Date:   9/16/2005 9:43:32 PM ( 19 y ago)
Hits:   942
URL:   https://www.curezone.org/forums/fm.asp?i=68860

3 readers agree with this message.  Hide votes     What is this?

http://www.mercola.com/article/soy/avoid_soy.htm



by Sally Fallon & Mary G. Enig, Ph.D.

Cinderella's Dark Side


The propaganda that has created the soy sales miracle is all the more
remarkable because, only a few decades ago, the soybean was considered unfit
to eat - even in Asia. During the Chou Dynasty (1134-246 BC) the soybean was
designated one of the five sacred grains, along with barley, wheat, millet
and rice.

However, the pictograph for the soybean, which dates from earlier times,
indicates that it was not first used as a food; for whereas the pictographs
for the other four grains show the seed and stem structure of the plant, the
pictograph for the soybean emphasizes the root structure. Agricultural
literature of the period speaks frequently of the soybean and its use in
crop rotation. Apparently the soy plant was initially used as a method of
fixing nitrogen.13

The soybean did not serve as a food until the discovery of fermentation
techniques, some time during the Chou Dynasty. The first soy foods were
fermented products like tempeh, natto, miso and soy sauce.

At a later date, possibly in the 2nd century BC, Chinese scientists
discovered that a purée of cooked soybeans could be precipitated with
calcium sulfate or magnesium sulfate (plaster of Paris or Epsom Salts ) to
make a smooth, pale curd - tofu or bean curd. The use of fermented and
precipitated soy products soon spread to other parts of the Orient, notably
Japan and Indonesia.

The Chinese did not eat unfermented soybeans as they did other legumes such
as lentils because the soybean contains large quantities of natural toxins
or "antinutrients". First among them are potent enzyme inhibitors that block
the action of trypsin and other enzymes needed for protein digestion.

These inhibitors are large, tightly folded proteins that are not completely
deactivated during ordinary cooking. They can produce serious gastric
distress, reduced protein digestion and chronic deficiencies in amino acid
uptake. In test animals, diets high in trypsin inhibitors cause enlargement
and pathological conditions of the pancreas, including cancer.14

Soybeans also contain haemagglutinin, a clot-promoting substance that causes
red blood cells to clump together.

Trypsin inhibitors and haemagglutinin are growth inhibitors. Weanling rats
fed soy containing these antinutrients fail to grow normally.
Growth-depressant compounds are deactivated during the process of
fermentation, so once the Chinese discovered how to ferment the soybean,
they began to incorporate soy foods into their diets.

In precipitated products, enzyme inhibitors concentrate in the soaking
liquid rather than in the curd. Thus, in tofu and bean curd, growth
depressants are reduced in quantity but not completely eliminated.

Soy also contains goitrogens - substances that depress thyroid function.

Additionally 99% a very large percentage of soy is genetically modified and
it also has one of the highest percentages contamination by pesticides of
any of our foods.

Soybeans are high in phytic acid, present in the bran or hulls of all seeds.
It's a substance that can block the uptake of essential minerals - calcium,
magnesium, copper, iron and especially zinc - in the intestinal tract.

Although not a household word, phytic acid has been extensively studied;
there are literally hundreds of articles on the effects of phytic acid in
the current scientific literature. Scientists are in general agreement that
grain- and legume-based diets high in phytates contribute to widespread
mineral deficiencies in third world countries.15

Analysis shows that calcium, magnesium, iron and zinc are present in the
plant foods eaten in these areas, but the high phytate content of soy- and
grain-based diets prevents their absorption.

The soybean has one of the highest phytate levels of any grain or legume
that has been studied,16 and the phytates in soy are highly resistant to
normal phytate-reducing techniques such as long, slow cooking.17 Only a long
period of fermentation will significantly reduce the phytate content of
soybeans.

When precipitated soy products like tofu are consumed with meat, the
mineral-blocking effects of the phytates are reduced.18 The Japanese
traditionally eat a small amount of tofu or miso as part of a mineral-rich
fish broth, followed by a serving of meat or fish.

