Bryanna Clark Grogan’s Vegan Feast Kitchen/ 21st Century Table: The kitchen journal of a vegan food writer.. I'm on Facebook and Twitter (see links in sidebar at right).
SAFETY OF SOY?

Updated in September 2015
This is very long, BTW...I started writing it over 10 years ago and have tried to update it and add to it over the years, as new myths popped up and more information and science has been gathered. Soy is THE most studied food in the world, so the science is there.
Other articles:
A Vegan Doctor Addresses Soy Myths and Misinformation: http://freefromharm.org/health-nutrition/vegan-doctor-addresses-soy-myths-and-misinformation/
This is very long, BTW...I started writing it over 10 years ago and have tried to update it and add to it over the years, as new myths popped up and more information and science has been gathered. Soy is THE most studied food in the world, so the science is there.
Other articles:
A Vegan Doctor Addresses Soy Myths and Misinformation: http://freefromharm.org/health-nutrition/vegan-doctor-addresses-soy-myths-and-misinformation/
Soy archive from Ginny Messina, RD http://www.theveganrd.com/tag/soy
Soy archive from
Jack Norris, RD http://jacknorrisrd.com/?cat=17
An excellent article: Being Vegan and Eating Soy: Myths, Truths, and Everything in Between, by Christa Novelli, M.P.H. https://vegfamily.com/being-vegan-and-eating-soy-myths-truths-and-everything-in-between/
See also: http://zenhabits.net/soy/
**I was quoted in an article on soy in the Canadian magazine Macleans (https://www.macleans.ca/society/health/will-soy-make-my-son-gay/). There were a number of comments, some of which I addressed myself. There was one long comment (#27) by "Loretta", which covered alot of territory. I couldn't resists answering, but the answer was too long to post with the comments, so my answer is posted at the end of this page.
QUESTIONS:
1.) Where do you
stand on the soy controversy?
I stand for common
sense. You can eat a perfectly fine
vegan diet without soy-- no question about that. If you are soy allergic, you can find non-soy
meat and dairy substitutes, or make them yourself. I have files of them that I can send to
people who ask about that.
It really annoys me
that people with an anti-vegetarian agenda are spreading nonsense about a food
that has sustained humans for thousands of years, distorting history,
distorting scientific studies, and spreading hysteria. If you do a search on the internet, it's hard
to find anything BUT this hysteria-- no wonder people are confused! That's why I've researched this subject and
posted information about it. I don't
really care whether you eat soy or not, just make your decision from an
informed place!
Soy is a a very
versatile food for vegetarians and, if you are not allergic, I see nothing
wrong with eating soyfoods daily from organic and non-GMO sources. I have done so for many years, even making my
own tofu, even before I was a vegetarian.
I am healthy and active as I face my 60's, not sick and
"poisoned" as the anti-soy contingent would prefer me to say.
I think that the
majority of soyfoods, as with all the other foods you eat, should be traditional soyfoods or soyfoods
that have not been overly-tampered with.
But what does that mean? Some
people call tofu, a soy product with thousands of years of history, that you
can make in your own kitchen, a "processed food"! Well, butter is a processed food, as well,
then.
I consider
traditional Asian foods, like soymilk (I make my own), tofu, miso, soy sauce,
and tempeh, foods that I can eat every day if I want to. Other soyfoods that I have no qualms about
eating daily (though I don't necessarily-- I eat a very eclectic and varied
diet because I like to experiment with many ethnic cuisines) are soy flour, soy
yogurt (homemade), and even plain, unflavored dried textured soy protein, which
is made from cooked defatted soy flour extruded through "dies" to
make granules or shapes, and then dried.
(It is not the same as "hydrolized soy protein" in any
way!) A new product that I also like is
called Soy Curls, which is similar to textured soy protein, but made
from the whole soybean.
As for all the new
processed soyfoods-- soy weiners, sausages, burgers, "hamburger
crumbles", soy cheese, etc.-- we eat them a few times a month when we are
in a hurry. My husband was a meat lover
15 years ago and became a vegan on his own, but he craves sausages, etc.
sometimes. We buy vegan products that
contain ingredients we can understand, and made with organic soy. Most of the time, I make my own meat
substitutes at home, and we love beans of all kinds. (I don't panic about protein, and we often
have soup meals, or vegetable only meals.)
These products are far superior to processed meats that many people
think nothing of serving to their children.
A few times a year
we might buy soy "ice cream" (again, organic), and I almost never buy
tofu sour cream, tofu creme cheese, or vegan "junk foods". Again, I make my own. I can't afford to buy these vegan processed
foods, even if I wanted to, and I think my own recipes taste better, most of
the time. I can also control fat and
calories and fiber content better that way.
2.) For those
concerned about estrogens in soy:
Soy estrogens are
"plant estrogens" or "phytoestrogens" (phyto is Greek for
plant). They are found in many plant
foods besides soy. This is an article (a
pdf file: http://www.ifst.org/uploadedfiles/cms/store/ATTACHMENTS/phytoestrogens.pdf
) about phytoestrogens from the Institute of Food, Science and Technology of
the UK. It is worth reading. Here is the beginning of it: (Unfortunately, you have to be a member to access it now):
"Phytoestrogens are naturally occurring phenolic plant compounds, present in foods such as beans, cabbage, soyabean, grains and hops, and are part of a wider class of polyphenols found in all plants. They are structurally similar to the mammalian oestrogen, oestradiol, and have oestrogenic properties. However, their oestrogenic activity is generally much less than that of human oestrogens (oestrogenic activity ranges from 1/500 to 1/1000 of the activity of oestradiol). Hence phytoestrogens can act as anti-oestrogenic agents by blocking the oestrogen receptors and exerting a much weaker oestrogenic effect compared with the hormone. As a consequence it has been suggested that they might partly suppress or inhibit normal oestrogenic activity in oestrogen-responsive tissues such as breast tissue and may reduce the risk of breast cancer. They may, in addition to their endocrine effects, have action on cellular targets which are independent of oestrogen, thereby complicating the prediction of their properties in humans.
Dietary intake
of phytoestrogens
Phytoestrogens are
found in the seeds, stems, roots or flowers of plants, serving as natural
fungicides and acting as part of the plant's defence mechanism against
microorganisms. They also are the molecular signals that emanate from the root
of leguminous plants that attract specific nitrogen-fixing soil bacteria. The
main classes of phytoestrogens are the isoflavones, coumestans and lignans.
Isoflavones are receiving a great deal of commercial interest at present; they
are found almost exclusively in legumes, the soya bean being the most abundant
source. The most important soya isoflavones are genistein and daidzein.
Lignans, however, are also an important source of phytoestrogens in the UK diet
as they are present in most fibre-rich foods."
So, as you can see,
phytoestrogens are not only found in many, many plants besides soy, but they
are many, many times weaker than human or artificial estrogens.
See this article by
Ginny Messina, RD: http://veganforher.com/2014/01/21/soybean-isoflavones-different-estrogen/
http://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/foodcomp/Data/isoflav/isoflav.html
is the USDA-Iowa State University Database on the Isoflavone Content of Foods.
There is good
material about this subject in an excellent book called The Okinawa Program,
pps. 123- 129, including a chart of the "Top 50" foods containing
healthful phytoestrogens (see also the
sister book The Okinawa Diet Plan).
Besides soy, flaxseed, kudzu, carrot leaves, onions, cranberry juice,
kale, celery, snow peas, broccoli, turnip greens, black tea, green tea, jasmine
tea, green beans, fava beans, applesauce, srtawberries, pintos, lentils all
have 2mg or more phytoestrogens per serving.
Here are some
values per serving of a small sampling from the chart:
soybeans, cooked,
38.2 mg/ 1/2 cup
onion, 35.8
applesauce, 3.0
mg/1/2 cup
kale, 11.2 mg/1 cup
pinto beans,
cooked, 1.9 mg/1/2 cup
garbanzos, cooked,
3.6 mg/1/2 cup
flaxseed, 28.9 mg/
1 Tbsp
cranberry juice,
44.3 mg / 3/4 cup
What many
people don't take into consideration when worrying needlessly about soy
estrogens (consumed in soy foods, NOT soy supplements), is that there is good
evidence of estrogen contamination in meat and dairy products. If you still eat dairy and/or meat, it would
behoove you to read some of the following articles:
Articles about
estrogen in dairy products:
Articles about
estrogen in meat:
Here is a comprehensive report from
Vegetarians International Voice for Animals (VIVA! http://www.viva.org.uk/
) on "The Dark Side of Dairy" http://www.milkmyths.org.uk/sites/default/files/dairy_report.pdf.
You can also obtain
the complete report "White Lies" http://www.milkmyths.org.uk/sites/default/files/dairy_report.pdf
by the Vegetarian and Vegan Foundation (VVF: http://www.vegetarian.org.uk/
) "an extensive report ...investigating the links between the consumption
of cow’s milk and dairy products and health. White Lies includes forewords by
Professor T. Colin Campbell PhD, Jacob Gould Schurman Professor Emeritus of
Nutritional Biochemistry at Cornell University in Ithaca, New York and
Professor Jane Plant CBE, (DSc, CEng), Life Fellow of the Royal Society of
Medicine and Professor of Applied Geochemistry at Imperial College in London.
The VVF’s 40,000-word report includes over 200 references from the
peer-reviewed scientific literature. The report describes the evidence linking
a diverse range of health problems and diseases to dairy including some of the
UK’s biggest killers such as heart disease, diabetes, breast cancer and
prostate cancer as well as osteoporosis, eczema, asthma, Crohn’s disease,
colic, constipation and even teenage acne."
3.) Should men eat
soy? I've heard it can cause men to be sterile.
ADDED NOTE June 20,
2007: The ultimate in soy hysteria can
be found here http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53327
, where the author claims that feeding soy to your children will make them
homosexual and reduce penis size, and that eating it as an adult will lower
your libido AND make it impossible to conceive!
Do not worry! The
birth rate in Asia, where soyfoods are eaten regularly by everyone, should set
your mind at rest!
Here is an
informative article http://www.theveganrd.com/2009/03/soy-and-sperm-and-testosterone-too.html
Soy and Sperm (and Testosterone, Too!)
by Virginia Messina, RD
Here is some
information from my book "Soyfoods
Cooking for a Positive Menopause". (I've highlighted some parts in
bold text when they pertain to men, but read through the whole essay in order
to get a full understanding):
The phytoestrogens
in soy are structurally similar to human estrogen, but very weak compared to
the estrogens that the human body produces. They bind with estrogen receptors
in the human body. Phytoestrogens are believed to protect against breast and
prostate cancers, two hormone-dependent cancers. Isoflavones, found in soy, are
only one type of phyto (or plant) hormone or sterol. There are many others
available in a number of plant foods.
Other foods that
contain phytosterols (some with "estrogenic" qualities, and some with
"progesterogenic" qualities) are:
Most seeds and nuts
and their oil;, most legumes; green leafy vegetables; sea vegetables; common
vegetables such as asparagus, beets, cabbage family, carrots, celery, corn,
onion family, garlic, nightshade family (peppers, tomatoes, eggplants,
potatoes), squash, yam, turnip, cucumber, parsley, and more "exotic"
ones such as bamboo shoots, okra, and Jerusalem artichokes;naturally-fermented
beer; most common spices and herbs; sprouted seeds and grains; most fruits and
whole grains.
These foods have
not been studied sufficiently to know what how much phytoestrogen or other
phytosterols they contain. Soyfoods have been studied exhaustively and it is
now easy to figure how much isoflavone there is in a serving of one soyfood or
another. One tablespoon of flaxseed has about an equal portion of isoflavones
to one portion of soyfood. Wild yam is full of isoflavones and is used as a
source for natural progesterone and estrogen therapy products, but it is not
the same as the yam we buy in the grocery store.
And, by the way,
cooking, baking, and frying do not seem to effect the viability of
phytoestrogens.)
Isoflavones
resemble animal (or human, in this case) estrogens just enough to be accepted
by cell estrogen receptors and bind weakly to the cell surface membrane. The
estrogen receptors have been compared to "tiny switching stations",
"locks" or "docking stations" on the cells. Joanna Dwyer
and colleagues at the New England Medical Center and Tufts University theorized
in an article they wrote for The Journal of The American Dietetic Association
(July 1994) that in premenopausal women the estrogen receptors are occupied and
the weaker plant estrogens must compete for these sites. However, in
postmenopausal women, whose self-produced estrogen declines about 60%, there is
a far greater chance of the plant estrogens "docking" and this can
increase the amount of estrogens available to her.
Perhaps the most
important soybean estrogen in genistein. It is considered a powerful
anticarcinogen and it is found in good supply in whole soybeans (including
roasted soybeans or "soynuts"), textured soy protein, soy flour,
soymilk, tofu and tofu products, and tempeh.
Daidzein, another
soybean estrogen genorously supplied by these soy foods, is now under intense
study for its potential cancer-fighting and bone-building qualities. It, like
genistein, is turned by intestinal bacteria into a substance that competes with
human estrogen. Although other foods contain phytosterols, no other commonly
consumed foods contain these two powerful phytoestrogens. And it has been
proven in human studies that isoflavones in the diet are absorbed into the
bloodstream-- one study in which volunteers ate 40 grams of textured soy
protein daily for just five days, the isoflavone levels in their urine (which
indicates their presence in the bloodstream) increased as much as thousandfold
in comparison to levels taken before the study.
In fact, in a 1993
study, women living in a controlled environment for two months had an average
increase of two and a half days in the length of time between menstrual periods
when they ate soy, which attests to the powerful effect phytoestrogens can have
on a woman's body.
(This type of
evidence has led a few scientists to wonder if eating large amounts of soy can
lower fertility, but most authorities, including Mark Messina, Ph.D., author of
The Simple Soybean and Your Health, points out that Chinese and Japanese women
have no trouble with fertility levels, despite daily high soy intake. Kenneth
Setchell, Ph.D., professor of Pediatrics at Children's Hospital and Medical
Center in Cincinnati says that, though soy lengthens the cycle, it does not prevent
ovulation and there is still a normal menstrual cycle. And there is some
evidence that eating soy can enhance fertility in men. The isoflavone genistein
may be used to treat male sterility because it affects blood levels of LH
[luteinizing hormone], needed for normal sperm production. Soybeans are also
high in zinc, a mineral used by the body in the formation of many hormones and
which also functions as an antioxidant. Zinc deficiency has been shown to
affect reproduction in animals.)
Boron, a trace element
which is necessary for our health but which you need very little of, helps
activate both vitamin D and estrogen. It is in good supply in plant foods, such
as the soybean, but not in animal proteins. A study was done in 1986 of
post-menopausal women between the ages of 48 and 82, led by Forrest Nielsen,
Ph.D., director of the U.S, Department of Agriculture's Agricultural research
Center in Grand Forks, North Dakota. Boron supplementation markedly reduced
urinary excretion of calcium and magnesium and also raised the level of and
estrogen called estradiol-17 beta, a female hormone, and testosterone (a
precursor to estradiol-17 beta), a predominantly male hormone which women
produce in smaller amounts, but which increases energy and libido.
(Testosterone is now often prescribed in small amounts to postmenopausal women
who have lost their sexual desire.) Boron supplementation is not recommended--
it should be easy to ingest enough of this ultra-trace mineral on a plant-based
diet containing lots of soy.
One of the factors
that piqued the interest of cancer researchers some years ago was the striking
difference between mortality rates for breast cancer and prostate cancer in the
West (North America and Europe) compared to Asian countries, such as China,
Japan, the Republic of Korea, and Thailand. In the West, your chances of dying
of breast or prostate cancer can be ten to twenty times higher than if you
lived in one of these Asian countries!
(Japan's average
daily soy intake is 29.5 g, whereas in the U. S. it is negligible. Japan's
breast cancer death rate is 6 per 100,000 people, and the U. S. rate is 22.4
per 100,000. Japan's prostate cancer death rate is 3.5 per 100,000, and the
U.S. rate is 15.7.)
MORE ABOUT SOY AND
CANCER:
Only a small number
of cancers can be attributed to heredity, and, when Asians emigrate to Western
countries, within a couple of generations their descendants catch right up to
other Westerners in terms of cancer deaths. Even in Asia itself, as the diet
has become more Westernized, there has been a slow but steady rise in mortality
from all types of cancer.
Studies of Japanese
men on traditional high-fiber, high-vegetable, low-fat diets showed
consistently that, though Japanese men get prostate cancer at the same rate as
North American men, far fewer Japanese die from the disease, because the cancer
does not grow or progress. When Japanese men move to North America and eat more
Westernized diets, cancers are faster-growing.
