The "Soy" article in this issue's 'Mothering' - Page 3 - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#61 of 127 Old 04-28-2004, 03:47 PM
 
MamaAllNatural's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Nearest chair with *ONE* nursling!
Posts: 7,185
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I didn't read all the other posts but I just wanted to comment that I'm glad Mothering came out with this article. My midwife told me about the estrogen in soy when I was pregnant with #2. I have issues with too much estrogen and I get horrible morning sickness. I cut out the soy and the morning sickness improved. I also get some other weird pregnancy issues caused by too much estrogen and even with my last pregnancy I would notice that even if I ate soy one day, my symptoms would worsen (the next day I'd notice). I do think with all the soy cheese, soy milk, soy yogurt, veggie dogs, nuggets, burgers and plain and baked tofu, etc. it can really add up in your system and become too much. I do eat it occasionally now that I'm not pregnant. It's really a shame that such a good source of protein (and many other things) has such a downside, but I guess it's like with everything else - moderation is the key.
MamaAllNatural is offline  
#62 of 127 Old 04-28-2004, 04:02 PM
 
Tracy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: "It's Chinatown, Jake"
Posts: 12,452
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
my own issues around soy came up about a year ago when my husband and I started to notice ds smelled after eating tofu dogs. my husband said it was BO..it came out of his pores, shower, bathe and it would still be there.
My friend who runs her husbands chiro business had given me a heads up about soy years ago and the estrogen factor etc. I started noticing thyroid problems with girlfriends of mine who consumed a lot of soy and tofu..and well...it just all added up for me... no more soy. Very, very little tofu.

I can't say what people should do or not do, but for me I had an vibe it wasn't a good fit for us.

Check out New Moon on my Astrology Site

http://tracyastrosalon.blogspot.com/

 

Tracy is offline  
#63 of 127 Old 04-28-2004, 04:39 PM
 
toraji's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Rural Upstate NY
Posts: 1,179
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by vegiemom
Also, could the article not have been about Beef or fish or someother protein source that is involved in "the great american cover up" in regards to the harmful way it may be produced. The way it's over eaten or the amount of environmental "bad" it has in it? I think it surely could have been.
Plenty of articles and books have been written dedicated to how evil conventional meat is for both the environment and for human health, and there are loads of veg*n people and organizations who will talk your ear off about this subject. Soy is like the sacred cow. Anyone who says anything bad about it is bound to cause controversy. I applaud Mothering for publishing something controversial.
Quote:
An example is that the article stated that vitamin D is added to soy milk so that it is "equal to dairy milk". PHOOEY- who doesn't know that Vit. D is ALSO ADDED to cow milk---- so if it wasn't ADDED to cows milk, cows milk would not be so "fab" either!?!?
Vitamin D is added to pasteurized milk, as it is heat-sensitive and destroyed by pasteurization. It is naturally present in raw milk, and in higher amounts if the animal is eating its natural diet (grass, not grain). People started having problems after pasteurization became common (rickets) so they started adding synthetic Vitamin D back into the milk.
Quote:
Originally Posted by captain optimism
If Asians (all Asians?) on average are eating a much greater amount of soy than people in the US (on average) and there aren't higher rates of supposedly soy-related illnesses in Asia, then the argument that soy causes those illnesses is seriously compromised.
Asians would be eating traditional and fermented forms of soy, like tempeh, miso, and unfermented forms like soymilk and tofu in moderation, not as the basis of their diet. I am guessing that problems are arising because of modern soyfoods like chik'n nuggets, boca burgers, etc, and because they are eaten so often.
toraji is offline  
#64 of 127 Old 04-28-2004, 04:54 PM
EBM
 
EBM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 310
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Why are some prompted by the Mothering article to turn this into a debate of meat/dairy vs soy?

It is unlikely that the article was an attack on vegetarians or vegans. Why not do your own personal research and base your arguments for/against soy on the scientific data? If your research leads you to conclude that soy is harmful, look for an alternative for your diet. If it is not harmful, eat to your hearts content.