Vegetarians who consume tofu and bean curd as a substitute for meat and
dairy products risk severe mineral deficiencies. The results of calcium,
magnesium and iron deficiency are well known; those of zinc are less so.

Zinc is called the intelligence mineral because it is needed for optimal
development and functioning of the brain and nervous system. It plays a role
in protein synthesis and collagen formation; it is involved in the
blood-sugar control mechanism and thus protects against diabetes; it is
needed for a healthy reproductive system.

Zinc is a key component in numerous vital enzymes and plays a role in the
immune system. Phytates found in soy products interfere with zinc absorption
more completely than with other minerals.19 Zinc deficiency can cause a
"spacey" feeling that some vegetarians may mistake for the "high" of
spiritual enlightenment.

Milk drinking is given as the reason why second-generation Japanese in
America grow taller than their native ancestors. Some investigators
postulate that the reduced phytate content of the American diet - whatever
may be its other deficiencies - is the true explanation, pointing out that
both Asian and Western children who do not get enough meat and fish products
to counteract the effects of a high phytate diet, frequently suffer rickets,
stunting and other growth problems.20

Soy Protein Isolate: Not So Friendly


Soy processors have worked hard to get these antinutrients out of the
finished product, particularly soy protein isolate (SPI) which is the key
ingredient in most soy foods that imitate meat and dairy products, including
baby formulas and some brands of soy milk.

SPI is not something you can make in your own kitchen. Production takes
place in industrial factories where a slurry of soy beans is first mixed
with an alkaline solution to remove fiber, then precipitated and separated
using an acid wash and, finally, neutralized in an alkaline solution.

Acid washing in aluminum tanks leaches high levels of aluminum into the
final product. The resultant curds are spray- dried at high temperatures to
produce a high-protein powder. A final indignity to the original soybean is
high-temperature, high-pressure extrusion processing of soy protein isolate
to produce textured vegetable protein (TVP).

Much of the trypsin inhibitor content can be removed through
high-temperature processing, but not all. Trypsin inhibitor content of soy
protein isolate can vary as much as fivefold.21 (In rats, even low-level
trypsin inhibitor SPI feeding results in reduced weight gain compared to
controls.22)

But high-temperature processing has the unfortunate side-effect of so
denaturing the other proteins in soy that they are rendered largely
ineffective.23 That's why animals on soy feed need lysine supplements for
normal growth.

nitrites , which are potent carcinogens, are formed during spray-drying, and
a toxin called lysinoalanine is formed during alkaline processing.24
Numerous artificial flavorings, particularly MSG, are added to soy protein
isolate and textured vegetable protein products to mask their strong "beany"
taste and to impart the flavor of meat.25

In feeding experiments, the use of SPI increased requirements for vitamins
E, K, D and B12 and created deficiency symptoms of calcium, magnesium,
manganese, molybdenum, copper, iron and zinc.26 Phytic acid remaining in
these soy products greatly inhibits zinc and iron absorption; test animals
fed SPI develop enlarged organs, particularly the pancreas and thyroid
gland, and increased deposition of fatty acids in the liver.27

Yet soy protein isolate and textured vegetable protein are used extensively
in school lunch programs, commercial baked goods, diet beverages and fast
food products. They are heavily promoted in third world countries and form
the basis of many food giveaway programs.

In spite of poor results in animal feeding trials, the soy industry has
sponsored a number of studies designed to show that soy protein products can
be used in human diets as a replacement for traditional foods.

An example is "Nutritional Quality of Soy Bean Protein Isolates: Studies in
Children of Preschool Age", sponsored by the Ralston Purina Company.28 A
group of Central American children suffering from malnutrition was first
stabilized and brought into better health by feeding them native foods,
including meat and dairy products. Then, for a two-week period, these
traditional foods were replaced by a drink made of soy protein isolate and
sugar.

All nitrogen taken in and all nitrogen excreted was measured in truly
Orwellian fashion: the children were weighed naked every morning, and all
excrement and vomit gathered up for analysis. The researchers found that the
children retained nitrogen and that their growth was "adequate", so the
experiment was declared a success.