Although it has not
been clinically proven (an argument you will here time and time again from
dairy boards and meat producers), you don't have to be a rocket scientist to
conclude that the Western high-fat, high-protein, low-fiber diet might have
something to do with this discrepancy. The seven countries with the highest rates
of breast cancer (over 20 deaths per 100,000 people per year) are countries
where the average intake of fat is the highest (about 150 g a day). The seven
countries with the lowest rates of breast cancer (about 5 per 100,000) occur in
countries with the lowest intake of fats (less than 50 g a day). Prostate
cancer rates are very similar.
However, another
major protective factor may be soy in the Asian diet. A major 20-year study of
8000 Japanese men in Hawaii found a direct correlation between tofu consumption
and lower rates of prostate cancer. Those who consumed tofu once a week or less
were three times as likely to get prostate cancer as those who ate it daily.
Other factors were measured, including fat intake, and tofu consumption was
deemed to be most protective.
Cancer is believed
to be a two-stage process-- initiation, or exposure to a cancer-causing
substance, and promotion, or stimulation by another substance that makes the
first become active. There is considerable research going on today into substances
that prevent the promotion stage and therefore halt or reverse cancer
development. This is possible because there may be ten years or more between
the time of tumor initiation and actual malignancy.
Soybeans contain
several factors which may inhibit cancer growth, which may explain why the
Japanese men in those studies got prostate cancer, but succumbed to it far less
often than did their Western counterparts.
Protease inhibitors
are non-nutritive substances that are found in the reproductive parts of
soybeans and other vegetables. Because they block the activity of an enzyme
that aids the digestion of proteins, they were once thought to interfere with
nutrition. The U.S. Dept. of Agriculture spent alot of time and money trying to
remove protease inhibitors from soybeans because they thought their removal
would improve growth in children! However, it has been established that
protease inhibitors are capable of neutralizing the effects of a large number
of cancer-causing agents. Dr. Ann Kennedy, then of Harvard, now a leading
researcher at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, reported that
even brief exposure of initiated and/or promoted cells to the Bowman-Birk
Inhibitor (BBI), a protease inhibitor derived from soybeans, not only prevented
transformatioon of the cells into cancers, but also "reprogrammmed"
their precancerous changes back to the "pre-initiation" stage.
In many laboratory
studies, scientists have investigated protease inhibitors, especially BBI, and
found that they inhibited cancers of the colon, lung, pancreas, mouth,
esophagus, skin, and bladder. Evidently, protease inhibitors prevent the
activation of specific genes that cause cancer, and they also protect against
the damaging effects of free radicals and radiation.
Other substances in
soybeans and other plant foods that seem to have anti-cancer properties are:
polyphenols that have been reported to interfere with tumor promotiion and to
act as "garbage collectors", disposing of cell-damaaging mutagens and
cancer-causing agents; phytates, the plant storage form of the mineral
phosphorus, abundant in soybeans, and a chelator, a substance that binds with
certain metals that may promote tumor growth and also acts as an antioxidant,
preventing free radical damage; phytosterols, which are related to
cholesterols, but found only in plant foods, and move straight through our
intestines to our colons, protecting them against the harmful effects of bile
acids and reducing the development of colon tumors; saponins, antioxidants which
protect against free radical damage and, in laboratory investigations, have
been shown to prevent mutations that can lead to cancer.
All of these
substances, and several others which are still being investigated, occur in
many plant foods, which is one very good reason why you should eat a
plant-based diet with a wide variety of vegetables, fruits, grains and legumes.
But soy contains them all, and more, which makes soy a valuable and potentially
protective food.
Dr. Mark Messina
and Virginia Messina, in their wonderfully informative book The Simple Soybean
and Your Health, point out the intriguing results of over thirty different
epidemiologic studies that have been conducted on many types of cancers and
many varieties of soyfoods. Most of these studies were comparisons between
people living in different parts of Asia, who have generally similar diets and
lifestyles (including fat intake), which makes them more useful than
comparisons of Western and Asian diets, which have radically different average
rates of fat consumption. They suggest that people who frequently consume
soyfoods have lower cancer rates than those who consume soyfoods less often. In
many of the studies, it seems that people who eat soyfoods daily have about
half the risk of cancer as those who eat soyfoods only once or twice a week.
For instance, a study in Singapore found that those women with the highest
soyfood consumption had less than half the breast cancer risk than those who
consumed soyfoods only rarely. A Japanese study showed that people who ate soy
had only 1/7th the risk of rectal cancer of those who did not eat soy, and that
eating soybeans and tofu lowered the colon cancer risk by 40%. In China,
frequent consumers of soymilk had less than half the stomach cancer risk of
those who did not drink it. Several Chinese studies (where smoking is more
prevalent than in North Amerrica) found that lung cancer risk could be lowered
by half with frequent tofu and other soyfood consumption.
One thing that
makes soy truly unique as a protective food is that it is one of the few foods
that contains significant amounts of plant estrogens or phytoestrogens called
isoflavones. These plant compounds are converted during the normal digestive
process into a form of very weak estrogen. Back in 1982, Dr. Kenneth Setchell
identified a phytoestrogen called equol in the urine of people who eat soy
foods. Equol is structurally similar to the natural estrogen estradiol-17.
Later, Dr. Herman Aldercreutz of the University of Helsinki found high levels
of equol in the urine of Japaanese men and women who ate a soy-rich traditional
diet. He found low levels of equol in women who had breast cancer, as opposed
to cancer-free women.
Scientists from
several countries have found much higher levels of another isoflavone called
genistein in the urine of people eating a traditional Japanese soy-rich diet
than in those eating a typical Western diet.
Genistein is a powerful
anticarcinogen, found only in soybeans. It appears to inhibit enzymes that
promote tumor growth. Test tube experiments show that genistein can block the
growth of prostate cancer cells and breast cancer cells. As well, genistein
helps to promote something called differentation in cancerous cells. To explain
this simply, the human body has specialized cells-- bone cells, heart cells,
skin cells, etc.-- that have unique properties. When cells become cancerous,
they "forget" what it was they were designed to do and begin to look
the same. These so-called undifferentiated cells are very resistant to cancer
therapies.
Another isoflavone
found in soy is daidzein. Studies show that this isoflavone can also inhibit
the growth of cancer cells and promote cell differentation.
Plant lignans are
other phytoestrogens that occur widely in plant foods. Lignans are reported to
have anticancer, antiviral, bactericidal, and fungistatic properties, and
vegetarians have higher blood levels of them than do meat eaters.
Estrogens play a
key role in the development of breast cancer. Among women who will eventually
develop breast cancer, higher levels of active estrogen are present, apparently
acting as a breast cancer promoter on a cellular level. For instance, estrogen
increases cancer risk by binding to breast cells. Because isoflavones are so
similar to human estrogen, they can attatch to estrogen receptors, effectively
blocking the human estrogen. But, because they are much, much weaker than
estrogen, they don't have the deadly effect that estrogens do. (Tamoxifen, a
breast-cancer drug, works in the same way.)
Longer exposure to
estrogen is a risk factor for breast cancer-- women who start to menstruate
early and have a late menopause are at higher risk, because they have been
exposed to potent estrogens for a longer period. Remaining childless and not
breastfeeding are further risk factors, again because during pregnancy and
round-the-clock breastfeeding (before periods return) there are less active
forms of circulating estrogen than during menstruation.
One of the reasons
that fat (and meat) in the diet may be a major factor in hormone-related
cancers such as breast and prostate is that a high-fat diet promotes high
estrogen levels. At the University of California, Los Angeles, School of
medicine, David Heber placed women on a very low-fat diet (less than 10% of
calories) for only three weeks. In that short time the women dropped an average
of 50% in serum estradiol (a form of estrogen) levels (one dropped 80%!)
Another study in Boston measured blood hormone levels as well as urine
excretion levels in vegetarian and meat-eating women. The vegetarian women had
increased fecal excretion of estrogen, decreased levels of estrogen in the
bile, and lower levels in the blood, 11 to 20 % lower than those measured in
the meat-eating women. Many other studies, as well as the epidemiologic studies,
point to a low-fat, low-meat diet as another way to lower the amount of
estrogen exposure in a woman's lifetime.
A longer time
between menstrual periods also reduces exposure to estrogen. Kenneth Setchell,
Ph.D., professor of Pediatics at Children's Hospital and Medical Center in
Cincinnati, fed a group of women 60 g of textured soy protein daily for four
weeks, and observed that the time between their menstrual cycles increased two
to five days. 60 g of miso lengthened this by another day.
(By the way,
natural progesterone produced by the body or derived from wild yams and soy,
protects against breast cancer. Synthetic progestins, however, have been linked
to breast cancer.)
Obesity after
menopause is also considered a risk factor, because large amounts of estrogen
can be made in the subcutaneous fatty tissue. This is another reason to become
fit and as slim as your body is comfortable being (see Chapters II and III).
Dr. Robert M.
Kradjian, in his book Save Yourself from Breast Cancer, which I urge every
woman and girl to read, paints a sad picture of the Western girl who, eating an
estrogen-promoting high-fat, high-protein diet, will start menstruating at
about age 12 and have only one or two children, who will not be breastfed for
very long, if at all, thereby having a much longer exposure to potent estrogens
than her sisters in "less developed" countries. About half of
American girls exhibit breast or pubic hair development by age nine! In China,
Japan, the Philippines, and Africa, where breast cancer rates are much lower,
the average age of menarche is 16 or 17, as it was in the U.S. 100 years ago,
and breastfeeding is prolonged, also as it was 75 or more years ago in North America.
In men, estrogen
also plays a part in prostate cancer. Estrogen is a precursor to androgens
(male hormones), triggering the production of testosterone. Men with prostate
cancer often have higher levels of testosterone than cancer-free men. The estrogen-blocking
activities, as well as their tumor-inhibiting qualities, of soy isoflavones may
therefore also play a part in preventing prostate cancer in men.
The
cancer-protective claims for soy are called "speculative" by some,
but the data is impressive. Soyfoods have clear benefits in protecting against
heart disease and have been proven to have no negative side effects, so many
scientists are advising us not to wait years for definitive studies, but to
start reaping the benefits of the mighty soybean NOW!
And, of course, soy
is only one part of a healthy, protective diet. As I have mentioned before,
it's not a "magic bullet" or a "miracle food". A varied
complex-carbohydrate, high-fiber, low-fat, low-protein, plant-based diet with
regular vigorous exercise is a most important component in a healthy life. As
Dr. Robert M. Kradjian says, it's unlikely that good health will come from a
medicine bottle-- we must seek protection from disease through improved
nutrition. Adding soy to such a plan will only add more benefits, but this doesn't mean isolating
this or that protective substance from the soybean and taking it in a
supplemental form. Just as we should get our antioxidants in the form of fresh
fruits, vegetables, and legumes because we don't even know what all them are
yet, and we're not sure how they all work in concert with one another, we
aren't sure if the protective components of soybeans will work "out of
context". Isoflavones may not do their work if not accompanied by the soy
protein, for instance. It is a lesson that we in the West have yet to learn--
to trust the power of whole foods, rather than specific nutrients.
4.) I've been told
that it's not safe to feed soy to children. Is this true?
ADDED NOTE June 20,
2007: The ultimate in soy hysteria can
be found here http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53327,
where the author claims that feeding soy to your children will make them
homosexual and reduce penis size, and that eating it as an adult will lower
your libido AND make it impossible to conceive!
Many sources wildly
exaggerate the effects of eating soyfoods. It's true that there may be concerns
about ingesting soy isoflavones that are extracted and concentrated, but eating
soy as food does not appear to be a problem for the vast majority of people.
Check out the article at the link below, which is about vegetarian children and
cites a "landmark study" done on the children of "The Farm"
in Tennessee, a large commune started in the early 1970's. They had a vegan
diet which was soy-based. The children, who are now adults and having their own
children, have been studied for growth, health, etc... At the end of the
article you can link to "click here for footnotes", and then, if you
wish, get the medical publications on these studies, perhaps through your
library.
MORE: I’ve just
excerpted the material to do with soy and children from the following two
articles, but you might like to read these two articles in full, to remind yourself of all areas of the
“debate”.
EXCERPTS TO DO
WITH CHILDREN AND SOY:
From "Taking
the Joy Out of Soy" http://www.tldp.com/issue/11_00/joysoy.htm
by Bill Sardi:
"Much of
Fallon and Enig's criticism is generated from reports on the use of soy infant
formulas. In 1998, K.O. Klein of the Department of Clinical Science at the A.I.
duPont Hospital for Children in Wilmington, Delaware, reported that soy-based
infant formulas had been used for over 60 years and fed to millions of infants
worldwide and studied in controlled research. Klein says the medical literature
provides "no evidence of endocrine effects in humans from infant
consumption of modern soy-based formulas. Growth is normal and no changes in
timing of puberty or in fertility rates have been reported in humans who
consumed soy formula as infants." [Nutrition Reviews 56: 193-204, 1998]
The Journal of Pediatrics also conducted an earlier study that came to a
similar conclusion. [Journal Pediatrics 124: 612-20, 1994]
With no supporting
evidence, Fallon and Enig state that learning disabilities among male children
have reached epidemic proportions and that soy infant feeding, which began in
the 1970s, "cannot be ignored as a probable cause for these tragic
developments." Yet no citations are listed to back up their claim. They go
on to say that one percent of all girls show signs of puberty before the age of
three and quote a 1997 report in the Journal of Pediatrics. But that report
makes no mention of soy."
AND:
"According to
an FDA scientific review, soy does not interfere with childhood growth, does
not cause pancreatic or breast cancer, does not significantly interfere with
mineral absorption as long as dietary consumption is adequate, does not induce
early puberty, and does not interfere with fertility. Soy may induce allergies,
but that is not sufficient reason to ban it from the marketplace.
Epidemiological
studies do not confirm that soy accelerates the rate or incidence of brain
aging nor does soy increase the prevalence of thyroid disorders. There is a
consistent body of scientific evidence that soy protein consumption results in
a significant reduction in total and LDL cholesterol for those whose
cholesterol is elevated (above 250 mg per deciliter blood sample).*
Approximately 25 grams of soy is needed to produce this health benefit. This is
the asterisk noted earlier in this report. Soy doesn't lower cholesterol among
individuals with normal blood fats.
It's not like soy
hasn't been investigated thoroughly. Health reporter Jack Challem notes that in
a three-year period from 1996-98, over 1000 articles on soy isoflavones were
published in medical journals. But once the gate was opened for a health claim
for soy (cholesterol reduction), the rest of the still-to-be-confirmed health
claims were ushered in. Some scientific reports indicate soy can reduce hot
flashes among menopausal females, promote bone formation and may reduce the
risk of cancer. Consumers are likely to think that if a little bit of soy is
OK, then more is even better. "
From "The Truth About Soy" by John
Robbins http://www.foodrevolution.org/blog/the-truth-about-soy/
:
"DOES SOY
CAUSE BIRTH DEFECTS?
One of the most
alarming allegations in the Fallon and Enig article is that, due to the
phytoestrogens in soyfoods, vegetarian diets promote birth defects. They repeatedly
refer in the article and elsewhere to a study published in the British Journal
of Urology that found baby boys born to vegetarian mothers were five times more
likely to suffer from hypospadias, a malformation of the penis correctable with
surgery. I found this disturbing, and somewhat difficult to believe, because I
know of no other study that links vegetarian diets with a higher rate of any
birth defect, including hypospadias, and there are a number that show the
opposite - lower rates of a variety of birth defects in babies born to
vegetarian mothers. If the findings of this study were valid, however, it would
be extremely important.
We certainly need
more studies to determine what is going on, but after reading the actual study
I am not nearly as concerned as I was upon reading Fallon and Enig's
description, because what they neglect to mention is the significant fact that
the total number of baby boys in the study born with this condition to
vegetarian mothers was only seven. And it was not just vegetarian women who
were found to be at greater risk for delivering a boy with hypospadias. Women
who took iron supplements during pregnancy, and women who had the flu during
the first trimester, also were at heightened risk.
It's hard to know
just what to make of this isolated study. To my eyes, it highlights how much we
have yet to learn about the impact of the phytoestrogens contained in soy.
Given our current state of knowledge, I think that pregnant women should
largely avoid soy-based supplements. But there is no cause to conclude that
vegetarian diets, or soyfoods, are suspect in pregnancy.
Vegetarian diets
have consistently shown profound benefits for pregnancy and lactation,
including much lower levels of the toxic chemicals that typically concentrate
higher on the food chain in meat, fish and dairy products. A report in the New
England Journal of Medicine on the levels of contamination in human breastmilk
found that vegan mothers had dramatically lower levels of toxic chemicals in
their milk compared to mothers in the general population. The highest level
seen among these vegan mothers was actually lower than the lowest level seen in
nonvegetarian mothers. In fact, the levels of contamination found in the milk
of the vegetarian mothers was only 1 to 2 percent as great as the level found
in the milk of nonvegetarians."