This really is not an issue of meat eaters diet vs vegan/vegetarians diet. Sheeesh.
EBM is offline  
#65 of 127 Old 04-28-2004, 04:56 PM
 
layla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 384
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
HEY EBM... well said!
layla is offline  
#66 of 127 Old 04-28-2004, 05:20 PM
 
elainie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 153
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Why not read Kaayla's entire book? It is availabe on PDF version
www.wholesoystory.com

I applaud her for writing this book, I think soy is way overconsumed and can lead to problems. I ate a vegan macrobiotic diet for many years ( no soymilk only tamari, miso, tempeh once a week and tofu once per week) and ended up with hypothyroid.


In Asia soy is also consumed along with a diet that contains plentiful minerals, fish etc. to counteract the harmful effects of the phytates, etc..

They certainly don't dine on tofu pups, chug soymilk all day , start the day with soy yogurt and end it with soy ice cream.

America really has no history of healthful eating in any way and people tend to swap their old foods with health food store versions of the same foods
(breakfast cereal with soymilk, soy balony , tofu cheesecake, hot dogs etc..) in hopes of better health and less environmental impact though
replacing these foods with ersatz versions can't be any healthier or better
for the environment since they require machinery, packaging etc..

If it can't be made in my kitchen I'm very likely to skip it.

Edited to add> I did make my own miso, tempeh, tofu and natto right in my own kitchen years ago.
elainie is offline  
#67 of 127 Old 04-28-2004, 05:24 PM
EBM
 
EBM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 310
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I'm curious...

Why is the concept of soy being "potentially" harmful soooooo difficult to swallow?
EBM is offline  
#68 of 127 Old 04-28-2004, 05:37 PM
 
layla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 384
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
For me, it's not so difficult to swallow, what is difficult is for one person (or group or whatever) to say that any one thing is so terrible and no one should eat it. Anything that is overconsumed is probably not going to be great for you, weather it's because there's something that could potentially be harmful or because it's taking the place of other foods to add to a balanced diet. So my kids (okay, okay, me too!) want a tofu pup once in a while or I love soymilk in my coffee or even soy yogurt sometimes, so what? Yes, some soy is better than other soy, raw zuccini is better than fried zuccini broiled chicken is better than fried chicken. If we eat lots of veggies (not the fried ones!), whole grains, nut butters (raw, unsalted), fresh fruit (not apple pie with a lard crust!) and soy doesn't disagree with us, then here Little Johnny, enjoy your tofu pup! A varied diet that doesn't depend on any one thing is the key. And again, soy doesn't contain estrogen, but a compound that mimics it. How many hormones are in a Big Mac? A vanilla shake? There are no miracle foods, no one food that will give you eternal good health nor kill you if you eat it all in moderation and eat lots of different kinds of really good foods.
layla is offline  
#69 of 127 Old 04-28-2004, 05:41 PM
 
elainie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 153
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I think it's perhaps because it's so easy for people to walk into a store and buy packaged soy cheese, soy milk, soy everything .Soy has also been touted as a somewhat miracle health food.

Real foods take time to prepare and don't have a shelf life.

Edited to add: the people behind the soy controversy are not into Big Macs or any fast/packaged food.They see soy as an ultra processed food (not talking about the traditonally processed soy consumed by Asians in smaller amounts, natto, miso, tamari etc..)
elainie is offline  
#70 of 127 Old 04-28-2004, 05:46 PM
 
layla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 384
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I agree, and let me tell you, as much as I like to make homemade everything for my family, when I'm tired, I like nothing better than to pop an Amy's frozen soy cheese pizza in the oven! Hey, none of us are perfect!
layla is offline  
#71 of 127 Old 04-28-2004, 06:10 PM
 
