a little over a month. i usually have 2-3 "meals" worth a day along with normal food since im trying to gain weight. if you sold something cheaper with equal or better nutritional value and was just as convenient to prepare then i would probably buy it. i dont really care about gluten or soy or whatever shit that gives cancer right now

>Just make sure it doesn't contain animal derived ingredients. There would be no point in adding them and their inclusion would mean at least 2% less sales.
What about flavor? And is it really around 2%? With how vocal and omnipresent vegans/vegetarians seem to be, I thought they'd be more than that.

>if you sold something cheaper with equal or better nutritional value and was just as convenient to prepare then i would probably buy it.
A lot of people think they're nutritional experts & the perception of which product has "better nutritional value" really seems to vary from person to person.

>i dont really care about gluten or soy or whatever shit that gives cancer right now
A lot of people really seem to though. Aside the fact that soy is an allergen, a good number of people seem afraid of ingredients for little to no reason.

it has to be green trust me.

that's fucking stupid the cheapest complete protein available is why protein. no plant based protein is complete btw.

*whey protein

I figured milk would be one of the best ingredients to use to keep the price low. Losing the vegan/vegetarian consumer base might be worth it if it means a cheaper product. I keep joking to myself that the main ingredients should be milk and pork, to alienate as many minor demographics as I can right off the bat.

godspeed user