[npsimons]

I think the GP is missing the point here: for many people, food is like bills. You deal with them, but not because you want to, only because you have to. Whether or not the OP is serious, it reminded me much of molecular gastronomy, and approaching food scientifically. While some may look down on this as an exercise in soul-crushing, is it any worse than the mass produced eating material that is fast/convenience food today? At least with this approach, the goal is health, not addictiveness or saleability.

I'm the kind of person who has spent hundreds of dollars on a fine dining experience (and heartily enjoy and recommend it), and has spent countless hours in the kitchen attempting to make good food. Yet, on some days, I'd rather just whip up a soylent shake and be done with it. On some days, I'm not even in any state to care what it tastes or feels like.

[hcarvalhoalves]

First, enjoying food does not imply spending hours cooking food. If you think so, this is one thing your culture taught you wrong. Good food is simple, can be frozen, or even eaten raw. Also, there's no explanation to why one can order chicken wings by phone and have it delivered in 30 minutes but not something healthier other than pure ignorance.

Second, this is a reductionist, naive view of nutrition. There's more to nurturing than swallowing a mix of nutrients. Smell, taste, chewing motion, the brain. If you don't enjoy your food, you don't feel satisfied. If you don't feel satisfied, your organism doesn't work as expected, neither your mood. Food and pleasure are intimately associated, you cannot have a whole human being by reducing the act of eating to an inconvenience.

If you were right, enteral diets (Google what it means) would be completely normal by today.