AND:
"INFANT SOY
FORMULAS: BIRTH CONTROL PILLS FOR BABIES?
Another of the
disturbing charges made by the soy bashers is the allegation that "an
infant exclusively fed soy formula receives the estrogenic equivalent (based on
body weight) of at least five birth control pills per day." Soy formula,
say Fallon and Enig, amounts to "birth control pills for babies."
AND:
"These
theoretical risks are quite disturbing, but they appear at this point to be
merely theoretical, because we have yet to see any substantive evidence of this
harm in people. It is striking that there have been no reports of hormonal
abnormalities in people who were fed soy formula as infants - and this includes
millions of people in the past 30 years. In fact a major study published in the
August, 2001, Journal of the American Medical Association found that infants
fed soy formula grow to be just as healthy as those raised on cow's milk
formulas. If the phytoestrogens in soy were affecting the reproductive system
of infants fed soy formulas, then soy-fed babies would develop reproductive
health problems as adults. The study evaluated 811 men and women between the
ages of 20 and 34 who had participated in soy and cow's milk studies as
infants. No significant differences were found between the groups in more than
30 health areas. The major exception was that women who had been soy-fed
reported slightly longer menstrual periods (one-third of a day) than women
raised on cow's milk formulas.
The debate as to
which is better, formulas based on soy or cow's milk, is unresolved. Each seems
to have its own dangers. What is indisputable is that babies reared on breastmilk
have tremendous health advantages over babies reared on any type of formula.
Compared to babies who are fed soy or cow's milk based formulas, babies who are
beast-fed for at least six months have three times fewer ear infections, five
times fewer urinary tract infections, five times fewer serious illnesses of all
kinds, seven times fewer allergies, and are fourteen times less likely to be
hospitalized. Babies who are breast-fed spit up less often, have less diarrhea
and less constipation. For every 87 formula-fed babies who die from Sudden
Infant Death Syndrome, only three breast-fed babies die from the disease.
Babies who are fed only human milk for at least six months are six times less
likely to develop lymphoma, a cause of cancer, in childhood. Babies breast-fed
for at least one year are only half as likely to develop diabetes. Children who
were fed human milk have an average I.Q. seven points higher.
As adults, people
who were breast-fed have less asthma, fewer allergies, less diabetes, fewer skin
problems including dermatitis, lower risks of heart attacks and stroke due to
lower cholesterol levels, less ulcerative colitis (ulcers in the large
intestines), less Crohn's disease, and protection from certain chronic liver
diseases.
The indisputable advantages
of breast-feeding apply to mothers, too, affording major reductions of breast
cancer risk. Yet working mothers wanting to breast-feed are often faced with a
formidable challenge, because few workplaces have daycare facilities for their
workers or allow for breast-feeding breaks. In 1998, New York Representative
Carolyn Maloney sought to change that, introducing a bill in Congress that
would provide a mandated daily one hour of unpaid leave for expressing breast
milk, plus provide incentives for employers who created a
"lactation-friendly" environment.
The evidence that
breast is best is overwhelming. Infants breast-fed by vegetarian mothers have
all these advantages, plus more, because the milk of vegetarian mothers has the
added advantage of harboring substantially fewer residues from pesticides and
other toxic chemicals. Yet the anti-soy crusader Sally Fallon would evidently
prefer that an infant be fed a cow's milk formula rather than breastmilk, if
the mother is a vegetarian. She writes that "breast milk is best IF the
mother has consumed a …diet…rich in animal proteins and fat throughout her
pregnancy and continues to do so while nursing her child."
Why would someone
make a statement like that? Where are these soy antagonists coming from? What are
they trying to prove?
Fallon and Enig are
proponents of the philosophy that in order to be healthy people must eat large
amounts of saturated fat from animal products. They insist that only with the
regular consumption of lard, butter and other full fat dairy products, and
beef, can people derive the nutrients they need to be healthy. They deplore the
fact that soy products are increasingly replacing animal products in the
American diet.
Many of the most
vocal soy bashers are of similar dietary persuasions. Joseph Mercola, for
example, a Chicago osteopath who has authored a series of vehemently anti-soy
articles that have circulated widely on the internet, is an ardent advocate of
eating beef, chicken, turkey, ostrich, and other meats."
And what about
the dark side of meat?
There are a lot
more serious things in the North American diet to worry about than soy! If you don’t want to eat soy, fine. But, you can feel much better about eating
tofu than eating a number of common items in the N. American diet, like, say,
processed meats. Just as a “for
instance”, in a book called “How to Prevent and Treat Cancer with NaturalMedicine” (by Michael T. Murray, ND; Tim Birdsall, ND; Joseph E. Pizzorno, ND; and Paul
Reilly, ND) (NOT a vegetarian book, by the way), read:
"Children who
eat 12 hot dogs per month have nearly 10 times the risk of developing leukemia
compared with children who do not eat hot dogs.
Children who eat
hot dogs once a week double their chances of brain tumors; eating them twice a
week triples the risk.
Pregnant women who
eat two servings per day of any cured meat have more than double the risk of
bearing children who have brain cancer.
Kids who eat the
most ham, bacon and cured sausage have 3 times the risk of lymphoma
.
Kids who eat ground
meat once a week have twice the risk of acute lymphocytic leukemia compared to
those who eat none; eating 2 or more hamburgers weekly tripled the risk."
(Footnotes:
Preston-Martin S, Pogoda JM, Mueller BA, et al. Maternal Consumption of cured
meats and vitamins in relation to pediatric brain tumors. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev
1996;5:599-605.
Blot WJ, Henderson
BE, Boice JD Jr. Childhood cancer in
relation to cured meat intake: review of epidemiological evidence. Nutr Cancer 199;34:111-18)
AND, they also
write: “ The most important foods to avoid: Meats grilled or broiled at high
temperatures.”
And the following
is from a book called “Fresh Choices” , by David Joachim and Rochelle Davis (executive director and founder of
Generation Green, a non-profit advocacy group that promotes awareness of environmental
health issues){Rodale Press, 2004) which
is not a vegetarian book by any
means. It advises on what are the
groceries that are important to buy organic and which are low-pesticide even
though not organic:
"When the
International Agency for Research on Cancer (an arm of the World Health
Organization) looked at the diets of nearly half a million Europeans, they
found that those who ate more cured meats like hot dogs, sausage, salami,
bacon, bologna, and deli meats had a 50% increase in colon cancer risk. In the United States, Cornell University
researchers looked at 12 different studies and concluded that eating processed
meats can increase breast cancer risk.
And a recent study from Harvard University School of Public Health found
that eating too much processed meat may increase risk of Type 2 diabetes. Nitrites are the suspected culprit, as
previous studies have already linked nitrites to increased risk of Type 2
diabetes, the kind that most often afflicts children."
There are a lot
more North Americans out there wolfing down charred hamburgers, salami, ham and
hotdogs, than they are tofu burgers and veggie dogs! In 1987, in fact, the per capita consumption
of tofu and other soyfoods in the USA was less than 1 percent that of
meat. Even today, if we multiply that by
5 or even 10, it’s still a tiny amount compared to the amount of meat being
eaten.
AND WHAT ABOUT THE
TRAGIC DEATH OF BABY CROWN SHAKUR, DUBBED "DEATH BY VEGANISM"?
In her New YorkTimes op-ed piece, Nina Planck blamed the 6-week old baby's death (from a diet of only plain soymilk--
not formula or breastmilk-- and apple juice) on veganism.
The metatags for
her webpage invite browsers to “Learn why butter and lard are good for you and
corn oil and soy milk are not.”
Here is a great
blog post dissecting the op-ed and it's
by a non-vegan! http://www.tigersandstrawberries.com/2007/05/22/nina-planck-stirs-the-pot-vegans-get-steamed-film-at-eleven/
Here's Dr. John
McDougall's reply to the author: http://www.drmcdougall.com/misc/2007other/nytimes.html
Here are letters to
the NYT (some agreeing with her, most not), including one from vegan RD Amy
Lanou: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/23/opinion/l23vegan.html?n=Top%2fOpinion%2fEditorials%20and%20Op-Ed%2fLetters
More comments from
another vegan RD. http://www.vegfamily.com/dietician/0707b.htm
Nina Planck
advocates raw cow's milk for babies in her new book, http://www.babble.com/best-recipes/healthy-eating/the-healthiest-food-for-mother-and-baby/
Here's an excerpt
from an interview. http://vegan.com/blog/2010/01/28/slate-explodes-the-grass-fed-myth/
Nina Planck is a
Weston A Price follower-- she believes that people can't even get pregnant
while eating a vegan diet. She believes
that soy is poison and that we should eat lots of meat, lard, butter,
etc.. She believes in feeding children
raw cow's milk. She writes"...it is
difficult to get pregnant, sustain a healthy pregnancy, and to have sufficient
and nutritious breast milk on a vegan diet." This is patent nonsense and she is not
without an anti-vegetarian, never mind vegan, agenda.. Ask the American Dietetic Association (ADA)! Here is a quote from their paper on
vegetarian diet: http://www.vrg.org/nutrition/2009_ADA_position_paper.pdf
"Well-planned
vegan and lacto-ovo-vegetarian diets are appropriate for all stages of the life
cycle, including during pregnancy and lactation. Appropriately planned vegan
and lacto-ovo-vegetarian diets satisfy nutrient needs of infants, children, and
adolescents and promote normal growth (37). Dietary deficiencies are most
likely to be observed in populations with very restrictive diets. All vegan
children should have a reliable source of vitamin B-12 and, if sun exposure is
limited, vitamin D supplements or fortified foods should be used. Foods rich in
calcium, iron, and zinc should be emphasized. Frequent meals and snacks and the
use of some refined foods and foods higher in fat can help vegetarian children
meet energy needs. Guidelines for iron and vitamin D supplements and for the
introduction of solid foods are the same for vegetarian and nonvegetarian
infants. When it is time for protein-rich foods to be introduced, vegetarian
infants can have pureed tofu, cottage cheese, and legumes (pureed and
strained). Breast-fed vegan infants should receive a source of vitamin B-12 if
the mother’s diet is not supplemented and a source of vitamin D if sun exposure
is inadequate."
Here are some
resources by medical professionals:
5.) I've heard that
tofu is fattening-- how can that be?
I eat soyfoods all
the time and I pay close attention to fat and calories. Sure, you can use low-fat soymilk (or, what I
used to do before I started making my own—use a rich soymilk like Vitasoy and
dilute with water, 1/2 and 1/2), and low-fat soy flour, if you like, but I
don’t bother with "lite" tofu.
A 12.3 oz. box of silken tofu contains only about 150 calories in total!
As for regular
tofu, it has a bad reputation because 50 percent of its calories are from
fat. But the total amount of calories in
tofu is very low, much lower than equivilant amounts of meat or even avocado or
nuts, and much lower than eggs, oil and
solid cooking fats. A serving of tofu
contains only about 80 calories—that would be about 6 oz. silken tofu, 4 oz.
medium-firm tofu, 3 oz. firm tofu, or 2 oz. extra-firm tofu.
As an example of
this, you can use tofu in baking instead of oil and eggs, to save fat and
calories—when I use 8 oz. of medium-firm regular tofu in a muffin recipe for 12
muffins, each muffin contains only 1
gram of fat. A traditional “low-fat”
recipe with 1 large egg and 1/4 cup oil (not counting any nuts) would result in
muffins containing about 5 g fat per muffin.
We do need some fat
in our diets, and the fat in soy is good for us. Ordinarily I would not use soy oil, because
it is extracted chemically. But, in its
natural state in a soyfood, it is good for us.
6.) I just read in
this article that soy kills sperm! Can this be true?
This is seriously
bad reporting. The reporter neglected to mention that estrogens from other
sources (such as hops-- what, no beer???) were tested, and she focused only on
soy! Now this is going around like
wildfire. Read this article for the
actual story:
In addition, some
of the many other plant foods that contain phytoestrogens are: flax, coffee (!!), red clover, alfalfa sprouts, sunflower
seeds, pomegranate, fennel, licorice, yucca, oregano, nutmeg, tumeric, thyme,
goldenseal, cumin, camomille, cloves, and cottonseed oil, and many wild greens
and herbs (see the article link just below for a longer list).
We should be more
worried about the artificial estrogens found the paints, cleaning agents,
pesticides, and herbicides mentioned in the article than the ones in soy or
other plant foods . The
author of this article points this out here: http://www.fibrocystic.com/xeno.htm
An aquaintance
wrote this:
"I was thinking
about that article on soya this morning. I lived at The Farm in Tennessee where
we ate soy products every single day - tofu, tempeh, soybeans, ice bean, etc.
ad nauseum. It was our main source of protein. During the ten years I was
there, I never heard of anyone having an infertility problem. In fact,
fertility was the problem, as we had far more kids than we could take care
of."
And why is it
thought necessary until very recently by the Chinese government to have the
unfortunate and often tragic "one-child only" policy in China, where
soy is eaten on a daily basis?
7.) Friends have
told me that I shouldn't eat soy, that it's "poison" and can cause
all kinds of health problems. Is this really true?
Some people are
allergic to soy, but then, some people are allergic to wheat, corn , peanuts
and many other foods-- that does not mean that they are bad for the rest of
us! There is some serious
"soy-bashing" going on out there and some of the claims are downright
ridiculous! Do your research and make an
informed decision!
Soyfoods are, in
fact, one of the MOST studied foods in history—studies on soy and humans go
back to the turn of the 20th century.
Soy is not a “miracle” food, but it is a source of inexpensive and
high-quality protein, with proven anti-carcinogenic, antioxidant and
cholesterol-lowering properties.
Here are some
articles disputing the anti-soy theories, taking a point-by-point approach:
An appendix to the
huge online report on dairy called "White Lies" http://www.vegetarian.org.uk/whitelies/report01.html
by the Vegetarian and Vegan Foundation of the UK (VVF http://www.vegetarian.org.uk/)-- (supported by Professor T. Colin Campbell
PhD, Jacob Gould Schurman Professor Emeritus of Nutritional Biochemistry at
Cornell University in Ithaca, New York; and Professor Jane Plant CBE (DSc,
CEng), Life Fellow of the Royal Society of Medicine Professor and Professor of
Applied Geochemistry at Imperial College in London, among others).
An article by
health reporter Bill Sardi: http://www.tldp.com/issue/11_00/joysoy.htm
From vegan writer
John Robbins, author of “Diet for a New America”, “The Food Revolution”, “May
All Be Fed”, and “Reclaiming Our
Health”; founder of EarthSave International: http://www.foodrevolution.org/blog/the-truth-about-soy/
An article by
registered dietician Brenda Davis, co-author of "Becoming Vegetarian"
and "Becoming vegan": http://www.vegsource.com/articles2/davis_soy_safe.htm
Articles on soy by
Ginny Messina, RD: http://www.theveganrd.com/tag/soy
A comment by Dr.
Justine Butler about an article in the Guardian villifying soy. http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1839434,00.html
8.) Some people
assert that traditional consumption of soy in Asian countries has been mainly
of fermented foods, but that, on the whole, soy is not a mainstay; and that
soymilk and tofu are relatively recent introductions to the Asian diet. Is this
true?
UPDATE: Check out this article about Ben Franklin talking about "tau-fu" from China!
UPDATE: Check out this article about Ben Franklin talking about "tau-fu" from China!
This is
untrue. The average Taiwanese eats 64
lbs. of tofu a year! As of 1991, there
were thirty-eight-thousand tofu shops in Japan.
According to
Chinese tradition, soybeans were one of the five sacred crops named by Chinese
emperor Sheng-Nung, who reigned five thousand years ago! Sheng-Nung mentioned soybeans in his Ben Tsao
Gang Mu, written in 2838 BC! By 300 BC,
soybeans and millet were always mentioned in the ancient texts as the two major
food crops in Northern China. There is
archaeological evidence in the form of a kitchen scene in a Han tomb in
Northern China, clearly depicting the preparation of soymilk and tofu. This would be AD 25-100. Tofu is first mentioned in a document in 965
AD: the Ch'ing I Lu by T'ao Ku. The story implies that tofu was widely consumed
in China in those days.
In Japan, even
today, the words tofu, miso and shoyu (soy sauce) are commonly preceded in
everyday speech by the honorific prefix o—most people saying “o-tofu”, or
“honorable tofu”, showing the reverence for the noble soybean in their culture.
According to Dr. T.