Whether the children were actually healthy on such a diet, or could remain
so over a long period, is another matter. The researchers noted that the
children vomited "occasionally", usually after finishing a meal; that over
half suffered from periods of moderate diarrhea; that some had upper
respiratory infections; and that others suffered from rash and fever.

It should be noted that the researchers did not dare to use soy products to
help the children recover from malnutrition, and were obliged to supplement
the soy-sugar mixture with nutrients largely absent in soy products -
notably, vitamins A, D and B12, iron, Iodine and zinc.

Marketing The Perfect Food


"Just imagine you could grow the perfect food. This food not only would
provide affordable nutrition, but also would be delicious and easy to
prepare in a variety of ways. It would be a healthful food, with no
saturated fat. In fact, you would be growing a virtual fountain of youth on
your back forty."

The author is Dean Houghton, writing for The Furrow,2 a magazine published
in 12 languages by John Deere. "This ideal food would help prevent, and
perhaps reverse, some of the world's most dreaded diseases. You could grow
this miracle crop in a variety of soils and climates. Its cultivation would
build up, not deplete, the land...this miracle food already exists... It's
called soy."

Just imagine. Farmers have been imagining - and planting more soy. What was
once a minor crop, listed in the 1913 US Department of Agriculture (USDA)
handbook not as a food but as an industrial product, now covers 72 million
acres of American farmland. Much of this harvest will be used to feed
chickens, turkeys, pigs, cows and salmon. Another large fraction will be
squeezed to produce oil for margarine, shortenings and salad dressings.

Advances in technology make it possible to produce isolated soy protein from
what was once considered a waste product - the defatted, high-protein soy
chips - and then transform something that looks and smells terrible into
products that can be consumed by human beings. Flavorings, preservatives ,
sweeteners, emulsifiers and synthetic nutrients have turned soy protein
isolate, the food processors' ugly duckling, into a New Age Cinderella.

The new fairy-tale food has been marketed not so much for her beauty but for
her virtues. Early on, products based on soy protein isolate were sold as
extenders and meat substitutes - a strategy that failed to produce the
requisite consumer demand. The industry changed its approach.

"The quickest way to gain product acceptability in the less affluent
society," said an industry spokesman, "is to have the product consumed on
its own merit in a more affluent society."3 So soy is now sold to the
upscale consumer, not as a cheap, poverty food but as a miracle substance
that will prevent heart disease and cancer, whisk away hot flushes, build
strong bones and keep us forever young.

The competition - meat, milk, cheese, butter and eggs - has been duly
demonised by the appropriate government bodies. Soy serves as meat and milk
for a new generation of virtuous vegetarians.


Marketing Costs Money

This is especially when it needs to be bolstered with "research", but
there's plenty of funds available. All soybean producers pay a mandatory
assessment of one-half to one per cent of the net market price of soybeans.
The total - something like US$80 million annually4 - supports United
Soybean's program to "strengthen the position of soybeans in the marketplace
and maintain and expand domestic and foreign markets for uses for soybeans
and soybean products".

State soybean councils from Maryland, Nebraska, Delaware, Arkansas,
Virginia, North Dakota and Michigan provide another $2.5 million for
"research".5 Private companies like Archer Daniels Midland also contribute
their share. ADM spent $4.7 million for advertising on Meet the Press and
$4.3 million on Face the Nation during the course of a year.6

Public relations firms help convert research projects into newspaper
articles and advertising copy, and law firms lobby for favorable government
regulations. IMF money funds soy processing plants in foreign countries, and
free trade policies keep soybean abundance flowing to overseas destinations.

The push for more soy has been relentless and global in its reach. Soy
protein is now found in most supermarket breads. It is being used to
transform "the humble tortilla, Mexico's corn-based staple food, into a
protein-fortified 'super-tortilla' that would give a nutritional boost to
the nearly 20 million Mexicans who live in extreme poverty".7 Advertising
for a new soy-enriched loaf from Allied Bakeries in Britain targets
menopausal women seeking relief from hot flushes. Sales are running at a
quarter of a million loaves per week.8

The soy industry hired Norman Robert Associates, a public relations firm, to
"get more soy products onto school menus".9 The USDA responded with a
proposal to scrap the 30 per cent limit for soy in school lunches. The
NuMenu program would allow unlimited use of soy in student meals. With soy
added to hamburgers, tacos and lasagna, dieticians can get the total fat
content below 30 per cent of calories, thereby conforming to government
dictates. "With the soy-enhanced food items, students are receiving better
servings of nutrients and less cholesterol and fat."