mamaofthree's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 4,346
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
You know why at first I was so upset was because it seems like once something is "good for you" all of a sudden it isn't. Does that make since. When I was growing up MILK was the thing to drink. "Finish your milk" I am sure most of us heard that. There is the GOT MILK? ads and the three a day adds for dairy blaa blaa (I am not saying that this is all a milk conspiracy) but just as milk from cows was suppose to be great for you they find that it really isn't that great for all people. Anyway where am I going with this??? Oh yeah... I think I said this before it is like once it is found out to be good then it gets over done. PLUS soy as I understand it is pretty cheap so they stick it in EVERYTHING. I am sure it can easily be way overdone, I mean not just in meat/dairy subs but also cookies, ceral bars, Luna bars, everything has soy in it.
This whole debate and article actually opened my eyes more to my diet. I maybe a veggie but I am a way overprocessed veggie. I eat just as crappy as before I went veggie, just no meat. Pretty lame. When I talked to my dh about it he agreed. So we went to the library and got some whole foods cook books. And I suddenly realized there is alot my family is missing. I mean for us grains are rice. There is so much more out there when you take out all the processed foods that you (or I) depend on. PLUS I will actually get the joy of teaching my kids to cook and bake. Which we don't do.
Yes we will still eat soy, because for us I think limiting it is best, BUT we will be adding a bigger verity to our plates, because of this article.

And maybe that is another problem I am having with the article. No real ideas on what to do when you begin to cut out the soy. I mean I know we can look stuff up, and that isn't a real big deal, but to write something so scary sounding and then NOT give advice seems wrong. I mean that is a totally, IMO, mainstream mag thing to do. You read something in newsweek telling you how bad something is, it scares the crap out of you, but gives no advice on what else to do. I always enjoyed MOthering because usually it gives advice on what to do "besides". I was disappointed.

H

mama to 6 amazing children joy.gif married to my main man for 21 years love.gif and finally home FULL time dishes.gifhang.gifknit.gif

mamaofthree is offline  
#72 of 127 Old 04-28-2004, 06:34 PM
 
katoomgirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 7
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
At the end of the footnote, there's a link to the endnotes at Mothering Magazine's website. A link that doesn't work. I'm sure they'll fix it eventually.
I tried this link without the . at th end and it worked.

Wife to Jeff, Mother to Vianne
katoomgirl is offline  
#73 of 127 Old 04-28-2004, 07:59 PM
 
Momtezuma Tuatara's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 8,091
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Soy is not, and never has been, a food that is good for the immune system

Anyone who says otherwise, hasn't done any reading on the subject.

http://www.soyonlineservice.co.nz/home.htm

“I want to sell drugs to everyone. I want to sell drugs to healthy people. I want drugs to sell like chewing gum.” former Merck CEO, Henry Gadsden

Momtezuma Tuatara is offline  
#74 of 127 Old 04-28-2004, 08:11 PM
 
ChristaN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Colorado
Posts: 3,229
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by EBM
Why are some prompted by the Mothering article to turn this into a debate of meat/dairy vs soy?
I admit that when I read anti-soy articles, it does often strike me as anti vegetarian. This is likely b/c those who are so opposed to soy are usually tied to the dairy or meat industry or are promoting a diet heavy on animal protein. Although I do not know the background of this specific author, her arguements sound a lot like the arguements that I hear from those suspect sources.

As far as basing things on scientific research, a number of the posters here have said something like 'my personal experience is: I was vegetarian, ate soy, and got sick or I smelled bad when I ate soy, therefore it makes sense that soy is in fact bad for you.' That is about as unscientific as it gets. I have been vegan for 15+yrs., I eat soy & have zero thyroid problems. I am fairly thin & quite healthy. That doesn't prove anything about soy being the miracle food, just like someone saying that her friend who eats soy developed hypothyroidism means nothing. It is not a double blind study, nor even a study at all.
ChristaN is offline  
#75 of 127 Old 04-28-2004, 08:18 PM
EBM
 
EBM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 310
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChristaN

As far as basing things on scientific research, a number of the posters here have said something like 'my personal experience is: I was vegetarian, ate soy, and got sick or I smelled bad when I ate soy, therefore it makes sense that soy is in fact bad for you.' That is about as unscientific as it gets. I have been vegan for 15+yrs., I eat soy & have zero thyroid problems. I am fairly thin & quite healthy. That doesn't prove anything about soy being the miracle food, just like someone saying that her friend who eats soy developed hypothyroidism means nothing. It is not a double blind study, nor even a study at all.
if you review my post, you will see that i suggested that the individual should seek out scientific data and make a decision based on that. I was not implying the personal experiences mentioned on this thread are the equivalent of scientific studies. And just as these experiences are not double blind studies or studies at all--neither is your personal experience with soy.
EBM is offline  
#76 of 127 Old 04-28-2004, 08:24 PM
 
ChristaN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Colorado
Posts: 3,229
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by EBM
And just as these experiences are not double blind studies or studies at all--neither is your personal experience with soy.

I know - I said so in my post - "That [my personal experience] doesn't prove anything about soy being the miracle food, just like someone saying that her friend who eats soy developed hypothyroidism means nothing."
ChristaN is offline  
#77 of 127 Old 04-28-2004, 09:13 PM
 
layla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 384
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
MamaofThree, if you want a couple of fairly easy, non-soy, high protein, yummy recipes, pm me and I'll send you a couple. We eat soy and so far so good, so we'll keep eating it, but eat lots of other great stuff too!
layla is offline  
#78 of 127 Old 04-28-2004, 09:37 PM
 
MamaMonica's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: lalalala life goes on
Posts: 13,000
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I don't think anti-soy is anti--vegetarian because you don't need soy to be a vegetarian. In our modern society, many vegetarians eat a lot of it, however.

Being right is not always fair, but being fair is always right
MamaMonica is offline  
#79 of 127 Old 04-29-2004, 02:57 PM
 
Greenkate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 10
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Does anyone know more about the correlation between soy consumption and dementia? I know there was a heart study done a few years back that ended up linking the two. BTW, we've been vegetarians for many years, and have eaten our weight in soy. I'm really nervous now, and trying to find a balanced solution. I think the difference in Asian consumption and American, to segue, is that we Americans take something fairly healthy ~the soybean~ and find a way to supersize, deep-fry, mutate, puree, squash and squeeze all of the benefits of it, then eat it like there's no tomorrow. Compare our consumption of anything with any other culture, and maybe you'll find the key to the problem. :
Greenkate is offline  
#80 of 127 Old 04-29-2004, 03:32 PM
 
Meiri's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Murrysville, PA
Posts: 9,114
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Quote:
posted by Tricia80:
I have seen it alot if not all foods that have soy.. have the label "may contain soy/soy products" or "processed at a facility that processes soy products"....
I'm glad some manufacturers are doing this, but most are not. I recently told off Flatout Breads for the hidden soy in their 'wonderful natural product'. I don't expect to find soy in Bread, unless it's trying to cater to the low carb fad, in which case they brag about it on the Front of the label.

ftcmj, Thanks for the links. I've bookmarked and will be reading. Wheat is not a problem for me at all, and I apparently am not allergic to soy oil. Given that I've survived the Easter chocolate glut, soy lecithin is not an issue either as I didn't notice any particular symptoms. Whole soy, soy flour, soy proteins however! I avoid like the plague.

"What will you do once you know?"
Meiri is offline  
#81 of 127 Old 04-29-2004, 04:13 PM
 
MamaMonica's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: lalalala life goes on
Posts: 13,000
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I don't have a link to the soy/dementia problem, but you can find it on a google search.

The issue is soy protein islolate, which is processed with aluminum salts- apparently this is the type of aluminum that crosses the blood/brain barrier. It has been linked to alzeimers.