Colin Campbell’s data from long-running The Oxford-Cornell China Project, the
percentage of foods of animal origin in the Chinese diet was found to be 0-20
percent of calories, compared to 60-80% in North America. The Project found that much of the protein
eaten in rural China is from soyfoods and that 80-90% of legume intake was from
soyfoods. William Shurtleff (world-recognized expert and researcher on
TRADITIONAL Asian soyfoods) writes in “History of Soybeans and Soyfoods in
China (1949 to 1980s)”: “Prior to 1949 and up until about the mid-1960s, most
Chinese, especially peasants, ate meat only three times a year, on their great
festivals: New Year's, Autumn Festival, and Dragon Festival…Chinese derived
2.60 kg of protein per person per year from these animal products. By
comparison, the average Chinese consumed 8.3 kg of soybeans containing 38%
protein. Assuming that 95% were consumed directly with 90% protein recovery,
these soyfoods provided the average Chinese with about 2.69 kg of protein per
year, slightly more than was derived from animal products.”
Excerpt
of letter from Susan Marie Yoshihara to
The Island Word, Courtenay, BC, April 2005:
"My husband
Yoshi was born and raised in Japan on a farm in the traditional Japanese
peasant way of life. When he was a child his family (and, no doubt everyone
else in the village) almost never ate meat. They ate fish occasionally, but
tofu was a food they had almost everyday. This was before the era of
refrigeration. Early most mornings the tofu vendor from the nearest town would
arrive on his bicycle selling a variety of freshly made tofu and other soy
products.
Yoshi has now been
in Canada for 34 years. All this time we have continued to eat a mainly simple,
plant based diet. There hasn't been a time during our 34 year long relationship
when we didn't eat tofu. We have raised two healthy sons. Both are
intellectually and physically well-endowed. Our elder son is now a scientist
and the younger is a university student in Montreal.
I got my BA in
Pacific and Asian Studies from UVic in 2003. Tofu obviously doesn't rot your
brain. And I've got a lot to say about how tofu can help with menopause but I
want to keep this letter as short as possible, so I won't.
Over the past 30
years I've taken many trips to Japan and stayed there for extended periods.
I've lived with families, studied miso making, Japanese culture and the
language. I've shopped in the supermarkets and in corner stores. Even the 7-11
sells tofu. I've eaten in fancy places, temples, bars, and "greasy
chopstick" cafes. No matter what the season or location, tofu is extremely
common and soyfoods are almost always on the menu in some form."
Susan-Marie
Yoshihara
Denman Island,
B.C"
SOY IN OTHER ASIAN
COUNTRIES:
Tempeh is the
fermented soy product that originated in Indonesia. Little is known of how soybeans and soyfoods
were introduced to Indonesia, where Buddhism was only of temporary importance,
in about the eighth century. The soybeans may have been introduced by Chinese
immigrants; in some way tempeh was developed and became the most popular
soyfood, followed by tofu, miso (taucho), and soy sauce (kechap). Tofu and
tempeh, both made from soybeans, tare common foods in Indonesia. Tempeh is more
of a specialty, but both are part of the authentic Indonesian experience.
There is some
interesting information in this article.
http://www.pacific.net.id/pakar/myra/myra_37.html
Here's an excerpt:
"Tofu has a
long history in China, where it originated about 3 millennia ago. The
technology of soybean processing spread quickly to Japan, Korea and Southeast
Asia. While tofu is but one of the soybean products of these countries, it is
perhaps the most for general consumption.
In Indonesia, tofu
is considered an important element in the daily diet. It is found throughout
the nation’s archipelago, prepared everywhere in the style of the local cuisine
and reflecting its great ethnic diversity. It may be mixed with dog meat, in
those regions where dog is considered a delicacy; in other places, tofu may be
mixed with salted fish.
Tofu feeds the rich
as well as the poor. Five-star hotels and roadside stalls serve a variety of
tofu dishes and types, from the soft custard style to the crisply fried.
Judging from the processing technology, tofu seems to have been brought to the
archipelago by the Chinese, but the exact date is difficult to establish.
People in Kediri claim that tofu came to their city first, brought by the
troops of Kublai Khan in 1292.
The story begins, according to historical
records, when Kublai Khan demanded tribute from the Javanese king Kertanegara
of Singosari; but the king refused to fulfil the Khan’s request. The Khan’s
special envoy, sent to Java in 1289, suffered the injury and indignity of
having his face disfigured by the Javanese court. Kublai Khan sent an
expedition consisting of 20,000 soldiers to punish the king. Meanwhile,
however, Jayakatawang, king of the east Javanese realm of Kediri, had conquered
Singosari and killed Kertanegara. Raden Wijaya, Kertanegara’s son-in-law, vowed
revenge. Fortuitously for him, the Mongol expedition landed in Surabaya. He
directed the ships through the Brantas river to Kediri, and led a heavy battle.
Raden Wijaya, the victor, then established the illustrious Majapahit kingdom,
whose imperial reign endured into the 15th century. The place where the Chinese
junks anchored is now called Jung Biru (“blue junks”). Kublai Khan’s ships had
complete cooking galleys, of course; and some were equipped for making tofu.
Today many tofu
shops can be found in Kediri, offering tofu in a great variety of consistency,
from soft custard-like cakes to the more solid takua. The process of making
tofu is similar to the production of cheese. First, soybean milk is obtained by
grinding the beans mixed with water between two heavy stones. In Kediri, this
grinding is done the old-fashioned way, by two men who turn the heavy stones by
hand. From this liquid, different products may be produced at successive stages
of processing: soy milk and whey in the early stages, and tofu at a secondary
stage. Nothing is wasted. The leftover skins are used for cattle feed, but
sometimes are also sold to local villagers, who ferment it to
make oncom, an orange-colored substance,
that smells aomewhat stale, kije bkue
cheese, but (like blue cheese) is delicious.
Kediri is so proud
of its tofu history that, as part of the celebrations of the 1123rd anniversary
of the city, a 500 kilogram tofu was made and submitted to the Indonesian
Museum of Records in Semarang.
Understandably, this highly perishable half-ton tofu cake is on display
only in the form of a replica. The original was donated to the poor. "
This is a long page
of anecdotal "evidence" from Asians and people who lived in Asia
about soymilk and other soy consumption in Asia. http://ask.metafilter.com/42902/Do-people-in-Asia-drink-soy-milk
The consensus seems to be that they DO eat alot of soy in Asia!
The last entry
on the page is this one:
"Part of this
question, implied by the "did/do" is whether soy is a historical part
of diets, not just whether Asians consume it now. The author of this book, who
I heard on the radio, said that soy was not in the human diet until 3,000 years
ago, and soy milk was not in Asia until the 20th century. I don't know if she's
right but it's one informed opinion you can read more about.
Incidentally, she
brought it up in the context that people who champion soy like to boast about
how it's been a staple forever in Asia. Her opinion is that soy is not healthy,
and that the Asian connection is very tenuous. Condiment-only, basically." Posted by scarabic at 8:27 PM on October 25. The author she is referring to is Kaayla
Daniel, who wrote "The Whole Soy Story" and who is on the Board of
Directors of the Weston A. Price Foundation!
The following is
from http://www.westonaprice.org/soy-alert/soy-dark-side
"Soy
proponents claim that soy is a staple in Asia. A "staple" is defined
as a major commodity, one that provides a large portion of calories in the
diet, such as rice and fish in Japan, or rice and pork in China. The Japanese
consume 150 pounds of fish per person per year, or almost one-half pound per
person per day and a 1977 dietary survey in China determined that 65 percent of
calories came from pork, including the pork fat used in cooking. By contrast,
overall consumption of soy in Asia is surprisingly low. The average soy
consumption in China is about 10 grams or 2 teaspoons per day. Levels are
somewhat higher in Japan, averaging about 50 grams or 1/4 cup per day. (I
assume that this is grams of soy product, but which one, I don’t know.) In both
countries, soy is used as a condiment or flavoring, and not as a substitute for
animal foods. Seafood and seaweed in the Japanese diet provide sufficient
iodine to counteract the negative effects of the isoflavones in soy."
Their sources?
1.) www.csa.com/hottopics/thyroid/oview.html
(page no longer there!)
2.)
soyonlineservice.co.nz (no specific article) (This is the New Zealand
equivalent of Weston A. Price!)
3.) www.westonaprice.org
(no specific article)
Now read the
following from an article by registered dietician Reed Mangels: http://www.everybodyspersonaltrainer.com/about_soy.htm#.UvQrJGJdWw0
"If we look at
the amount of soy isoflavones used in countries where soy is a regular part of
the diet and where no harmful effects have been documented, perhaps this can
give us some idea of a reasonable amount of soy. The average daily soy intake
in Japan is about 65 grams per person, and the average isoflavone intake is
about 20-32 milligrams per day. Higher intakes have been reported in China,
where women's median isoflavone intake was 39 milligrams per day, and in
Singapore, where the median intake was 35 milligrams per day. To find out the
isoflavone level of your diet, use the USDA's isoflavone database, or look on
packages of soy foods that you eat. Choosing 2-3 servings of soy per day
will generally lead to an isoflavone intake similar to that seen in countries
where soy is a regular part of the diet."(Notice the footnotes inserted
and listed under the article—something noticeably lacking from from the WAP
article!)
SOURCES:
Hsiang Ju Lin and
Tsuifeng Lin, Chinese Gastronomy (Hastings house, NY, 1969)
“The Prodigious
Soybean” by Fred Hapgood, National Geographic,
Vol. 172, No. 1 (1987), p. 66-91.
Soyfoods in Asia:
How Much Do People Really Eat? by Ginny Messina, RD http://www.theveganrd.com/2011/03/soyfoods-in-asia-how-much-do-people-really-eat.html
************************************************************
Dr. T. Colin
Campbell, PhD, MD (regarded by many as the greatest nutritionist of our time),
(Jacob Gould Schurman Professor of Nutritional Biochemistry Cornell University,
On Leave; Project Director China-Oxford-Cornell Diet and Health Project
Division of Nutritional Sciences Cornell University Ithaca, NY ) NOTE: The Cornell-Oxford “China Study” is the
most comprehensive project on diet and disease ever undertaken. Two major
surveys were undertaken, 1983 and 1989-90. These surveys were undertaken in
China because cancers and various other diseases exhibit exceptional geographic
localization. Thus, it made sense to examine these local regions to determine
the responsible dietary and lifestyle factors.
There is a 900 page
book of data called Diet, Lifestyle and Mortality in China (1990), but the data
has now been analyzed and you can get
Dr. Campbell’s book The China Study.
You can read about
the study and link to results, comprehensive findings and papers about the
study at these links: http://www.cornell.edu/video/playlist/the-china-project-studying-the-link-between-diet-and-disease
and
http://www.cornell.edu/video/playlist/the-china-project-studying-the-link-between-diet-and-disease
and
http://intraspec.ca/TheChinaStudy.pdf
and
http://www.cornell.edu/video/playlist/the-china-project-studying-the-link-between-diet-and-disease
and
http://intraspec.ca/TheChinaStudy.pdf
“Chronologies of
Various Soyfoods" (soymilk, edamame and tofu)" by William Shurtleff
©2001 (co-author of “The Book of Tofu”, “The Book of Miso”, and “The Book of
Tempeh”) http://www.soyinfocenter.com/chronologies_of_soyfoods-introduction.php
"A Comprehensive
History of Soy" http://www.soyinfocenter.com/HSS/history.php by
William Shurtleff and Akiko Aoyagi, authors of “The Book of Tofu”, “The Book of
Miso”, and “The Book of Tempeh” (This is
a goldmine of information!) NOTE FROM
THE AUTHORS: "Research on this scholarly history book and its
bibliographies began in the early 1970s. We hope to publish the book in 4
volumes after our series of Bibliographies and Sourcebooks. The manuscript
presently contains over 2,500 pages and the bibliographies more than 63,000**
references. We have decided to make many of the chapters available now."
9.) Are soy
formulas dangerous for babies?
Let’s put the scare story about the danger of
soy formula to rest (and, by the way, I am a firm believer in “breast is
best”, and am a former La Leche League leader): Formula is definitely second-best for babies,
whether cow’s or goat’s milk, or soy.
But, if for some reason the baby can’t be breastfed and is allergic to
dairy (a common occurrence), soy formula is essential (and Baby's Only Organic
Soy Toddler Formula is available). Researchers at the University of
Pennsylvania School of Medicine did a study on soy-based infant formula begun
over thirty years ago. Their results, published in the Journal of the American
Medical Association, reaffirm the safety of soy infant formula and offer
evidence against the harmful effects of soy that have been presented in the
popular media. According to their findings, soy formula does not appear to lead
to any more health or reproductive problems than cow milk formula. This study
follows up a landmark 13-year study at the University of Iowa. Strom and his
colleagues tracked down and interviewed 811 adults [“mistakenly” reported as
only 211 by an article on Dr. Mercola’s site!] – some from almost 30 years
after the Iowa study began – and compared those that had been fed soy formula
with those fed cow’s milk formula. “We have found that, in terms of sexual
development, there is very little difference between children who, as infants,
were fed cow milk formula and those fed soy formula,” said Brian L. Strom, MD,
MPH, director of the Penn Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology.
Read more of this article: http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2001-08/uopm-cia081301.php
.
From http://www.foodrevolution.org/blog/the-truth-about-soy/
by John Robbins:
"INFANT SOY
FORMULAS: BIRTH CONTROL PILLS FOR BABIES?
Another of the
disturbing charges made by the soy bashers is the allegation that "an
infant exclusively fed soy formula receives the estrogenic equivalent (based on
body weight) of at least five birth control pills per day." Soy formula,
say Fallon and Enig, amounts to "birth control pills for babies."
In my view, there
is some basis here for concern. For an adult to regularly eat soy
characteristically produces a reduced risk of developing breast or prostrate
cancer. But the same phytoestrogens that produce this effect in adults may
produce very different effects in infants. "With adults, half their
phytoestrogens are freed into the bloodstream to bind to estrogen receptors,
which helps to fight breast cancer," explains Patricia Bertron, dietician
director of the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine. "But with
infants, less than five percent are available to bind to receptors." There
is a possibility that this could pose a risk to the sexual development of
infants and children. Because the milk source makes up nearly the entire diet
of infants, babies fed soy formulas may be at increased risk of harm.
These
theoretical risks are quite disturbing, but they appear at this point to be
merely theoretical, because we have yet to see any substantive evidence of this
harm in people. It is striking that there have been no reports of hormonal
abnormalities in people who were fed soy formula as infants - and this includes
millions of people in the past 30 years. In fact a major study published in the August, 2001,
Journal of the American Medical Association found that infants fed soy formula
grow to be just as healthy as those raised on cow's milk formulas. If the
phytoestrogens in soy were affecting the reproductive system of infants fed soy
formulas, then soy-fed babies would develop reproductive health problems as
adults. The study evaluated 811 men and women between the ages of 20 and 34 who
had participated in soy and cow's milk studies as infants. No significant
differences were found between the groups in more than 30 health areas. The
major exception was that women who had been soy-fed reported slightly longer
menstrual periods (one-third of a day) than women raised on cow's milk formulas.
The debate as to
which is better, formulas based on soy or cow's milk, is unresolved. Each seems
to have its own dangers. What is indisputable is that babies reared on
breastmilk have tremendous health advantages over babies reared on any type of
formula. Compared to babies who are fed soy or cow's milk based formulas,
babies who are beast-fed for at least six months have three times fewer ear
infections, five times fewer urinary tract infections, five times fewer serious
illnesses of all kinds, seven times fewer allergies, and are fourteen times
less likely to be hospitalized. Babies who are breast-fed spit up less often,
have less diarrhea and less constipation. For every 87 formula-fed babies who
die from Sudden Infant Death Syndrome, only three breast-fed babies die from
the disease. Babies who are fed only human milk for at least six months are six
times less likely to develop lymphoma, a cause of cancer, in childhood. Babies
breast-fed for at least one year are only half as likely to develop diabetes.
Children who were fed human milk have an average I.Q. seven points higher.
As adults, people
who were breast-fed have less asthma, fewer allergies, less diabetes, fewer
skin problems including dermatitis, lower risks of heart attacks and stroke due
to lower cholesterol levels, less ulcerative colitis (ulcers in the large
intestines), less Crohn's disease, and protection from certain chronic liver
diseases.
The indisputable
advantages of breast-feeding apply to mothers, too, affording major reductions
of breast cancer risk. Yet working mothers wanting to breast-feed are often
faced with a formidable challenge, because few workplaces have daycare
facilities for their workers or allow for breast-feeding breaks. In 1998, New
York Representative Carolyn Maloney sought to change that, introducing a bill
in Congress that would provide a mandated daily one hour of unpaid leave for
expressing breast milk, plus provide incentives for employers who created a
"lactation-friendly" environment.
The evidence that
breast is best is overwhelming. Infants breast-fed by vegetarian mothers have
all these advantages, plus more, because the milk of vegetarian mothers has the
added advantage of harboring substantially fewer residues from pesticides and
other toxic chemicals. Yet the anti-soy crusader Sally Fallon would evidently
prefer that an infant be fed a cow's milk formula rather than breastmilk, if
the mother is a vegetarian. She writes that "breast milk is best IF the
mother has consumed a …diet…rich in animal proteins and fat throughout her
pregnancy and continues to do so while nursing her child."