Soy milk has posted the biggest gains, soaring from $2 million in 1980 to
$300 million in the US last year.10 Recent advances in processing have
transformed the gray, thin, bitter, beany-tasting Asian beverage into a
product that Western consumers will accept - one that tastes like a
milkshake, but without the guilt.

Processing miracles, good packaging, massive advertising and a marketing
strategy that stresses the products' possible health benefits account for
increasing sales to all age groups. For example, reports that soy helps
prevent prostate cancer have made soy milk acceptable to middle-aged men.
"You don't have to twist the arm of a 55- to 60-year-old guy to get him to
try soy milk," says Mark Messina. Michael Milken, former junk bond
financier, has helped the industry shed its hippie image with
well-publicized efforts to consume 40 grams of soy protein daily.

America today, tomorrow the world. Soy milk sales are rising in Canada, even
though soy milk there costs twice as much as cow's milk. Soybean milk
processing plants are sprouting up in places like Kenya.11 Even China, where
soy really is a poverty food and whose people want more meat, not tofu, has
opted to build Western-style soy factories rather than develop western
grasslands for grazing animals.12

FDA Health Claim Challenged

On October 25, 1999 the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) decided to
allow a health claim for products "low in saturated fat and cholesterol"
that contain 6.25 grams of soy protein per serving. Breakfast cereals, baked
goods, convenience food, smoothie mixes and meat substitutes could now be
sold with labels touting benefits to cardiovascular health, as long as these
products contained one heaping teaspoon of soy protein per 100-gram serving.

The best marketing strategy for a product that is inherently unhealthy is,
of course, a health claim.

"The road to FDA approval," writes a soy apologist, "was long and demanding,
consisting of a detailed review of human clinical data collected from more
than 40 scientific studies conducted over the last 20 years. Soy protein was
found to be one of the rare foods that had sufficient scientific evidence
not only to qualify for an FDA health claim proposal but to ultimately pass
the rigorous approval process."29

The "long and demanding" road to FDA approval actually took a few unexpected
turns. The original petition, submitted by Protein Technology International,
requested a health claim for isoflavones, the estrogen-like compounds found
plentifully in soybeans, based on assertions that "only soy protein that has
been processed in a manner in which isoflavones are retained will result in
cholesterol lowering".

In 1998, the FDA made the unprecedented move of rewriting PTI's petition,
removing any reference to the phyto-estrogens and substituting a claim for
soy protein - a move that was in direct contradiction to the agency's
regulations. The FDA is authorized to make rulings only on substances
presented by petition.

The abrupt change in direction was no doubt due to the fact that a number of
researchers, including scientists employed by the US Government, submitted
documents indicating that isoflavones are toxic.

The FDA had also received, early in 1998, the final British Government
report on phytoestrogens, which failed to find much evidence of benefit and
warned against potential adverse effects.30


Even with the change to soy protein isolate, FDA bureaucrats engaged in the
"rigorous approval process" were forced to deal nimbly with concerns about
mineral blocking effects, enzyme inhibitors, goitrogenicity, endocrine
disruption, reproductive problems and increased allergic reactions from
consumption of soy products.31

One of the strongest letters of protest came from Dr Dan Sheehan and Dr
Daniel Doerge, government researchers at the National Center for
Toxicological Research.32 Their pleas for warning labels were dismissed as
unwarranted.

"Sufficient scientific evidence" of soy's cholesterol-lowering properties is
drawn largely from a 1995 meta-analysis by Dr James Anderson, sponsored by
Protein Technologies International and published in the New England Journal
of Medicine.33

A meta-analysis is a review and summary of the results of many clinical
studies on the same subject. Use of meta-analyses to draw general
conclusions has come under sharp criticism by members of the scientific
community.