Being right is not always fair, but being fair is always right
MamaMonica is offline  
#82 of 127 Old 04-29-2004, 04:54 PM
 
Attached Mamma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Posts: 153
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Wheat is not a problem for me at all, and I apparently am not allergic to soy oil.
Even if you aren't allergic to soy oil, I would try my best to avoid it. According to Rebecca Wood in "The New Whole Foods Encyclopedia", soy oil is a by-product of the soy industry, and is highly refined. Unrefined soy oil is no better, it has an unpleasantly intense aroma and flavor; it is considered toxic in traditional Chinese medicine, and is difficult to digest.
Attached Mamma is offline  
#83 of 127 Old 04-30-2004, 01:06 AM
 
ftcmj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 9
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Thank you, ChristaN, for actual new information instead of anecdotes, panic, conspiracy theories, hypochondria, and platitudes. Very refreshing. Here's some more.

Before I write anything else, I want to express that nothing I write here should be construed as medical advice. I'm not a doctor, and wouldn't advise anyone on nutrition.

I'm writing at such length because I think bad science needs to be directly opposed. What makes bad science bad isn't that it comes to the wrong conclusions, although it does excel at that. Even the conclusions of science done well is often wrong, or at least incomplete, for a variety of reasons. Bad science is science that is biased, that doesn't weigh all the evidence, and especially, it is science that is used to further peoples' pet prejudices. Too many people use scientific papers like religious fanatics use the Bible--as proof texts for their own crackpot notions.

So all of the following is not about whether soy is "good" or "bad", whatever those uselessly simplistic words may mean in this context. It's about whether Kaayla Daniel's article is well-reasoned or not, and whether it includes all the evidence. So far, I say it's not and it doesn't, and I explain why below.

First, resources and responses:

The end notes for the article now appear on the Web at
http://www.mothering.com/10-0-0/html...soy-notes.html
Thanks, Mom.

When you see Web site links in this forum that supposedly "prove" that soy "has problems", "is dangerous", or whatever, note that they are almost all from http://soyonlineservice.co.nz. When everyone with a similar point of view can only ever find one source for their information, you've got to wonder. Furthermore, if you go to the site, you can read still more about revisionist history, "powerful industry" conspiracies, mysterious, vindictive squads of attorneys, "what they don't tell you about" (oh God, not "them" again), and so on. It's propaganda. Some of its conclusions may be true, but it's still propaganda.

In a previous item, EBM writes:
Quote:
It is unlikely that the article was an attack on vegetarians or vegans. Why not do your own personal research and base your arguments for/against soy on the scientific data? If your research leads you to conclude that soy is harmful, look for an alternative for your diet. If it is not harmful, eat to your hearts content.

This really is not an issue of meat eaters diet vs vegan/vegetarians diet. Sheeesh.
I support this approach. But EBM, this may not be an issue of vegetarians vs. non-vegetarians for you and me, but it seems to be so for the author of the original article.

Quote:
I decided to write this book because I saw so many clients and friends
suffering from vegetarian and near vegetarian diets. Most often the
chief culprit was soy.

-- Kaayla Daniel, Testosterone Magazine 302,
http://www.t-mag.com/nation_articles/302poison.jsp.
So I wouldn't be too sure that the article isn't an attack on vegetarianism as much as it is on soy.

Later, EBM writes:
Quote:
I'm curious...

Why is the concept of soy being "potentially" harmful soooooo difficult to swallow?
Personally, I'm not upset about whether soy is "potentially" harmful. I'm upset about Mothering being willing to publish junk science. You can use "science" to prove anything you want if you're willing to pick and choose only those details from only those articles that match your preconceived notions. Read on for an analysis of one--just one--of the over 100 references that Daniel uses in her article.

Starrynight, the PubMed abstract for the study you were talking about is:
A maternal vegetarian diet in pregnancy is associated with hypospadias. BJU Int. 2000 Jan;85(1):107-13.