Why would someone
make a statement like that? Where are these soy antagonists coming from? What
are they trying to prove?
Fallon and Enig are
proponents of the philosophy that in order to be healthy people must eat large
amounts of saturated fat from animal products. They insist that only with the
regular consumption of lard, butter and other full fat dairy products, and
beef, can people derive the nutrients they need to be healthy. They deplore the
fact that soy products are increasingly replacing animal products in the
American diet.
Many of the most
vocal soy bashers are of similar dietary persuasions. Joseph Mercola, for
example, a Chicago osteopath who has authored a series of vehemently anti-soy
articles that have circulated widely on the internet, is an ardent advocate of
eating beef, chicken, turkey, ostrich, and other meats."
10.) Can soy affect
menstruation and fertility?
From my book "Soyfoods
Cooking for a Positive Menopause:
In a 1993 study,
women living in a controlled environment for two months had an average increase
of two and a half days in the length of time between menstrual periods when
they ate soy, which attests to the powerful effect phytoestrogens can have on a
woman's body.
(This type of evidence
has led a few scientists to wonder if eating large amounts of soy can lower
fertility, but most authorities, including Mark Messina, Ph.D., author of "The
Simple Soybean and Your Health", points out that Chinese and Japanese
women have no trouble with fertility levels, despite daily high soy
intake. Kenneth Setchell, Ph.D.,
professor of Pediatrics at Children's Hospital
and Medical Center in Cincinnati says that, though soy lengthens the
cycle, it does not prevent ovulation and there is still a normal menstrual
cycle.
And there is some
evidence that eating soy can enhance fertility in men. The isoflavone genistein may be used to treat male sterility because it
affects blood levels of LH [luteinizing hormone], needed for normal sperm
production. Soybeans are also high in
zinc, a mineral used by the body in the formation of many hormones and which
also functions as an antioxidant. Zinc
deficiency has been shown to affect reproduction in animals.)
Dr. Kenneth
Setchell of Children's Hospital and Medical Center in Cincinnati has done much
research on just this subject, and found that, on average, the length of time
between periods increased by 2 to 5 days when young women ate 60 g.(about 2 oz.) of textured soy protein (a
pretty concentrated soy food) a day. A
longer time between periods is considered beneficial in terms of breast cancer,
since the body has less lifetime exposure to estrogen.
ABOUT
PHYTOESTROGENS:
From the book
"The Okinawa Program" by Bradley J. Willcox, MD, Craig Willcox, PhD,
and Makoto Suzuki, MD (Three rivers Press, NY, 2001), based on the landmark
25-year study: (My notes in brackets[] and my bold type. The text in the book is footnoted and there
is a chart of phytoestrogen content of many foods.) http://www.okicent.org/
“Okinawan women get
natural estrogens (natural SERMs [“selective estrogen receptor modulators”]
through their diet [rather than drugs that are given to women with risk of
breast cancer in our society—BCG], mainly from the large quantities of soy they
consume. Soy contains phytoestrogens,
or plant estrogens, called flavinoids.
The other important major phytoestrogens are lignans, which are derived
from flax and other grains. All plants,
especially legumes (beans, peas), onions, and broccoli, contain these natural
SERMs, but not nearly in the same quantity as soy and flax. Soy and flax are the undisputed king and
queen of natural SERMs. The good thing
about flavinoids and lignans is that they offer you protection from the damaging
effects of estrogen while allowing you all the beneficial effects. Here’s how it works:
All estrogens,
whether they are produced in your body or by plant, have one thing in
common: they must connect with a cell
receptor to work, to promote cell growth.
If the estrogen receptor is blocked, the estrogen can’t connect. You can think of it as the estrogen trying to
get through the cell door with a key.
The receptor is the keyhole. When
the keyhole is blocked by SERMs the estrogen can’t get in, and therefore can’t
promote growth. That’s part of what
flavinoids and lignans do: they’re estrogen blockers—but they are selective
blockers; remember, SERM means selective estrogen receptor modulator. That’s the beauty of these
phytoestrogens. They allow estrogen to
connect and promote growth at certain selected areas of the body where it is
beneficial—that is, the bones—and block it from promoting growth in sensitive
sites, such as the endometrium and breast , where it can do damage. With no extra cell growth there is much less
risk of cancer.
This is important
information for women in North America, where even the definition of high risk
for breast cancer is scary. A high-risk
woman is someone over the age of twenty-five who has at least a 1.7 percent projected
risk of breast cancer in the subsequent five years—about double the average
risk. This includes most women with a
first-degree relative (sister, mother or daughter) who had breast cancer and
all women over sixty years of age—about 29 million American women, or roughly
20 percent of all women in the United States.”
(There is a lot more and I highly recommend this book to everyone.) Here’s one more quote: “Your risk as a North American woman is
approximately one in ten of getting breast cancer in your lifetime.” AND “In
contrast, if you are on Okinawan woman [on the traditional diet—not the modern,
North American-influenced one—BCG], the chances are the no one you know has
it or will develop it. You may have
heard of it but have never seen it—it is that rare. There is no need for screening
mammography. You have to put 100,000
Okinawan women in a room to find six who will die from it. This improves an Okinawan’s odds of living
life without fear of breast cancer by more than 80 percent versus a North
American woman. Even if you get breast
cancer in Okinawa, your chances of dying of it are less than half as much as
among North Americans.” (They go on to
say that “bad genes” appear to account for only a small number of breast cancer
cases. Many studies have shown that
Asian women increase their risk of breast cancer when they move to North
America and adopt our eating habits.]
11.) Don't
non-fermented soyfoods contain "anti-nutrients" which block mineral
absorption?
Anti-soy writers
put forth the theory that “non-fermented soy products contain phytic acid
[phytates] which essentially acts as an anti-nutritive food because of its
ability to bind with certain nutrients, including iron, zinc, copper and
magnesium, thereby inhibiting their absorption.” This is a gross over-simplification and
misinterpretation of the facts, frankly.
However, not only fermenting, but also cooking, sprouting and soaking
all destroy some of the phytates! (And
soy is not the only food that contains phytates. Wheat bran has higher levels, and all whole
grains, legumes, nuts and seeds, and some vegetables, contain them.) Soyfoods are ALWAYS eaten cooked. Even soy sprouts are eaten stir-fried or
lightly steamed or in soups in China.
Green soybeans are also lightly cooked before eating. Soymilk and tofu are both made from ground,
cooked soybeans. Soybeans and soy flour
are virtually inedible raw, anyway.
In any case, it is
really a non-issue. Karl Weingartner, a
soy specialist at the University of Illinois, found that soy contains just
enough phytates to bind the few minerals present in the soy itself and no more.
We still absorb all the minerals present in other foods we eat, even foods
eaten with soy. Besides, phytates are antioxidants and have numerous healthy
effects, from cancer prevention to boosting immunity. Susan Havala, MS, RD, writes “… many
foods also contain iron absorption inhibitors such as the tannins found in tea,
coffee, cola drinks, and some spices, as well as the phytates found in whole
grains and even the calcium in dairy products. In the context of the total diet
these enhancers and inhibitors generally offset each other….Recently, some
researchers have speculated that there are inherent advantages in getting the
bulk of dietary iron from nonheme [plant-based], rather than heme
[animal-based], sources… because iron is a potent oxidant, some researchers
speculate that the generation of free radicals and the oxidation of cholesterol
into a form more readily absorbed by the arteries may increase the risks of
coronary artery disease and cancer.”
There is a much
more technical rendering of the facts in this article http://www.tldp.com/issue/11_00/joysoy.htm including (my bold italics): “The IP6-phytic acid in soy has been
found to reduce the risk of colon cancer in an animal study via its ability to
chelate iron. [Proceedings Society Experimental Biology & Medicine 221:
80-86, 1999] The IP6-phytic acid in soy may be the primary ingredient that helps
to control cholesterol. [Journal Nutrition 125: 606-611S- 1995] IP6-phytic acid is not only found in
soy, it is provided in other whole grains, particularly bran. But no one is
proposing that bran is toxic because of its IP6-phytic acid content. Cow's
milk (probably due to its lactoferrin content), and eggs also tend to decrease
the bioavailability of iron from plant foods. [Federal Proceedings 42: 1716-20,
1983]"
Writer John Robbins
also covers this theory in a lengthy discussion in his article, from which this
excerpt comes http://johnrobbins.info/blog/what-about-soy/ :
“…there is absolutely no reliable evidence that vegetarians who eat
soyfoods ‘risk severe mineral
deficiencies.’ The complete adequacy of vegetarian diets is now so
thoroughly proven and documented that even the National Cattlemen's Beef
Association has acknowledged the legitimacy of meatless diets. In an official
statement, these representatives of the beef industry declared, ‘Well planned
vegetarian diets can meet dietary recommendations for essential nutrients.'
"
Why pick on soy,
anyway? The “anti-nutrients” that
many refer to when railing against soy are present in many foods besides soy,
particularly in wheat bran. No one
is railing against wheat bran, but I’m certain that it is sprinkled on foods
and added to foods on a far more regular basis in North America than soy
grits! In fact, many other foods
commonly (more commonly than soy for most North Americans) contain these
substances— including legumes, grains, vegetables, nuts and seeds .
**And what about
the dark side of meat?
There are a lot
more serious things in the North American diet to worry about than soy! If you don’t want to eat soy, fine. But, you can feel much better about eating
tofu than eating a number of common items in the N. American diet, like, say,
processed meats. Just as a “for
instance”, in a new book called “How to Prevent and Treat Cancer with Natural
Medicine” (by Michael T. Murray, ND; Tim Birdsall, ND; Joseph E. Pizzorno, ND;
and Paul Reilly, ND) (NOT a vegetarian book, by the way), read:
"Children who
eat 12 hot dogs per month have nearly 10 times the risk of developing leukemia
compared with children who do not eat hot dogs.
Children who eat
hot dogs once a week double their chances of brain tumors; eating them twice a
week triples the risk.
Pregnant women who
eat two servings per day of any cured meat have more than double the risk of
bearing children who have brain cancer.
Kids who eat the
most ham, bacon and cured sausage have 3 times the risk of lymphoma.
Kids who eat ground
meat once a week have twice the risk of acute lymphocytic leukemia compared to
those who eat none; eating 2 or more hamburgers weekly tripled the risk."
(Footnotes:
Preston-Martin S, Pogoda JM, Mueller BA, et al. Maternal Consumption of cured
meats and vitamins in relation to pediatric brain tumors. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev
1996;5:599-605.
Blot WJ, Henderson
BE, Boice JD Jr. Childhood cancer in
relation to cured meat intake: review of epidemiological evidence. Nutr Cancer 199;34:111-18)
ADDED NOTE June 20, 2007: The ultimate in soy hysteria can be found
here, where the author claims that feeding soy to your children will make them
homosexual and reduce penis size, and that eating it as an adult will lower
your libido AND make it impossible to conceive!
12.) Is it true that eating tofu will give you
Alzheimer's?
This one has been
trotted out again and again, despite the fact that it was very small
epidemiological study that started all the kafuffle.
John Robbins writes
at http://johnrobbins.info/blog/tofu-soy-milk-dementia/
:
“The study,
conducted in Hawaii by Lon White, M.D., and his associates, was part of the
Honolulu Heart Study. Looking at the diets and the risk of dementia of Japanese
men residing in Hawaii, the study found that men who ate the most tofu during
their mid-40s to mid-60s were more likely to have dementia and Alzheimer’s as
they grew older… But that’s not all we know. We know, for example, that
dementia rates are lower in Asian countries (where soy intake is high) than in
western countries. We know that the Japanese lifestyle (with its high soy
intake) has long been associated with longer life span and better cognition in
old age. And we know that Seventh Day Adventists, many of whom consume soyfoods
their whole lives, have less dementia in old age than the general
population…The Honolulu Heart Study is far indeed from conclusive. It measured
intake of only 27 foods, and there are many lifestyle factors for which it did
not control. Researchers acknowledged that tofu consumption might be a marker
for some other factor that affects cognitive function. And this would make tofu
an innocent bystander. Results of other studies, say soy researchers Mark and
Virginia Messina, ‘would suggest this is true.’
A number of
clinical studies have shown that soy and isoflavones from soy are actually
beneficial for cognition. In one study, published in the journal
Psychopharmacology in 2001, young adult men and women who ate a high-soy diet
experienced substantial improvements in short-term and long-term memory and in mental flexibility.
Other studies have found that isoflavone supplements from soy improve cognitive
function in postmenopausal women.
It is important to
bear in mind that the Honolulu Heart Study is the only study that has suggested
a link between tofu consumption and dementia in old age. Having studied the
literature, soy researchers Mark and Virginia Messina conclude that ‘there is
no reason to believe that eating soyfoods is harmful to brain aging’. I agree,
which is why members of my household happily eat tofu two or three times a
week, soy milk daily, and tempeh once or twice a week. ”
(By the way, Dr.
White later said: “It might be that this is totally wrong and the tofu has zip
to do with it.” [Los Angeles Times, 3/23/2000])
"Is there
anything else you can do to protect your brain functioning as you age?
Absolutely.
Regular exercise
and having an active mental life are both associated with better cognitive
aging.
If you are addicted
to alcohol, tobacco, and/or drugs, you now have yet another reason to overcome
this problem, because over time these vices take a dramatic toll on the brain.
Minimize your
exposure to toxic chemicals, including heavy metals like lead, aluminum and
mercury.
Don’t take
prescription drugs unnecessarily. Serious memory problems have been associated
with cholesterol-lowering statin drugs.
And don’t take
over-the-counter drugs lightly, either. Even seemingly harmless medications,
such as antihistamines and decongestants, can pose unexpected risks.
Can supplements
help? Taken selectively, yes. The B-vitamins have been shown to be particularly
useful, especially for older people. Elderly people are more likely to have
B-vitamin deficiencies than younger people, due to greater use of prescription
drugs, and lower vitamin bioavailability due to declining levels of the enzymes
involved in vitamin metabolism. Of the B-vitamins, choline is specifically
critical for the preservation of memory. As well, blood-flow enhancers like
quercetin and d-phenylalinine, and herbals such as Huperzine, Rhodiola rosea,
and gingko have been shown to improve
memory and focus in older people.
But most important
of all is the food you eat.
Eating a diet high
in antioxidants is essential. Antioxidants protect against free radical damage,
and free radical damage is deeply implicated in the development of cognitive
dysfunction and dementia.
The extent to which
free radicals can damage our brains is dependent on whether we get enough
antioxidant shields to protect ourselves from them. Vegetarians have an
advantage here, because plant foods contain more antioxidants, and animal-based
foods tend to activate free radical production and cell damage.
As I mentioned,
there is only a single study that suggests soy might be a problem. On the other
hand, there are a great many studies that demonstrate the benefit of a
plant-based diet high in antioxidants for brain function.
I’ll briefly
mention just a few of these.
A study published
in the American Journal of Epidemiology found high vitamin E and vitamin C
levels to each be associated with less memory loss in the elderly.
A study published
in 1997 in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition examined dietary intake
and cognitive function in a large group of people aged 65 to 90 years.
Researchers concluded that “a diet with less fat, saturated fat, and
cholesterol, and more carbohydrate, fiber, vitamins (especially folate,
vitamins C and E, and beta-carotenes), and minerals (iron and zinc)…(was shown)
not only to improve the general health of the elderly but also to improve
cognitive function.”
A study published
in 1997 in the Journal of the American Geriatric Society found that scores on
mental tests were higher among older people who consumed the most vitamin C and
beta-carotene.
Other studies
published in the British Medical Journal and the Journal of the American
Medical Association have found that low levels of vitamin C in the blood are
linked to poorer cognitive performance in old age, while B vitamins and
beta-carotene are linked to better cognitive function.
While only one study
has suggested a link between soy consumption and cognitive dysfunction, many
studies have found distinct correlations between dietary antioxidants and
improved cognition. This is quite important. And by the way, I know of no study
that suggests that consuming more dietary antioxidants impairs mental
functioning or increases memory loss.
The best sources of
dietary antioxidants are fresh vegetables and fruits, whole grains and legumes.
It is clear that a diet rich in these foods provides significant protection
against cognitive decline.
A whole foods
plant-based diet based on fresh vegetables and fruits, whole grains and legumes
is good for brain function because it is rich in antioxidants, but there’s
another reason, too. The health of your arteries and vessels that transport
blood to and from your brain is dependent on how well you eat. Diets high in
saturated fats and trans-fats reduce the flow of oxygen and nutrients to your
brain, and pave the way for strokes to occur. On the other hand, diets that maintain
healthy cholesterol levels and a healthy cardiovascular system ensure proper
blood flow to the brain, supplying the necessary raw ingredients for it to
function optimally.