"Researchers substituting meta-analysis for more rigorous trials risk making
faulty assumptions and indulging in creative accounting," says Sir John
Scott, President of the Royal Society of New Zealand. "Like is not being
lumped with like. Little lumps and big lumps of data are being gathered
together by various groups."34

There is the added temptation for researchers, particularly researchers
funded by a company like Protein Technologies International, to leave out
studies that would prevent the desired conclusions. Dr Anderson discarded
eight studies for various reasons, leaving a remainder of twenty-nine.

The published report suggested that individuals with cholesterol levels over
250 mg/dl would experience a "significant" reduction of 7 to 20 per cent in
levels of serum cholesterol if they substituted soy protein for animal
protein. Cholesterol reduction was insignificant for individuals whose
cholesterol was lower than 250 mg/dl.

In other words, for most of us, giving up steak and eating vegieburgers
instead will not bring down blood cholesterol levels. The health claim that
the FDA approved "after detailed review of human clinical data" fails to
inform the consumer about these important details.

Research that ties soy to positive effects on cholesterol levels is
"incredibly immature", said Ronald M. Krauss, MD, head of the Molecular
Medical Research Program and Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.35 He
might have added that studies in which cholesterol levels were lowered
through either diet or drugs have consistently resulted in a greater number
of deaths in the treatment groups than in controls - deaths from stroke,
cancer, intestinal disorders, accident and suicide.36

Cholesterol-lowering measures in the US have fuelled a $60 billion per year
cholesterol-lowering industry, but have not saved us from the ravages of
heart disease.



Soy And Cancer


The new FDA ruling does not allow any claims about cancer prevention on food
packages, but that has not restrained the industry and its marketers from
making them in their promotional literature.


"In addition to protecting the heart," says a vitamin company brochure, "soy
has demonstrated powerful anticancer benefits...the Japanese, who eat 30
times as much soy as North Americans, have a lower incidence of cancers of
the breast, uterus and prostate."37

Indeed they do. But the Japanese, and Asians in general, have much higher
rates of other types of cancer, particularly cancer of the esophagus,
stomach, pancreas and liver.38 Asians throughout the world also have high
rates of thyroid cancer.39 The logic that links low rates of reproductive
cancers to soy consumption requires attribution of high rates of thyroid and
digestive cancers to the same foods, particularly as soy causes these types
of cancers in laboratory rats.

Just how much soy do Asians eat? A 1998 survey found that the average daily
amount of soy protein consumed in Japan was about eight grams for men and
seven for women - less than two teaspoons.40 The famous Cornell China Study,
conducted by Colin T. Campbell, found that legume consumption in China
varied from 0 to 58 grams per day, with a mean of about twelve.41

Assuming that two-thirds of legume consumption is soy, then the maximum
consumption is about 40 grams, or less than three tablespoons per day, with
an average consumption of about nine grams, or less than two teaspoons. A
survey conducted in the 1930s found that soy foods accounted for only 1.5
per cent of calories in the Chinese diet, compared with 65 per cent of
calories from pork.42 (Asians traditionally cooked with lard, not vegetable
oil!)

Traditionally fermented soy products make a delicious, natural seasoning
that may supply important nutritional factors in the Asian diet. But except
in times of famine, Asians consume soy products only in small amounts, as
condiments, and not as a replacement for animal foods - with one exception.
Celibate monks living in monasteries and leading a vegetarian lifestyle find
soy foods quite helpful because they dampen libido.

It was a 1994 meta-analysis by Mark Messina, published in Nutrition and
Cancer, that fuelled speculation on soy's anticarcinogenic properties.43
Messina noted that in 26 animal studies, 65 per cent reported protective
effects from soy. He conveniently neglected to include at least one study in
which soy feeding caused pancreatic cancer - the 1985 study by Rackis.44 In
the human studies he listed, the results were mixed.

A few showed some protective effect, but most showed no correlation at all
between soy consumption and cancer rates. He concluded that "the data in
this review cannot be used as a basis for claiming that soy intake decreases
cancer risk". Yet in his subsequent book, The Simple Soybean and Your
Health, Messina makes just such a claim, recommending one cup or 230 grams
of soy products per day in his "optimal" diet as a way to prevent cancer.

