What about at scale? A 14 oz. tin of Ensure powder costs $9 at Walmart [2]. It provides 7 servings, which comes out to $1.29 per meal or $3.30 per day. Cheaper, but still not quite there - It would need to sell for < 1/3 retail price to feed those living in poverty[3].

I'm sure it's possible to supply Ensure/Soylent at a sufficient price, especially if you subsidize it heavily through government programs or charity. But this of course get's into the distribution and logistical problems that really plague attempts to solve food shortages through clever solutions. This also ignores the potential negative economic and political impacts of making entire countries reliant on a food product distributed to their people through an outside agency.

All this is to say, I do not think this is as clear cut a solution as you are pointing out.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nomin... [2] http://www.walmart.com/ip/Ensure-R-Powder-Vanilla-14-oz-can/... [3] I know using Walmart's price isn't a perfect analysis, but I needed a quick reference to frame the conversation

That isn't what they said.

> However, creating a less expensive, highly nutritious, complete food product that is shelf stable and easily transported would save 10's, maybe 100's, of millions of lives.

It already exists. The World Food Programme already has it. Soylent isn't doing anything new. Open Source Soylent isn't doing anything new.

Here's a list of the different feeds the WFP uses (http://documents.wfp.org/stellent/groups/public/documents/co...)

(https://www.wfp.org/nutrition/how-wfp-fights-malnutrition)

(https://www.wfp.org/nutrition/special-nutritional-products)

(http://www.irinnews.org/report/83124/malawi-cheaper-recipe-f...)

Notice that Soylent needs to be mixed with water. Clean water isn't easily available in many areas, so I'm not sure if Soylent are aware of that.

Often due to policies of the US or other imperialist nations.

Examples of this would be nice. If you want everyone to pat you on the head and tell you how special you are you should stay in grade school. IMO, the Soylent product is a nonsensical endeavor with little chance of real success. I see no reason to pretend that I feel something different about it. Personally, I'm curious as to why you take such offence.

Re: growing difficulties: I explained that lack of food is not an issue in my dead-ened comment. There is more than enough food being produced right now for every living person on the planet. The global food crisis is not helped by another form of food, because that was never the issue.

slimfast only demonstrates the validity

It's dying: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-01-14/unilever-s-slim-fas...

There is no race to win - find a competetive career and get back to me on this one.

At some point in life, you'll understand that this is a crazy (and frankly unhealthy and unsustainable) way to live.

Writing off 40% of the population

Well, good thing that isn't what I said at all, is it?

Soylent isn't going to do well because we already have 40% of the population in the US that overindulge their love of food. These people aren't going to stop eating burgers so that they can have a protein shake instead.

Ergo, bad business idea. I'm pretty confident in my anti-Soylent stance, given the two major reason I stated above. I see no product and/or company in 5 years here.

By all means I encourage them to prove me wrong.