Many studies speak
to us about the relationship between diet and the most serious forms of
dementia, such as strokes (vascular dementia) and Alzheimer’s. Here are a few:
Studies published
in the Journal of Alzheimer’s disease and the Journal of the American Medical
Association compared Alzheimer’s rates to dietary variables in 11 different
countries, and found the highest rates of the disease among people with a high
fat intake and low intake of whole grains.
In a publication
from the famous Framingham study, researchers concluded that for every three
additional servings of fruits and vegetables a day, the risk of stroke is
reduced by 22 percent. And three servings, as defined by this study, are not
very much. In this study, 1/2 cup of peaches, of 1/4 cup of tomato sauce, or
1/2 cup of broccoli, or one potato were each considered one serving. By this
standard, the men in the study who consumed the most fruits and vegetables
consumed as many as 19 servings a day.
In yet another
study, scientists analyzed food intake and cognitive performance for over 5,000
older people. Publishing their results in 1997 in the Annals of Neurology, they
found that people who consumed the most fat and saturated fat had the highest
risk of dementia due to vascular problems.
A large study published
in the Archives of Neurology in 2003 found that older people can reduce their
risk of developing Alzheimer’s disease by eating fish, consuming fish oil, or
taking DHA supplements. Participants in the study who consumed fish once a week
had a 60% lower risk of developing the disease than did those who rarely or
never ate fish. Participants whose daily intake of DHA was about 100 mg/day had
an incidence of Alzheimer’s which was 70% lower than those with an intake of 30
mg/day or less.
Another study on Alzheimer’s
disease found that the risk of getting the disease was 3.3 times greater among
people whose blood folic acid levels were in the lowest one-third range, and
4.5 times greater when blood homocysteine levels were in the highest one-third.
The study found it desirable to maintain low blood homocysteine levels and high
blood folic acid levels, a situation most easily achieved on a whole foods
plant-based diet with ample vitamin B-12. (Because adequate B-12 is necessary
to regulate homocysteine levels, people whose B-12 levels are low may risk
higher homocysteine.) The best source of folic acid is green leafy vegetables.
Homocysteine is an amino acid that is derived primarily from animal protein.
In our society, we
come to take for granted that aging will bring restricted short term memory and
diminished mental faculties. A visit to most nursing homes demonstrates how
commonly and how markedly people in our society experience cognitive decline as
they age. As one comedian described it, “First you forget names, then you
forget faces, then you forget to pull your zipper up, then you forget to pull
your zipper down.”
But there is good
science to show that we can experience clear thinking well into our later
years. It is not soy consumption, but the standard American high-saturated fat
diet, low in vegetables and fruits and whole grains and thus low in
brain-preserving antioxidants, that is primarily responsible for the unhealthy
outcomes we see so often in our elderly.
By the way, you
mentioned that your wife is now breast-feeding a two-year-old. Congratulations
to you both on your new child, and doubly congratulations to your wife for
breastfeeding for so long. The health benefits for breastfeeding are dramatic.
Keep on laughing,
keep on taking care of yourself, and you won’t be one of the people who ends up
lamenting, “If I knew I was going to live this long, I would have taken better
care of myself.”
With joy in the
adventure of life,
John"
MORE ON SOY AND
COGNITIVE FUNCTION:
Some recent stories
have raised questions about soy’s impact on cognitive function. A University of Hawaii researcher, Dr. Lon
White, reviewing previous data collected on food intake from Japanese-American
men reported a possible association between high tofu intake and loss of
cognitive function. Dr. Lon White’s
study was an observation – it does not show cause and effect. Many environmental factors have been related
to memory loss, only a few have persisted when tested in clinical trials.
In Dr. White’s
epidemiological study, the men consuming large amounts of tofu differed
significantly from the other men in the study.
The men who consumed more tofu were older by over two years (may account
for the differences in the brain size), had suffered more strokes (a condition
that directly compromises cognitive function), and had come from poorer
families (possibly with compromised nutrition in utero and infancy that would
limit brain development.)
Taken alone
these findings are troublesome, Dr. Thomas Badger, a soy researcher with the Arkansas Children’s Nutrition
center, notes that common sense argues against such findings. “Millions of people have consumed soy for
centuries. In countries where the
highest consumption occurs, there is no epidemiological data to support
cognitive problems. In fact, these
countries actually celebrate aging, and their political and business leaders
are in general much older and function at a high level.”
13.) Does soy
interfere with thyroid therapy, or cause or exacerbate thyroid problems?
Here's a Q and A from http://www.drfuhrman.com/
,Dr. Joel Fuhrman’s website (author of “Eat to Live”):
Q: I've recently read that walnuts, soy
products and high fiber foods are contraindicated to the efficacy of synthroid.
I am hypothyroid, take .75/day, and all of those foods are a significant part
of my diet. What, if any, foods effect
the thyroid in this way?
A: The relationship
between certain high fiber foods and binding of the drugs in the digestive
tract inhibiting absorption of thyroid replacement therapy is slight. The PDR (Physician's Drug Reference)
recommends avoiding such foods at the exact time of taking the medication; however studies of those who take the medication with a meal compared
to those who did not showed such a small difference that doctors don't usually
bother even mentioning it. There was one
case reported in the medical literature of a person who had to increase the
dose of her Synthroid because she took it at the same time as her high protein
soy shake each morning. To sum up, it is
not important, but if you can take your medication an hour before a meal or at
bedtime and see if you can get by with a hair less, but I doubt it, especially
because you are taking such a low dose already. JF
By Virginia
Messina, MPH, RD & Mark Messina, PhD:
(Mark Messina, PhD,
MS is a nutritionist with a master’s degree in nutrition from the University of
Michigan and a doctorate in nutrition from Michigan State University. He was
employed by the National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health where
he identified research needs in the area of diet and cancer prevention.
Virginia
[Ginny]Messina, MPH, RD is a registered dietitian with a masters in public
health nutrition from the University of Michigan. She has taught nutrition at
the university level, was a foods and nutrition specialist for the Michigan
Cooperative Extension Service and was director of nutrition services for George
Washington University Medical Center. She works on a number of projects with the
American Dietetic Association's Vegetarian Nutrition Dietetic Practice group,
served as editor of the newsletter Issues in Vegetarian Dietetics, is editor of
a series of fact sheets on vegetarian nutrition produced by ADA and is
co-author of the ADA's 1997 position paper on vegetarian diets.)
"Soyfoods and
Thyroid
Many foods contain
goitrogens, compounds that interfere with thyroid function (and in extreme
cases can cause an enlarged thyroid, called a goiter). Along with soyfoods,
millet, cruciferous vegetables and other foods contain goitrogens. Generally,
these foods cause problems only in areas where iodine intake is low since this
mineral is important for thyroid function. The effects of iodine deficiency can
be made worse if the diet is high in goitrogens.
Although a concern
about soy and thyroid function may be news to many vegans, it has actually been
a focus of research for more than 70 years. 6 Between 1951 and 1961, this
research took on a special importance when about 10 cases of goiter were diagnosed
in infants who had been fed infant formula made from soy flour. These old
studies form some of the basis for arguments that soy is dangerous for infants.
However, the situation for today's soy formula-fed infant is very different.
Since the 1960's, soy-based infant formula has been made from soy protein
isolate (which does not contain the goitrogens component; soy flour formulas
did) and it is fortified with iodine. No cases of goiter have been diagnosed in
infants fed this formula in the past 40 years.
Nor is there any
evidence that consuming soy causes thyroid problems in healthy, well-nourished
people who have adequate iodine in their diet. . 7-10 However, it is possible
that eating a diet with generous amounts of soyfoods could be a problem for people
whose iodine intake is marginal. And that might just include some vegans, since
the main sources of iodine in western diets are fish and milk. But the
appropriate response to this is not to limit healthful soyfoods; it's to get
enough iodine. Vegetables have varying amounts of iodine depending on where
they are grown. In some parts of the world--specifically northern
Europe--vegans may have low intakes of iodine. Foods that can supply iodine to
vegan diets are sea vegetables, although contents vary quite a bit. Fortified
foods are also a good source. Iodized salt is about the most reliable source.
Vegans should be sure that, when they season foods with salt, it is iodized. If
this isn't a regular part of your diet, use an iodine supplement.
CONCLUSION: Soyfoods
may contain goitrogenic compounds as do other foods. There is no evidence that
eating soyfoods regularly causes thyroid problems in people who eat a balanced
diet. Vegans should make an effort to include adequate sources of iodine in
their diet."
14.) Who are these
people you call "anti-soy" who are spreading the fear of all things
soy?
That's just what I
asked myself. Where are these people are
coming from, the ones that seem to have vendetta against the common soybean?
ONE OF THE MAJOR
SOURCES IS THE WESTON A PRICE FOUNDATION, A BASTION OF ANTI-VEGETARIANISM: (You
can visit their website to verify what I have posted here, if you wish.)
I would not be so
concerned about what these people advocate, if I didn’t see how widespread
their influence is. Because they have naturopaths and herbalists on their
board, their information goes far and wide on the internet, on “health food”
and “natural living” sites, and people don’t even realize where it originated.
I have seen their articles reprinted over and over on other sites, with no
sourcing.
Here is a good
article about the Weston A. Price Foundation, written by John Robbins: http://www.vegsource.com/articles2/robbins_weston_price.htm
Here is a whole
series of articles written by Dr. Joel Fuhrman:
Part One: The truth
about the Weston Price Foundation
Part Two: Facts,
and Weston Price Foundation Fantasies
Part Three: Dr. Joe
Mercola and Unscientific Double Talk
Part Four: Do
Primitive People Really Live Longer?
Part Five:
Legitimate Concerns for Vegans
They (WAPF) cloak
their opinions in a veil of “natural health” and whole foods—but these whole
foods include a diet of up to 70% fat (see board member’s diets below) and full
of animal fats and protein. (Read
scientist T. Colin Campbell’s “The China Study” AND his response to Weston A.
Price, for antidotes! http://www.vegsource.com/articles2/campbell_china_response.htm
) Their “Myths and truths” section
contains wildly misinformed articles on soy, vegetarianism, mad cow disease and
osteoporosis. In their book
reviews section, they give the “thumbs down” to “The Womanly Art of Breast
Feeding” (by the La Leche League) and any other book that even remotely
encourages vegetarianism or low-fat diet.
In their “Farm
and Ranch” section, they have such articles as:
The Vegan
Ecological Wasteland
Real Eggs from a
Real Farm
Pastured poultry
and much more.
“Food Features” on
the site include articles on:
Biltong, the South
African dried meat;
The wonders of
unpasteurized ham and salami;
Learning to
maximize the use of your real milk and cream;
Why butter is
better;
Cooking with cow
colostrum;
Lamb shoulder stew
and hearty beef soup;
Fermented honey;
The wonders of
gelatin broth;
The value of eating
oysters;
and “The whole
bird”—utilizing the whole chicken.
One of the Weston A. Price “Dietary Dangers”:
Do not practice
strict vegetarianism (veganism); animal products provide vital nutrients not
found in plant foods.
John Robbins
(author of “Diet for a New America”, “The Food Revolution”, “May All Be Fed”,
and “Reclaiming Our Health”; founder of
EarthSave International) writes in his article “The Truth About Soy?” at http://www.foodrevolution.org/blog/the-truth-about-soy/
“The evidence that
breast is best is overwhelming. Infants breast-fed by vegetarian mothers have
all these advantages, plus more, because the milk of vegetarian mothers has the
added advantage of harboring substantially fewer residues from pesticides and
other toxic chemicals. Yet the anti-soy crusader Sally Fallon [president of the
Weston A. Price Foundation, bastion of
anti-vegetarian thought and misinformation, and the font of the anti-soy
“movement..BCG] would evidently prefer that an infant be fed a cow's milk
formula rather than breastmilk, if the mother is a vegetarian. She writes that
"breast milk is best IF the mother has consumed a …diet…rich in animal
proteins and fat throughout her pregnancy and continues to do so while nursing
her child."
Why would someone
make a statement like that? Where are these soy antagonists coming from? What
are they trying to prove?
Fallon and Enig are
proponents of the philosophy that in order to be healthy people must eat large
amounts of saturated fat from animal products. They insist that only with the
regular consumption of lard, butter and other full fat dairy products, and
beef, can people derive the nutrients they need to be healthy. They deplore the
fact that soy products are increasingly replacing animal products in the
American diet.
Many of the most
vocal soy bashers are of similar dietary persuasions. Joseph Mercola, for
example, a Chicago osteopath who has authored a series of vehemently anti-soy
articles that have circulated widely on the internet, is an ardent advocate of
eating beef, chicken, turkey, ostrich, and other meats."
Thanks for that,
John!
Now, whether you
are a meat-eater or not, you probably know someone who is vegetarian and has
breastfed her babies, who are just as healthy as the next baby, maybe more.
Evidently, the authors have not read the American Dietetic Association’s
Position Paper on Vegetarianism, which you can read here: http://www.vegsource.com/nutrition/adapaper.htm
In it is this statement: “Well-planned vegan and lacto-ovo-vegetarian
diets are appropriate for all stages of the life cycle, including during
pregnancy and lactation. Appropriately planned vegan and lacto-ovo-vegetarian
diets satisfy nutrient needs of infants, children, and adolescents and promote
normal growth.” ( This is the professional association for Registered
Dieticians, similar to the American Medical Association, the professional body
representing doctors.)
FALLON AND ENIG’S
ARTICLE ON BREASTFEEDING (From the Weston A. Price Foundation):
Here is a quote
from that article: “Breastfeeding is best. . . in a perfect world. But the
world is not perfect and self-evident statements are not always true.
Breastfeeding advocates argue that breast-fed children have lower mortality
rates and better levels of health than formula-fed children. In third world
countries, where the cleanliness needed for safe bottle-feeding is lacking,
this is undoubtedly true. But a perusal of recent studies comparing breastfed
and formula-fed infants presents a real dilemma for breastfeeding advocates
because the research does not provide a clear case of benefit.”
AND:
“Behind the simple
mantra "breastfeeding is best," gliding easily off the tongues of
lactation consultants, sales reps, government officials and pediatricians, lurk
several gross deceptions that usher millions of women into the arms of the
formula industry. First is the deception that insufficient milk is rare. Yes,
it is rare in a society of truly healthy people but the western nations are not
inhabited by truly healthy people. The production and release of milk is
governed by a complex interaction of hormones, involving the hypothalamus,
pituitary gland and thyroid gland. There are plenty of places where it can go
wrong and given the high levels of thyroid and endocrine problems in western
women, it's a wonder that so many nurse successfully at all. Insufficient milk
supply is a problem more common than the medical profession wants to admit, as
many a valiant breastfeeding mother, starting off with the best of intentions,
has learned to her sorrow.
Second is the
deception that "Almost all mothers can produce good milk, even if their
diet is not perfect." With this statement we turn our backs on the
accumulated wisdom of traditional people throughout the globe, most of whom
recognized that nursing mothers need special diets to meet the special needs of
the growing infant. As early as the 1940s, Weston Price observed a decline in
the quality of human breast milk, as evidenced by the extensive dental problems
he found in his breastfed patients. The recent poor showing of breastfed
infants in comparison trials indicates that modern human milk is not better—and
possibly worse—than it was in Price's day.
The final deception
is that babies should not be given homemade formula made with cow or goat milk.
Early books on infant feeding recognized that milk from a cow (or goat, water
buffalo, camel, sheep, reindeer or llama) was the logical substitute. How wise
these early writers seem in comparison to our modern "experts":
Nature does not
always confer upon a woman the important capacity for nursing her baby, but the
women who are able should do so. Every pregnant woman should not only be
impressed with the importance of this duty on her part, but with the essential
preparation for accomplishing it. However, there are women who for some reason
cannot perform this natural function—for these, it is necessary to learn to
take advantage of the way now available to them to feed the infant
artificially. The logical substitute for human milk is cow's milk (or goat's
milk)."
Of course, they
neglect to add that, after World War I, women in industrialized countries were
being persuaded that bottlefeeding was the "modern way" to raise
children and were actively discouraged from breastfeeding their children. Many women were told that they didn't have
enough milk, when, in truth, the management of nursing (separating mothers from
their babies for hours after birth, telling mothers to nurse only every 4
hours, etc.) by ill-informed doctors discouraged the flow of milk. My mother experienced this in the 1930's and
40's, and I experienced it in the 1960's.
I was told that I didn't have enough milk for my first child, but I was
able to nurse the subsequent three with no problem, when I had the proper
advice.