Thousands of women are now consuming soy in the belief that it protects them
against breast cancer. Yet, in 1996, researchers found that women consuming
soy protein isolate had an increased incidence of epithelial hyperplasia, a
condition that presages malignancies.45 A year later, dietary genistein was
found to stimulate breast cells to enter the cell cycle - a discovery that
led the study authors to conclude that women should not consume soy products
to prevent breast cancer.46

Phytoestrogens: Panacea Or Poison?


The male species of tropical birds carries the drab plumage of the female at
birth and 'colors up' at maturity, somewhere between nine and 24 months.

In 1991, Richard and Valerie James, bird breeders in Whangerai, New Zealand,
purchased a new kind of feed for their birds - one based largely on soy
protein.47 When soy-based feed was used, their birds 'colored up' after just
a few months. In fact, one bird-food manufacturer claimed that this early
development was an advantage imparted by the feed.

A 1992 ad for Roudybush feed formula showed a picture of the male crimson
rosella, an Australian parrot that acquires beautiful red plumage at 18 to
24 months, already brightly colored at 11 weeks old.

Unfortunately, in the ensuing years, there was decreased fertility in the
birds, with precocious maturation, deformed, stunted and stillborn babies,
and premature deaths, especially among females, with the result that the
total population in the aviaries went into steady decline.

The birds suffered beak and bone deformities, goiter, immune system
disorders and pathological, aggressive behavior. Autopsy revealed digestive
organs in a state of disintegration. The list of problems corresponded with
many of the problems the Jameses had encountered in their two children, who
had been fed soy-based infant formula.

Startled, aghast, angry, the Jameses hired toxicologist Mike Fitzpatrick.
PhD, to investigate further. Dr Fitzpatrick's literature review uncovered
evidence that soy consumption has been linked to numerous disorders,
including infertility, increased cancer and infantile leukemia; and, in
studies dating back to the 1950s,48 that genistein in soy causes endocrine
disruption in animals.

Dr Fitzpatrick also analyzed the bird feed and found that it contained high
levels of phytoestrogens, especially genistein. When the Jameses
discontinued using soy-based feed, the flock gradually returned to normal
breeding habits and behavior.

The Jameses embarked on a private crusade to warn the public and government
officials about toxins in soy foods, particularly the endocrine-disrupting
isoflavones, genistein and diadzen. Protein Technology International
received their material in 1994.

In 1991, Japanese researchers reported that consumption of as little as 30
grams or two tablespoons of soybeans per day for only one month resulted in
a significant increase in thyroid-stimulating hormone.49 Diffuse goiter and
hypothyroidism appeared in some of the subjects and many complained of
constipation, fatigue and lethargy, even though their intake of Iodine was
adequate.

In 1997, researchers from the FDA's National Center for Toxicological
Research made the embarrassing discovery that the goitrogenic components of
soy were the very same isoflavones.50

Twenty-five grams of soy protein isolate, the minimum amount PTI claimed to
have cholesterol-lowering effects, contains from 50 to 70 mg of isoflavones.
It took only 45 mg of isoflavones in premenopausal women to exert
significant biological effects, including a reduction in hormones needed for
adequate thyroid function. These effects lingered for three months after soy
consumption was discontinued.51

One hundred grams of soy protein - the maximum suggested
cholesterol-lowering dose, and the amount recommended by Protein
Technologies International - can contain almost 600 mg of isoflavones,52 an
amount that is undeniably toxic. In 1992, the Swiss health service estimated
that 100 grams of soy protein provided the estrogenic equivalent of the
Pill.53

In vitro studies suggest that isoflavones inhibit synthesis of estradiol and
other steroid hormones.54 Reproductive problems, infertility, thyroid
disease and liver disease due to dietary intake of isoflavones have been
observed for several species of animals including mice, cheetah, quail,
pigs, rats, sturgeon and sheep.55

It is the isoflavones in soy that are said to have a favorable effect on
postmenopausal symptoms, including hot flushes, and protection from
osteoporosis. Quantification of discomfort from hot flushes is extremely
subjective, and most studies show that control subjects report reduction in
discomfort in amounts equal to subjects given soy.56 The claim that soy
prevents osteoporosis is extraordinary, given that soy foods block calcium
and cause vitamin D deficiencies.