Read the abstract at:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q..._uids=10619956

You can read the full text of article at the publisher's Web site for free at:
http://www.bjui.org/85/1/article/bju436.asp

Take a look at this excerpt from the hypospadias paper (one of Daniel's sources):

Quote:
The consumption of soya as a substitute for meat is increasing in the UK, partly as a result of the recent problems with beef and partly from concepts of "healthy eating". It is now widely used in the food industry, with the advent of vegetarian-style meals, and it provides the highest concentrations of phytoestrogens (particularly isoflavones) of all edible plant matter [18,21]. However, the estimated daily exposure to exogenous oestrogens by consumers of soya is minimal compared to, e.g. that from oral contraceptives. Such low levels of exposure would perhaps indicate small risks (or benefits), as the biological activity of phytoestrogens is considered to be low. Nevertheless, extended prolonged exposure may cause phytoestrogens in the body to reach biologically significant levels. The possible effects on humans should not be dismissed until more experimental data are available. MacLusky [22] discussed the more indirect role of phytoestrogens; rather than having a direct oestrogenic effect, they may interact with other factors in the diet and lead to an interference with "normal oestrogen biosynthesis and action".
The comment about potential "biologically significant levels" I find a bit odd, given that the toxicology site (cited below) says that the body metabolizes and eliminates plant phytoestrogens, whereas other, synthetic organic endocrine disruptors, particularly some pesticides, accumulate.

All in all, though, the preceding paragraph from the hypospadias paper reads like good science. The study says that effects are "possible", not present; that phytoestrogens may interact with other dietary factors and interfere with hormones; that effects on humans shouldn't be ruled out with out more evidence. may cause... possible effects... may interact... more experimental evidence. This is how a scientist sounds when speculating about possible explanations for a phenomenon. The author is not making claims, but rather is speculating about what may be worth studying, given what is generally known about hormones. This is what good science sounds like.

Daniel's use of the hypospadias study is revealing. From reading her article, you'd think that the study proved that soy caused hypospadias. What the report actually says (read it for yourself) is that babies of vegetarian mothers in the study had five times the risk of hypospadias than those of non-vegetarian mothers. It speculates that soy may be involved, but shows no evidence to the contrary, and makes no claim. Yet Daniel treats it like a slam-dunk.

Other fun facts Daniel somehow missed in the original hypospadias study:
  • Dietary phytoestrogens were speculated as only one of the possible causes of the association. Other speculations included increased exposure of the mother to estrogen-disrupting environmental chemicals, particularly pesticides, or a possible, undetermined nutritional deficiency. There is also a 5% probability that the results were due to chance.
  • Hypospadias incidence varies widely around the world, and it's not clear why. No evidence was presented that it was associated with local soy consumption. That would be an obvious thing to consider if the scientists were trying to make a case that soy was causative, but it wasn't even mentioned.
  • Phytoestrogens have protective effects against several diseases, particularly breast cancer. (Other sources suggest that people who already have hormone-dependent breast cancer may want to avoid phytoestrogen-containing foods because phytoestrogens might encourage cell proliferation.)
  • None of the mothers who always ate organic vegetables had a child with hypospadias, but that sample size was too small, and so was not significant.
  • Moreover, the article says that food content tables don't provide enough information on phytoestrogen content to measure the quantity the mothers consumed.
  • The study even says that they can't link soy to hypospadias, because too few of the women in the study ate enough soy to be statistically significant. Somehow this little detail escaped Daniel's attention.
  • The article also mentions in passing that in Asia, "soybean products are a major component of the traditional diet". (Presumably Dr. Daniel will contact these researchers and straighten them out on this point. While doing so, she might also explain to them why Japanese women have over 16 times the concentration of soy metabolism products in their urine as do supposedly soy-infused American women, as this study claims. Might the mighty Urine Industry somehow be involved?)

So, rather than being a damning indictment of soy as a cause of hypospadias, the researchers find a relationship, in one group, between maternal vegetarianism and hypospandias in offspring. They speculate that dietary plant phytoestrogens are one possible cause among many, and say that the issue deserves further study, which it most certainly does. Daniel can't make a case that soy is dangerous, or causes hypospadias, based on this study. At least, not to anyone who has read it, and is paying attention. Yet she tries.