Here is what they
say about La Leche League (NOTE
FROM BRYANNA: I was a La Leche League http://lalecheleague.org/ab.html leader and one
of my daughters was a "second-generation" La Leche League leader.):
"No one can
dispute the service that La Leche League has performed in raising awareness of
the benefits of breastfeeding. However, the organization is also the most
influential proponent of the fallacy (my italics, BCG) that 'all mothers can
nurse successfully'."
You can go to their
website (if you can stomach it) to read their so-called “discussion” about
breastfeeding, answering a letter from an LLL leader; or how they advocate feeding raw milk to
babies; or their homemade baby formula recipes (they advocate egg yolk as
baby’s first solid food)-- an excerpt (my italics, bold type and colored type--
BCG):
“Fortunately, it is
possible to compose a formula that closely resembles mother's milk. Whenever
possible this formula should be based on raw organic milk, from cows certified
free of tuberculosis and brucellosis. The milk should come from cows that
eat food appropriate to cows, which is green grass in the warm months and hay
and root vegetables in the winter, not soy or cottonseed meal. Ideally, the
milk should come from Jersey or Guernsey cows, rather than Holsteins, so that
it has a high butterfat content. This may be purchased at the farm in some
states. Of course, such milk should be produced under the cleanest possible
conditions and stored in sterilized containers. But the milk should be
unheated. Properly produced raw milk does not pose a danger to your baby, in
spite of what numerous public health propagandists may assert. Raw milk
contains enzymes and antibodies that make it less susceptible to bacterial
contamination than pasteurized milk, while many toxins that cause diarrhea and
other ailments survive the pasteurization process. Your nose will tell you if
raw milk is contaminated or spoiled—but pasteurized milk may be seriously
contaminated with no telltale warning odor. Raw milk is easier for your baby to
digest than pasteurized and less likely to cause cramps, constipation and
allergies. If it is not possible for you to obtain certified raw milk, begin
with the best quality pasteurized whole milk you can find, milk that is not
homogenized, and culture it for 12 hours with piima culture or kefir grains to
restore enzymes lost through pasteurization (pages 83 and 88). Or, you may
prepare a milk-free formula made from organic liver. Organic liver should also
be added to formula made from goat milk, as goat milk is deficient in iron,
folic acid and vitamin B12.
Both our milk-based
and meat-based formulas have been designed to provide maximum possible
correspondence with the various components of human milk. Our milk-based
formula takes account of the fact that human milk is richer in whey, lactose,
vitamin C, niacin, manganese and long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids
compared to cows milk but leaner in casein (milk protein). The addition of
gelatin to cow's milk formula will make it more digestible for the infant. The
liver-based formula also mimics the nutrient profile of mother's milk. Use only
truly expeller-expressed oils in the formula recipes, otherwise they may lack
vitamin E.
A wise supplement
for all babies—whether breast fed or bottle fed—is an egg yolk per day,
beginning at four months.
Egg yolk supplies cholesterol needed for mental development as well as important
sulphur-containing amino acids. Egg yolks from pasture-fed hens or hens raised
on flax meal, fish meal or insects are
also rich in the omega-3 long-chain fatty acids found in mother's milk but
which may be lacking in cow's milk. These fatty acids are essential for the
development of the brain. Parents who institute the practice of feeding egg
yolk to baby will be rewarded with children who speak and take directions at an
early age. The white, which contains difficult-to-digest proteins, should not
be given before the age of one year. Small amounts of grated, raw organic
liver may be added occasionally to the egg yolk after six months.This imitates
the practice of African mothers who chew liver before giving it to their
infants as their first food. Liver is rich in iron, the one mineral that
tends to be low in mother's milk possibly because iron competes with zinc for
absorption.”
“At the age of
about ten months, meats, fruits and vegetables may be introduced, one at a time
so that any adverse reactions may be observed. Carbohydrate foods, such as
potatoes, carrots, turnips, etc., should be mashed with butter. (Don't
overdo on the orange vegetables as baby's immature liver may have difficulty
converting carotenoids to vitamin A. If your baby's skin develops a yellowish
color, a sign that he is not making the conversion, discontinue orange
vegetables for a time.) Lacto-fermented taro or other roots (page 102) make
an excellent carbohydrate food for babies. It is wise to feed babies a little
buttermilk or yoghurt from time to time to familiarize them with the sour
taste. Above all, do not deprive your baby of animal fats—he needs them for
optimum physical growth and mental development. Mother's milk contains over
50% of its calories as fat, much of it saturated fat, and children need these
kinds of fats throughout their growing years.”
MORE OF THEIR
"ADVICE":
VEGANISM: "The
milk of vegan mothers will be lacking in vitamin B12 and important long-chain
fatty acids. If a vegan mother insists on breastfeeding, her baby's diet should
be supplemented with cod liver oil, egg yolks and liver, all animal
foods."
“DIET FOR PREGNANT
WOMEN AND NURSING MOTHERS
Cod liver oil to
supply 10,000-20,000 IU vitamin A daily
2/ 8-ounce glasses
whole milk daily, preferably raw and from pasture-fed cows
4 tablespoons
butter daily, preferably from pasture-fed cows
2 or more eggs
daily, preferably from pastured chickens
Additional egg
yolks daily, added to smoothies, salad dressings, scrambled eggs, etc.
3-4 ounces fresh
liver, once or twice per week
Fresh seafood, 2-4
times per week, particularly wild salmon, shellfish and fish eggs
Fresh beef or lamb
daily, always consumed with the fat
Oily fish or lard
daily, for vitamin D
2 tablespoons
coconut oil daily, used in cooking or smoothies, etc.
Lacto-fermented
condiments and beverages
Bone broths used in
soups, stews and sauces
Soaked whole grains
Fresh vegetables
and fruits”
AGAIN, I STATE THAT
I DO NOT AGREE WITH OR ENDORSE ANY OF THE ADVICE OR COMMENTS FROM THE WESTON A.
PRICE FOUNDATION OR ITS SUPPORTERS POSTED ABOVE-- I MERELY WANT VEGETARIANS AND
OTHERS TO KNOW THE ANTI-VEGETARIAN AGENDA THAT FUELS THE ANTI-SOY
CAMPAIGN. BCG
Fallon, Enig and
Mercola’s articles are full of untrue statements, half-truths and down-right
hysteria. They are virulently
anti-vegetarian and advise that you can only be healthy if you eat not only
animal protein, but plenty of animal fats!
These people
promote a book by Kaayla Daniel called "The Whole Soy Story" (who also wrote a scare-mongering article in Mothering
magazine and is on the Board of Directors of the anti-vegetarian, anti-soy
Weston A. Price Foundation. (See the
letter below from some of the scientists she whose data she misinterprets below.)
To see where she is
coing from, this is one of the
recommendations in an article entitled “Why Broth is Beautiful” by Daniel (an
article on the Weston A. Price website promoting gelatin for joint health, a
notion that she admits even Knox gelatin doesn’t endorse!):
“Boil a piece of
pig skin for at least 3 hours until it becomes very soft. Eat it as is, with
mustard or horseradish, or put it through a mincer and add it to other food.
The important thing is regular use—a tablespoon or more every day, along with a
diet that contains adequate animal protein and lots of nourishing animal fats.
" !!!!
In this article she
dredges up old studies that even Knox gelatin discarded claiming, among other
things, that gelatin detoxifies the liver!
A letter in
"Thyroid and gyn issues" from 2 scientists:
We are writing in
response to the article by Kaayla Daniel entitled "The Whole Soy
Story." We firmly congratulate Dr. Daniel for seeking to shed scientific
light on misleading claims and uses of supplements, which the public feels are
safe, generally without data to support that impression.
However, we are
disappointed that Dr. Daniel did not apply the same standards of scientific
accuracy to her own work and claims. While we cannot comment on the many issues
and studies she referred to, we can comment in detail on her misleading
statements about our work.1
As she indicates,
"most of the evidence damning soy formula can be found only in animal
studies." To that end, it is disappointing that she chooses to dismiss,
misquote, and misinterpret data from the one large study in humans and a study
subjected to peer review by one of the most prestigious journals in the medical
literature. The "buried" findings regarding thyroid problems,
cervical cancer, polycystic ovarian syndrome, blocked fallopian tubes, and
pelvic inflammatory disease specifically mentioned by Dr. Daniel were all based
on a very small number of events. The differences between the patients with
these medical conditions receiving soy formula and those receiving milk formula
did not even approach statistical significance-that is, the data did not meet
the minimal scientific criterion for suggesting an increased risk.
Thus, our data were
certainly not compatible with an increase in risk. However, since we felt we
could not definitively prove the absence of risk with these small numbers, our
conclusions on these outcomes were indeed not highlighted. If we had
highlighted them, we would have pointed out more explicitly that there was no
increased risk identified in this study.
Most importantly,
our study, in contrast to Dr. Daniel's paper, met all scientific criteria for
rigorous peer-reviewed scientific research.
NOTE
1. B. L. Strom et
al., "Exposure to Soy-based Formula in Infancy and Endocrinological and
Reproductive Outcomes in Young Adulthood," Journal of the American Medical
Association 286 (2001): 807-814.
Brian L. Strom, MD,
MPH
Rita Schinnar, MPA
And how about this
for a laugh—Fallon and Enig write: “Zinc deficiency can cause a 'spacey'
feeling that some vegetarians may mistake for the 'high' of spiritual
enlightenment." Excuse me?! !
AND, they also
write: “ The most important foods to avoid: Meats grilled or broiled at high
temperatures.”
And the following
is from a new book called “Fresh Choices” http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0875968961/qid=1149280478/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/104-4483753-1450345?s=books&v=glance&n=283155
, by David Joachim and Rochelle Davis (executive director and founder of
Generation Green, a non-profit advocacy group that promotes awareness of
environmental health issues){Rodale Press, 2004) which is not a vegetarian book by any means.
It advises on what are the groceries that are important to buy organic
and which are low-pesticide even though not organic:
"When the
International Agency for Research on Cancer (an arm of the World Health
Organization) looked at the diets of nearly half a million Europeans, they found
that those who ate more cured meats like hot dogs, sausage, salami, bacon,
bologna, and deli meats had a 50% increase in colon cancer risk. In the United States, Cornell University
researchers looked at 12 different studies and concluded that eating processed
meats can increase breast cancer risk.
And a recent study from Harvard University School of Public Health found
that eating too much processed meat may increase risk of Type 2 diabetes. Nitrites are the suspected culprit, as
previous studies have already linked nitrites to increased risk of Type 2
diabetes, the kind that most often afflicts children."
There are a lot
more North Americans out there wolfing down charred hamburgers, salami, ham and
hotdogs, than they are tofu burgers and veggie dogs! In 1987, in fact, the per capita consumption
of tofu and other soyfoods in the USA was less than 1 percent that of
meat. Even today, if we multiply that by
5 or even 10, it’s still a tiny amount compared to the amount of meat being
eaten.
Dr. T. Colin
Campbell (of the China Project) said that you can’t just look at one study, you
have to look at the big picture.
Virginia Messina,
RD and Dr. Mark Messina write:
“It is important to
recognize some important facts about scientific research. It's true that there
have been studies showing negative effects associated with soy consumption. But
it is a rare situation where every single study on a subject is in agreement.
There are always a few that sit in direct contrast to the majority of the
studies. So it is never a good idea to suggest broad conclusions or
recommendations based on one or two studies. By picking and choosing individual
studies carefully enough, you can prove just about anything you would like
about nutrition. That's why health experts look at all the research and pay
attention to the totality of the evidence, not just to a few studies.
Many of the studies
that have concluded that soy is unhealthful have used animals as subjects.
Drawing conclusions about human health from animal research can be very
misleading. For example, broccoli and other cruciferous vegetables contain a
compound (called indole-3 carbinol) that is an anticarcinogen in humans. But in
some other species, it causes cancer. 5 If we looked only at the results of the
studies in those species, the FDA would no doubt ban broccoli and cabbage from
grocery stores.”
I DO NOT AGREE WITH
OR ENDORSE ANY OF THE ADVICE OR COMMENTS FROM THE WESTON A. PRICE FOUNDATION OR
ITS SUPPORTERS POSTED BELOW-- I MERELY WANT VEGETARIANS AND OTHERS TO KNOW THE
ANTI-VEGETARIAN AGENDA THAT FUELS THE ANTI-SOY CAMPAIGN. BCG
NOTE: I repeat,
I would not be so concerned about what these people advocate, if I didn’t see
how widespread their influence is.
Because they have naturopaths and herbalists on their board of
directors, their information goes far and wide on the internet, on “health
food” and “natural living” sites, and people don’t even realize where it
originated. I have seen their articles
reprinted over and over on other sites, with no sourcing.
ADDED NOTE June 20,
2007: The ultimate in soy hysteria can be found here, where the
author claims that feeding soy to your children will make them homosexual and
reduce penis size, and that eating it as an adult will lower your libido AND
make it impossible to conceive!
Weston A. Price
Board of Directors: http://www.westonaprice.org/about-the-foundation/board-of-directors
Here's an excellent article: http://gentleworld.org/as-we-soy-so-shall-we-reap/
******************************************************************
******************************************************************
Soy Article
Comments:
I was quoted in an
article on soy in the Canadian magazine Maclean's available online here:
There were a number
of comments, some of which I addressed myself.
There was one long comment (#27) by "Loretta", which covered
alot of territory. I couldn't help myself
from answering, but the answer is too long to post with the comments, so I am
going to link to it here:
L: Why do people
always think the 'meat or dairy boards' are trying to slam soy, without
considering the massive industry of soy, one of the biggest and dirtiest
businesses in the world. We can't blame the beef any longer for the
disappearing rainforest.
B: I'm afraid we
CAN blame beef (and other meat products) for the disappearing rainforest, as
most of the world's soybean crop goes to animal feed. Nearly 80 percent of the global soybean
harvest is milled into animal feed, according to the Worldwatch Institute.
In addition:
"..soybean oil accounted for 92 percent of the 250 million liters of
biodiesel made in the United States, a recent use that is bound to grow as
Americans turn to biofuels to replace imported oil.27 Similarly, 59 percent of
Brazilian biodiesel came from soy."http://www.worldwatch.org/node/5442
L: Here's just a
few of the errors/omissions/misconceptions in this article:
Messina is indeed a
'soy expert'. He's at the top of the soy industry food chain. His interest in
soy is massive, it's called money.
B: Mark Messina,
Ph.D., M.S., is an adjunct associate professor at Loma Linda University;
co-owner of Nutrition Matters Inc. (a nutrition consulting firm); and executive
director of the Soy Nutrition Institute. He served as program director for the
National Cancer Institute (NCI) and has published more than 50 articles and
book chapters for health professionals. He has also given more than 400
presentations to both consumer and professional groups throughout the United
States and in 35 countries.
So, yes, he makes
his living (but "massive money"?
Do you know something I don't know?) as a scientist in his field of
expertise. He is a well-respected professional. Should we not consult real scientists? I could just as well criticize a former WAPF
board member, Joseph Mercola, who puts himself out there as a "nutrition
expert", though he is actually an osteopath and entrepreneur, selling
everything on his websites from bison to vitamins to cookware to coconut oil on
his websites, plus membership programs, articles, etc. .
L: It's not the
Western A. Price Foundation, but the Weston A. Price Foundation. They are not
paid by the meat or dairy board. Their main slant is not to knock soy, but to
advocate traditional foods, including hormone-free, grass-fed, compassionately
farmed meats, fats that are not rancid and artificially processed, and chemical
free whole foods. The foundation follows the work of Weston Price, a dentist,
who went around the world to study tooth decay and health, expecting to find
vegetarian cultures that fit his paradigm of health. His studies of nutritional
anthropology and modern health advocate whole and traditional foods, as does
the foundation. Dr. Kaayla Daniel, who is a member of the foundation, wrote a
book called The Whole Soy Story.
B: I'm
going to quote author John Robbins
from an article at http://www.vegsource.com/articles2/robbins_weston_price.htm
in answer to the above:
"Weston Price
was an American dentist who traveled around the world, camera and film in hand,
in the late 1920s and early 1930s. An entire chapter in my latest book, Healthy
At 100, is devoted to his work.
Price specifically
sought out native peoples who were still eating their native foods. He asked
about their dietary habits, then examined and took photographs of their teeth.
At the same time, he undertook similar studies and took similar photos of
people from the same cultures who had become exposed to Western foods, and who
had begun to substitute foods like white flour, white sugar, marmalade and
canned goods for their native diets....
Today, Price's work
has attracted a loyal and devoted following among those who rebel against
processed foods and who seek a way of life more in tune with nature's laws.
Some of his more ardent followers say his accomplishments are more important
than those of Charles Darwin, Linus Pauling, or Jonas Salk, and that he was a
greater genius than Albert Einstein. Others say his was the most important
health research of all time.
Some of the most
zealous of his followers now run an organization called the Weston A. Price
Foundation. A book by the foundation's president, Sally Fallon, with the
appealing title of Nourishing Traditions, has been a best-seller.
