/ck/ - Food & Cooking

>>11868128
i wouldn't drink it because i like the taste of food and the experience of cooking, but most people on here who think it will make you grow tits are probably already fat anyway

>>11868128
>Soylent hate has become retarded
nope.
that shit is poison.

>>11868128
That's huel, not soylent

>>11868128
>Replacing a proper meal with sludge that you can drink at your computer to be more productive and because you can't cook is sick.
No it isn't. But it's applying a very engineering mentality to one's diet. The focus is efficiency and the aesthetic is completely discounted. It's not sick, but it is a good way to remove the pleasure from eating.

If you "don't have time to cook/eat" you're lying and are just shit at time management.

people who use a meal replacement vs eating a meal of the same calories eat twice as much person who ate proper food the next meal.

>>11868128
>to be more productive
I agree that's a stupid reason.
>because you can't cook
Less "can't" and more "don't want to." Although I've never tried soylent. I used Ensure and Boost in the past. I wish I could live off nothing but those shakes, but I end up with bad diarrhea since the only thing going through my intestines with them is a bunch of liquid. They made a Boost with added fiber but that doesn't really change the fact you're consuming nothing but liquid. If anyone ever invents a way to get all your nutrition from a drink and not end up running to the bathroom twenty times before getting to sleep that'd be great.
In the meantime next best thing is ramen noodles (as a base food to keep your intestines filled with something solid enough to hold things together but not retardedly high fiber like beans where you're feeling like you're being stabbed with knives from the inside of your guts out) along with milk (for protein and more calories), V8 (vitamins / potassium), and a multivitamin to roughly cover some of the other nutritional quotas you're probably missing. A lot more of a hassle than just drinking boost shakes, but well worth it to have the ability to sleep without interruption and have your location be a bed instead of a toilet.

Meal replacement shakes have existed before your parents were born you dumb zoomer. This is nothing new, only the brands have changed. Also music wasn’t better in the old days and consumer goods were shit except for a few expensive brands.

In conclusion you were not born in le wrong generation, there is no “trend” to speak of, and ur a dumdum, kill you are self.

>>11868128
The thing is, that cup on the right, you have to swallow all that stuff whole to get the nutrition. Cooking destroys all the nutrition. Ergo, soylent is a much easier alternative for acquiring nutrition.

Soy in food has been the infiltration of poison for the benefit of company profits.

>>11870200
Yeah in le good old days companies operated at a loss. MAGA!

>>11870183
>Cooking destroy all the nutrition.
Yes, that's why before the invention of readymade powdered meals everybody kept dying of malnourishment. I also didn't get the part about having to swallow all that stuff whole because you wrote that sentence with your butt.

>>11868128
Most people are fucking cattle, dude, feed-sludge is what they deserve.

>>11870220
Idiot. You have to eat like 5-10x the amount of “real” food to get the same nutrition as soylent because most of it is burned off when cooking.

>>11870227
Glad you admitted to this slop not being real food. Just take your nutrients via IV if it makes you happy but fuck outta cooking forums because as you put it so well, the thing you feed upon does not include any.

>>11870200
>>11870211
reminder that the only way to fix corporations is with government or private intervention

some things the market won't self regulate

>>11870951
So it isn't a "free" market?

>>11870211
In the good ol' days food was food, not poison, and money for a house was the equivalent of $15,500 after adjusting for inflation, and the middle class grew at an extraordinary pace.

>>11870965
Fucking boomers.

Imagine ingesting this garbage while thinking you're being healthy.

just keep doing it right
stay away from soy
we'll survive the night

>>11871377
Name one thing about it that's unhealthy.

It tasting like shit, being exclusively for autists, and not being a fun skill like cooking a meal are valid criticisms of soylent, but I don't see health being one of them.

>>11871377
What’s not healthy about it though?

>>11868716
>actually having typed that
Suggests a very limited paradigm of how great some foods are, specifically stevia. With casein and whey,, it's possible cold-making drinks or various types of frostings, creams, fudges, brownies, cookies, cakes, and toffees …

>>11870035
How ludicrous …

A lot of satiation is based on how relevant is what's actually being eaten, and else is basing on the quality of foods, and especially sweets (so, minimizing sweeteners that are non- stevia, alternatively which is conversely *benefiting* blood metrics, and is some 200x sweeter than sugar, with longer onsets and more lasting durations – "the 'minty' of sweet").

(Image)

>>11870118
Logically, protein powders … as a large percentage of the ingredients … Them sitting in the biological-oven-and-water-extractor seems an obvious, reasonable alternative.

>>11870200
there's nothing wrong with soy as long as you it's not literally the only thing you eat

>>11870200
there's nothing wrong with soy as long as it's not literally the only thing you ever eat

>>11871745
wrong

>>11871745
>>11871766

>>11870227
What "nutrition" are we talking about here? Fats? Carbohydrates? Protein? Fiber? Minerals? Any vitamins other than B- and C vitamins? Because those are all unaffected by cooking. And even then, cooking food makes the nutrients more bioavailable.

>>11871779
I didn't know soyboys were premenopausal Japanese women

>>11870220
Technically, aging is malnutrition – maybe some low MPS and such.

>>11871832
There's obviously interest in making an argument there. Apparently shelved it though.

>>11871683
Shit the fuck up and stop shilling stevia. This is the fifth time I've seen you post about stevia and NOT ONCE has it been relevant to the topic at hand.

>>11871912
There's obviously interest in making a response there. Apparently shelved it though.

>>11871922
>>11871923

>>11871928
not an argument

>>11871928
Seriously dude. Stevia isn't related at all to soylent. You appear psychotic ranting about stevia out of nowhere on every thread. Make your own thread dedicated to stevia instead of shitting up every single thread.

>>11871832
>>11871930
Females are biologically very similar to males. This is obvious, and reduction of estrogen amounts is plausibly beneficial for both.

>>11871922
>>11871939
It's obviously a relevant response to what was posted, which suggests your having huge personal problems. >>>/out/

>>11871958
>Females are biologically very similar to males. This is obvious, and reduction of estrogen amounts is plausibly beneficial for both.
noooooooo
no
no

>>11871980

>phytoestrogens taking up receptors
>estrogens lowered
Simplicity.

>>11871958
>Females are biologically very similar to males. This is obvious
t.

>>11872005
post all those high test men flexing with their soy milk bottle openers

I'm starting my soylent diet today. 2 bottles a day, along with a multi vitamin. Hope I dont end up with a feminine frsme.

>>11871377
>Disclaimer:
>Anyone who doesn't want to die immediately,
>Should seriously reconsider consuming this chemical cocktail

Leftists and numales should all consume Soylent Sludge, hasten their departure from this Earth.

>>11872018

>>11871377
Soy protein only? And people pay for this shit?

>>11868128
seriously though, why do people drink this? interested in honest non-meme answers

>>11872481
Too lazy to cook.

>>11868128
Does anybody have the virgin soylent vs chad huel picture?