For very accessible background information on endocrine disruptors (which is the major theme of the soy article in Mothering), see the page:

http://extoxnet.orst.edu/faqs/pesticide/endocrine.htm

Quote:
  • What chemicals cause endocrine disruption?

Drugs have been specifically designed to treat hormone imbalance in humans. Diethylstilbesterol (DES), a drug with strong estrogenic properties administered to pregnant women until 1971 to prevent miscarriages, is a tragic example. Female children of mothers who took DES during pregnancy have a higher incidence of certain forms of ovarian and vaginal cancer. However, there are many drugs that mimic or otherwise affect hormone balance which are important to modern medicine. Other man made chemicals, with unintentional hormone-like activity include: pesticides such as DDT, vinclozolin, endosulfan, toxaphene, dieldrin, and DBCP, and industrial chemicals and byproducts such as polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), dioxins, and phenols. Some of these phenols are breakdown products of surfactants, found in soaps and detergents. Also implicated are heavy metals, plastics, cosmetics, textiles, paints, lubricants. Sewage treatment effluent may contain a variety of natural and man made endocrine disruptors, including natural hormones from animal and human waste.

Currently, there are no standard tests to determine if a chemical is an endocrine disruptor. However, both the Clean Water Act and the Food Quality Protection Act require the EPA to develop test methods by 1999. As many endocrine disruptors are thought to affect sex hormone function, and therefore reproduction, the findings in multigeneration animal studies, currently required for pesticide registration by EPA, can provide strong evidence of the potential for endocrine disruption.
  • What natural chemicals have endocrine activity?

There are natural chemicals in plants that have hormone-like activity. These chemicals, mostly phytoestrogens, are found in high levels in broccoli, cauliflower, soybeans, carrots, oats, rice, onions, legumes, apples, potatoes, beer, and coffee. Most phytoestrogens have weak activity (low potency) and people who consume diets rich in these substances may have a reduced risk of developing some hormone related diseases. However, the actual health risk or benefit of a diet rich in plant hormones is largely unknown. Some researchers argue that dietary consumption of plant hormones dwarfs the potential exposure from man made sources. (Emphasis added.)
Another source, this one specifically about phytoestrogens, is from the same site (a Web site about the science of toxins):
http://extoxnet.orst.edu/faqs/natural/phytoest.htm

To close on a light note, I did run across a reference to one study that linked high tofu consumption to decreased mental functioning in older men. The study didn't explain whether eating tofu caused mental degeneration, or vice-versa.
ftcmj is offline  
#84 of 127 Old 04-30-2004, 09:49 AM
EBM
 
EBM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 310
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Why not do your own personal research and base your arguments for/against soy on the scientific data? If your research leads you to conclude that soy is harmful, look for an alternative for your diet. If it is not harmful, eat to your hearts content.
EBM is offline  
#85 of 127 Old 04-30-2004, 10:14 AM
 
layla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 384
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I don't have time to check out all those links right now, but will later today. I do want to say that for every "scientific" finding on any one subject, there is always a counter finding by equally "reputable" scientists. Also, I have to agree with a couple of things: people overprocess really good things and make them bad, people eat too much processed/refined food and if soy doesn't bother you, eat it! If it does, don't! If my sister is allergic to eggs, she shouldn't eat them, but that won't stop me from eating them!
layla is offline  
#86 of 127 Old 04-30-2004, 11:07 AM
EBM
 
EBM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 310
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
ftcmj,

What is your opinion on this?
http://www.thedoctorwithin.com/index...les/index.html
EBM is offline  
#87 of 127 Old 04-30-2004, 11:16 AM
EBM
 
EBM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 310
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I'm not a doctor so can someone explain this in relation to the discussion on this thread?