No doubt the
foundation is doing good in awakening some people to the dangers of processed
foods, but speaking as someone who has great respect for the work of Weston A.
Price, I am sorry to say that to my eyes, the foundation that carries Price's
name today is unfortunately exaggerating what was unbalanced in his work, and
abandoning much of what was good.
For one thing, the
foundation exudes an attitude of "you're either with us or you're against
us" that is reminiscent of the dark side of cults. Those authors and
researchers who the foundation disagrees with are caustically mocked. If these
authors happen to subscribe to the findings of modern nutritional science, they
are mocked and condemned for being "politically correct." Reputable
scientists who dare suggest that saturated fat contributes to heart disease are
denounced for being "as pc as pc can be—and totally ignorant."
Regrettably, those
currently running the Weston A. Price Foundation seem to be oblivious to the
spirit of compassion which motivated the work of the man under whose name they
act. Sadly, they are not just intolerant of people who eat or think differently
than the way they advocate; they frequently demean and condemn those with whom
they disagree. There is a nastiness, a mean-spiritedness, to their activities
that is not worthy of the man in whose footsteps they presume to follow.
In fact, the more
I've gotten to know the Weston A. Price Foundation, the less I've felt that it
is actually carrying on the spirit or the work of the man in whose name it
purports to function. For one example, Price never once mentioned the words
"soy," "soybean," "tofu," or "soy milk"
in his 500 page opus, and spoke quite positively about lentils and other
legumes, yet the foundation has taken it upon itself to be vehemently and
aggressively anti-soy, calling soy foods "more insidious than
hemlock." (My thorough response to their specific accusations against soy
foods can be seen at http://healthyat100.org/display.asp?catid=3&pageid=12
For another
example, Price discovered many native cultures that were extremely healthy
while eating lacto-vegetarian or pisco-vegan diets. Describing one
lacto-vegetarian people, for example, he called them, "The most physically
perfect people in northern India… the people are very tall and are free of
tooth decay." Yet the foundation that operates under his name is
strikingly hostile to vegetarians. Sally Fallon, the foundation's president,
denounces vegetarianism as "a kind of spiritual pride that seeks …to shirk
the earthly duties for which the physical body is created." She further
insults vegetarians by saying they frequently suffer from zinc deficiency, but
think it is spiritual enlightenment.
In 1934, Price
wrote a moving letter to his nieces and nephews, instructing them in the diet
he hoped they would eat. "The basic foods should be the entire grains such
as whole wheat, rye or oats, whole wheat and rye breads, wheat and oat cereals,
oat-cake, dairy products, including milk and cheese, which should be used
liberally, and marine foods." Yet the Weston A. Price Foundation aggressively
promotes the consumption of beef, pork and other high-fat meats, while
condemning people who base their diets on whole grains.
One last example of
the discrepancy between Price's actual work and those who today purport to
represent it: Price never once mentioned the word "cholesterol," yet
the foundation presuming to forward his work has declared war on the idea that
high cholesterol levels are associated with higher rates of heart disease.
"The truth is that cholesterol is your best friend," they write.
"There is no greater risk of heart disease at cholesterol levels of 300
than 180." They might as well say there is no greater risk of lung cancer
for heavy smokers, or that the Earth is flat.
I regret to say
that those running the Weston A. Price Foundation today seem to have their own
agenda. They are proponents of the philosophy that in order to be healthy,
people must eat large amounts of saturated fat from animal products. They
insist that only with the regular consumption of lard, butter and other
full-fat dairy products, and beef, can people derive the nutrients they need to
be healthy.
Toward that end,
the Foundation has widely publicized an article written by a former member of
the Foundation's Board of Directors, Stephen Byrnes, titled "The Myths of
Vegetarianism."
The article is
harshly critical of vegetarian diets, and concludes with an "About the
Author" section which states: "Stephen Byrnes… enjoys robust health
on a diet that includes butter, cream, eggs, meat, whole milk, dairy products
and offal." In fact, Stephen Byrnes suffered a fatal stroke in June, 2004.
According to reports of his death, he had yet to reach his 40th birthday."
In addition, the
Foundation advises that vegetarian mothers should not breastfeed, and advises
raw milk baby formulas and has a recipe for baby formula made from raw
liver!
As for Kaayla
Daniel (who also wrote a scare-mongering article in Mothering magazine and is
on the Board of Directors of WAPF-- see the letter from some of the scientists
she whose data she misinterprets--
http://www.mothering.com/sections/extras/soy-letters.htmlIt's
the 6th letter),
to see where she is
coming from, this is one of the recommendations in an article entitled
"Why Broth is Beautiful" by Daniel (an article on the Weston A. Price
website promoting gelatin for joint health, a notion that she admits even Knox
gelatin doesn't endorse!):
"Boil a piece
of pig skin for at least 3 hours until it becomes very soft. Eat it as is, with
mustard or horseradish, or put it through a mincer and add it to other food.
The important thing is regular use—a tablespoon or more every day, along with a
diet that contains adequate animal protein and lots of nourishing animal fats.
"
In this article she
dredges up old studies that even Knox gelatin discarded claiming, among other
things, that gelatin detoxifies the liver!
L: This whole idea
that soy is a health food comes from- the soy industry! But the roots of soy
are deep and dirty. Soy's big thrust here was as oil. Processed, poisonous
'vegetable oil.' You know, the stuff of margarine. Hydrogenated oil. Trans fat.
Heart-healthy! the margarine companies chirped. For years we used the plastic
on our food as a healthy alternate to butter. The cheap oil was used in all
processed foods. Junk foods. As science came around, soy saw the bottom falling
out of their market and began pumping another batch of health food stories.
Think about it. Hydrogenated oil is one of the most toxic heart dangers, with
ZERO as a safe limit. Why are the new 'health' products any different?
B: Scary
stuff! A bit of excessive hyperbole
there. Just because the soy industry is trying to sell its products (just like
the coconut oil industry, the noni juice industry, the supplements industry,
etc., etc.) doesn't mean that soy is "poison"! And you don't have to eat processed soy
products, or any other processed products.
And the roots of soy are in Asia, where it has been used as a food for
centuries. According to Chinese
tradition, soybeans were one of the five sacred crops named by Chinese emperor
Sheng-Nung, who reigned five thousand years ago! Sheng-Nung mentioned soybeans in his Ben Tsao
Gang Mu, written in 2838 BC! The soybean was known as "meat without
bones" or "the meat of the fields" in China.
If the soybean was
"poison", Asian cultures would not have thrived and become empire,
and I would be dead! It's not only soy
oil that is hydrogenated-- any oil can
be hydrogenated. Most soy oil (which I don't use, BTW) is a by-product of processed soy for animal feed, so they sell
it off to food processors and fast food companies, and for bio-diesal. if so much was not grown for animal feed,
they would not be foisting all that oil on the world.
L: The quote from
the Asian girl about the flat earth was very cute and so on, and strategically
used to make us think that anyone who thinks soy is dangerous is a lunatic.
Recall that at first, EVERYONE thought the earth was flat because that's what
they were told. The insinuation is, if we are thinking soy is harmful, we are
idiots. But considering the massive amounts of evidence against it, we are
actually the first to stop believing in that flat earth and consider a wider
science.
B: the "Asian girl" is actually a
middle-aged master miso-maker (traditionally made Shinmeido Miso)! And I'm still waiting for the "massive
amounts of evidence" from reliable sources.
L: I don't know the
measurement of soy products in Asia, and I am not Asian, and I do believe many
Asians eat soy products. However, Asian cultures eat a lot of fish, raw fish,
and vegetables, and less processed foods or wheat-based products. There are
many many reasons why they don't have our diseases. Also, Chinese cultures eat
a lot of eggs and pork. I mean, A LOT. Maybe this is why they have less cancer?
B: Perhaps you should read "The China
Study" by a true scientist Dr. T. Colin Campbell: "For more than 40 years, T. Colin
Campbell, Ph.D. has been at the forefront of nutrition research. His legacy,
the China Study, is the most comprehensive study of health and nutrition ever
conducted. Dr. Campbell is the Jacob Gould Schurman Professor Emeritus of
Nutritional Biochemistry at Cornell University and Project Director of the
China-Oxford-Cornell Diet and Health Project. The study was the culmination of
a 20-year partnership of Cornell University, Oxford University and the Chinese
Academy of Preventive Medicine.
Dr. Campbell
received his master's degree and Ph.D. from Cornell, and served as a Research
Associate at MIT. He spent 10 years on the faculty of Virginia Tech's
Department of Biochemistry and Nutrition before returning to the Division of
Nutritional Sciences at Cornell in 1975 where he presently holds his Endowed
Chair (now Emeritus)."
Oh, and in case you are going to accuse him of
being part of the "establishment", read Chapters 16 and 17 in his
book he is definitely NOT an
establishment darling!
You can read about
the study and link to results, comprehensive findings and papers about the
study here.
For instance:
"Average
protein intake [in China] was only about 65% of the average intake in the US.
But, more significantly, only about 10% of the protein was provided by animal
based foods, whereas in the US, it is about 70%. Thus, on an energy intake
basis, animal protein intake is about 10-fold higher in the US, thus causing
major differences in many nutrient intakes.
Probably one of the
most significant findings is the positive association of animal protein with
blood cholesterol (both total and LDL) and the inverse association with plant
protein.
Also, an increasing
intake of plant protein is associated with ever increasing body stature
(height) reached during adulthood. Thus, a good quality plant based diet can
lead to 'big' people."
and:
"Comparison of
diets in rural China with average American diets shows that Chinese diets are
much lower in total fat (6-24% of calories, except for certain nomadic groups
in northern China), much higher in dietary fiber (10-77 g/day), about 30%
higher in total calorie intake and substantially lower in foods of animal
origin.
These diets are
much different from the average American diets, containing only about 0-20%
animal based foods, while the average American diet is comprised of about
60-80% animal based foods.
Disease patterns in
much of rural China tend to reflect those prior to the industrial revolution in
the U.S., when cancers and cardiovascular diseases were much less prevalent.
The major
comprehensive dietary factor responsible for disease rates of
pre-industrialized societies changing to those of
post-industrialized societies is the decision to consume much larger quantities
of animal based foods."
L: Finally, there was no mention of something
very important: soy foods in Asia are fermented. The entire miso-making culture
was about learning fermentation secrets. Why is this important? Because
unfermented soyfoods are poison. Soy beans were used as fertilizer, and
fermenting the bean made it edible to the people, all those years ago. Asians
do not eat isolated soy protein or vegetarian soy and gluten patties. They eat
pork, fish, vegetables, and traditionally fermented tofu. Tofu here, and most
soyfoods, are not fermented. The fermenting process removes many of the toxins
in the soy. Go ahead, ask a real Asian miso maker why they ferment the soy.
They'll tell you why.
B: It happens that
I CAN ask a "real Asian miso-maker"-- Yoshi Yoshihara of Shinmeido
Miso-- your "Asian girl"!
Unfermented
soyfoods are not "poison" and are widely used in Asia in the forms of
green soybeans, soymilk and fresh tofu.
There is archaeological evidence in the form of a kitchen scene in a Han
tomb in Northern China, clearly depicting the preparation of soymilk and
tofu. This would be AD 25-100. Tofu is
first mentioned in a document in 965 AD: the Ch'ing I Lu by T'ao Ku. The story
implies that tofu was widely consumed in China in those days.
In Japan, even
today, the words tofu, miso and shoyu (soy sauce) are commonly preceded in
everyday speech by the honorific prefix o—most people saying
"o-tofu", or "honorable tofu", showing the reverence for
the noble soybean in their culture.
The following is from http://www.westonaprice.org/soy-alert/soy-dark-side
"Soy
proponents claim that soy is a staple in Asia. A "staple" is defined
as a major commodity, one that provides a large portion of calories in the
diet, such as rice and fish in Japan, or rice and pork in China. The Japanese
consume 150 pounds of fish per person per year, or almost one-half pound per
person per day and a 1977 dietary survey in China determined that 65 percent of
calories came from pork, including the pork fat used in cooking. By contrast,
overall consumption of soy in Asia is surprisingly low. The average soy
consumption in China is about 10 grams or 2 teaspoons per day. Levels are
somewhat higher in Japan, averaging about 50 grams or 1/4 cup per day. (I
assume that this is grams of soy product, but which one, I don't know-BCG.) In
both countries, soy is used as a condiment or flavoring, and not as a
substitute for animal foods. Seafood and seaweed in the Japanese diet provide
sufficient iodine to counteract the negative effects of the isoflavones in
soy."
Their sources?
1.) www.csa.com/hottopics/thyroid/oview.html
(page no longer there!)
2.)
soyonlineservice.co.nz (no specific article) (This is the New Zealand
equivalent of Weston A. Price!)
3.) www.westonaprice.org
(no specific article)
Now read the
following from this article , by registered dietician Reed Mangels:
"If we look at
the amount of soy isoflavones used in countries where soy is a regular part of
the diet and where no harmful effects have been documented, perhaps this can
give us some idea of a reasonable amount of soy. The average daily soy intake
in Japan is about 65 grams per person, and the average isoflavone intake is
about 20-32 milligrams per day. Higher intakes have been reported in China,
where women's median isoflavone intake was 39 milligrams per day, and in
Singapore, where the median intake was 35 milligrams per day. To find out the
isoflavone level of your diet, use the USDA's isoflavone database, or look on
packages of soy foods that you eat. Choosing 2-3 servings of soy per day will
generally lead to an isoflavone intake similar to that seen in countries where
soy is a regular part of the diet."
Notice the
footnotes inserted in and listed under the article—something noticeably lacking
from from the WAPF article!
l
Anti-soy writers
put forth the theory that "non-fermented soy products contain phytic acid
[phytates] which essentially acts as an anti-nutritive food because of its
ability to bind with certain nutrients, including iron, zinc, copper and
magnesium, thereby inhibiting their absorption." This is a gross over-simplification and
misinterpretation of the facts, frankly.
Nnot only fermenting, but also cooking, sprouting and soaking all destroy
some of the phytates! (And soy is not
the only food that contains phytates.
Wheat bran has higher levels, and all whole grains, legumes, nuts and
seeds, and some vegetables, contain them.)
Soyfoods are ALWAYS eaten cooked.
Even soy sprouts are eaten stir-fried or lightly steamed or in soups in
China. Green soybeans are also lightly
cooked before eating. Soymilk and tofu
are both made from ground, cooked soybeans.
Soybeans and soy flour are virtually inedible raw, anyway.
L. Finally, if the
aim is to make soy dissidents feel like neanderthal redneck homophobes,
whatever. I'm pretty in pink, believe me. But that doesn't change the fact that
hormone disruption is a dangerous thing. Artificial or natural, screwing with
your hormone function is risky business. Plants are drugs, don't forget.
Chemical drugs are based on plant science. So it makes sense, just possibly,
that estrogen might not be a good idea to feed either boys or girls. You have
the estrogen you need already. It's not about making anyone gay. It's about
girls menstruating before age ten and little boys growing moobs. It is
happening out there. It makes sense to question the hormones in meat, the
estrogen in plastics, and the estrogen in soy foods.
B: Plant estrogens
are simply NOT the same thing as human estrogens! They are much, much weaker. As I wrote in an earlier post: "The
phytoestrogens in soy are structurally similar to human estrogen, but very weak
compared to the estrogens that the human body produces. They bind with estrogen
receptors in the human body. Isoflavones, found in soy, are only one type of
phyto (or plant) hormone or sterol. There are many others available in a number
of plant foods.
Isoflavones
resemble animal (or human, in this case) estrogens just enough to be accepted
by cell estrogen receptors and bind weakly to the cell surface membrane. The
estrogen receptors have been compared to "tiny switching stations",
"locks" or "docking stations" on the cells. Joanna Dwyer
and colleagues at the New England Medical Center and Tufts University theorized
in an article they wrote for The Journal of The American Dietetic Association
(July 1994) that in premenopausal women the estrogen receptors are occupied and
the weaker plant estrogens must compete for these sites. However, in
postmenopausal women, whose self-produced estrogen declines about 60%, there is
a far greater chance of the plant estrogens "docking" and this can
increase the amount of estrogens available to her. For this reason,
phytoestrogens are believed to protect against breast and prostate cancers, two
hormone-dependent cancers."
The only guys I know
with "man boobs" are obese chronic hamburger eaters, and there is
plenty of evidence that girls in Asia and Seventh Day Adventist vegetarian
girls (who eat alot of soy-- and not necessarily tofu, but lots of burgers and
that sort of soyfood-- have a slightly LATER menarche than the average north
American girl. it is not a matter of
controversy-- look it up. What is
happening out there is synthetic xenoestrogens flooding our world.
All the best,
All the best,
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)