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/q..._uids=15084758
EBM is offline  
#88 of 127 Old 04-30-2004, 12:58 PM
 
lolabelle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 42
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I recieved my Mothering mag yesterday and read most of the article...but not all.

Unlike the majority of posters here, I supplemented my son with organic soy formula. I was atypical in this group. I tried unsucessfully (37 hospital hours) with a doula and my Bradley trained husband to have a natural childbirth and ended with a c-section, torn uterus and a infection which required an 8 day hospital stay with interveinous antibiotics and delayed milk letdown...the lactation consultants said they had never seen someone take so long. Once at home I had to pump and dump for a week because of more oral antibiotics...but I kept trying and did eventually letdown and worked on getting my supply up. Because of the antibiotics,I suspect, I had an attack of Crohn's disease...it was hard to keep up my weight and produce enough milk. I stayed ill and underweight until I weaned my son at 13 months. That said...I supplemented my breastfeeding with a ratio of about 20/80...or 30/70 respectfullly. The later number being breastfeeding. Sorry...I felt the need to defend myself!

We eat mostly all organic. We don't eat dairy and eat mainly free-range chicken and turkey and occasionally wild salmon. We don't eat much soy...my son doesn't care for it except for miso and the tofu chunks in that, and when I took ds of of soy formula I put him on rice milk. Now at 20 months he only drinks water and occasionally juice. We don't vaccinate (son is intact), and I use only natural cleaning products in the home and natural lawn care outside. We have distilled water delivery and are switching soon to in home reverse osmosis system. So I do my research for what is best for my family and my growing son, but after reading the article I panicked and thought...What have I done to my precious son! One of the first things I did this morning was a computer search of soy formula safety...and then checked here. After reading the responses...I am going to take this study with a grain of salt. My son is not hyper, very smart...if I do say so myself, and his testes are fine. I also found found it weird, as did Mamaofthree, that she mentioned the undesended testicle...I read that and thought, that is not right! Another brow raiser was the bit about delayed sexual development (or no develpment)problems in young boys and excelerated develpment in young girls have increased since soy formulas have hit the market, therefore it's soy that is causing these problems.

Thank you ftcmj for help in sorting this out and easing my mind. I will sleep better tonight!

edited to correct a spelling error...I am sure there are many more!
lolabelle is offline  
#89 of 127 Old 04-30-2004, 01:09 PM
EBM
 
EBM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 310
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I just wanted to add that my concerns over soy did not originate from the Mothering article but from other sources (O'Crea, Mercola, etc)

Oh, and a naturpathic, VEGETARIAN, doctor who is dead set against meat/dairy.
EBM is offline  
#90 of 127 Old 04-30-2004, 08:59 PM
 
starrynight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: WA
Posts: 115
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Thanks for the links ftcmj. I read them with interest. I also found a couple other sites that talked about this. Apparently of the (nearly) 8000 boys in the study, there were 321 from vegetarian moms and 7 of them had hypospadias. The other 44 boys that had hypospadias came from omnivore moms. Frankly, the numbers are so small that I agree no conclusions can be drawn. I mean what caused the hypospadias in the moms that weren't vegetarian? Iron supplements and having the flu during the 1st trimester were also implicated, but again very small numbers. With only 7 vegetarian moms to go on it could just be a coincidence.

I also looked up what the rates of hypospadias were internationally. From what I read industrialized countries have more cases than non-industialized countries. I was particularly curious about Japan, since the average Japanese consumes quite a bit more soy than the average American. The studies I found on the web say the average Japanese consumes at least 50-80 grams a day, while the average American consumes only 5 grams. (Which makes sense then that Japanese women excrete more soy isoflavones in their urine.) While the rates of hypospadias in Japan have gone up in the past 20 years, they are still ten times less than what they are in the U.S. This seems contradictory to the soy causes hypospadias argument.
starrynight is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Drag and Drop File Upload
Drag files here to attach!
Upload Progress: 0
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off