If Asians indeed have lower rates of osteoporosis than Westerners, it is
because their diet provides plenty of vitamin D from shrimp, lard and
seafood, and plenty of calcium from bone broths. The reason that Westerners
have such high rates of osteoporosis is because they have substituted soy
oil for butter, which is a traditional source of vitamin D and other
fat-soluble activators needed for calcium absorption.

Birth Control Pills For Babies

But it was the isoflavones in infant formula that gave the Jameses the most
cause for concern. In 1998, investigators reported that the daily exposure
of infants to isoflavones in soy infant formula is 6 to11 times higher on a
body-weight basis than the dose that has hormonal effects in adults
consuming soy foods. Circulating concentrations of isoflavones in infants
fed soy-based formula were 13,000 to 22,000 times higher than plasma
estradiol concentrations in infants on cow's milk formula.57

Approximately 25 per cent of bottle-fed children in the US receive soy-based
formula - a much higher percentage than in other parts of the Western world.
Fitzpatrick estimated that an infant exclusively fed soy formula receives
the estrogenic equivalent (based on body weight) of at least five birth
control pills per day.58 By contrast, almost no phytoestrogens have been
detected in dairy-based infant formula or in human milk, even when the
mother consumes soy products.

Scientists have known for years that soy-based formula can cause thyroid
problems in babies. But what are the effects of soy products on the hormonal
development of the infant, both male and female?

Male infants undergo a "testosterone surge" during the first few months of
life, when testosterone levels may be as high as those of an adult male.
During this period, the infant is programmed to express male characteristics
after puberty, not only in the development of his sexual organs and other
masculine physical traits, but also in setting patterns in the brain
characteristic of male behavior.

In monkeys, deficiency of male hormones impairs the development of spatial
perception (which, in humans, is normally more acute in men than in women),
of learning ability and of visual discrimination tasks (such as would be
required for reading).59 It goes without saying that future patterns of
sexual orientation may also be influenced by the early hormonal environment.

Male children exposed during gestation to diethylstilbestrol (DES), a
synthetic estrogen that has effects on animals similar to those of
phytoestrogens from soy, had testes smaller than normal on manturation.60

Learning disabilities, especially in male children, have reached epidemic
proportions. Soy infant feeding - which began in earnest in the early
1970s - cannot be ignored as a probable cause for these tragic developments.

As for girls, an alarming number are entering puberty much earlier than
normal, according to a recent study reported in the journal Pediatrics.61
Investigators found that one per cent of all girls now show signs of
puberty, such as breast development or pubic hair, before the age of three;
by age eight, 14.7 per cent of white girls and almost 50 per cent of
African-American girls have one or both of these characteristics.

New data indicate that environmental estrogens such as PCBs and DDE (a
breakdown product of DDT) may cause early sexual development in girls.62 In
the 1986 Puerto Rico Premature Thelarche study, the most significant dietary
association with premature sexual development was not chicken - as reported
in the press - but soy infant formula.63

The consequences of this truncated childhood are tragic. Young girls with
mature bodies must cope with feelings and urges that most children are not
well-equipped to handle. And early maturation in girls is frequently a
harbinger for problems with the reproductive system later in life, including
failure to menstruate, infertility and breast cancer.

Parents who have contacted the Jameses recount other problems associated
with children of both sexes who were fed soy-based formula, including
extreme emotional behavior, asthma, immune system problems, pituitary
insufficiency, thyroid disorders and irritable bowel syndrome - the same
endocrine and digestive havoc that afflicted the Jameses' parrots.

Dissension In The Ranks

Organizers of the Third International Soy Symposium would be hard-pressed to
call the conference an unqualified success. On the second day of the
symposium, the London-based Food Commission and the Weston A. Price
Foundation of Washington, DC, held a joint press conference, in the same
hotel as the symposium, to present concerns about soy infant formula.

Industry representatives sat stony-faced through the recitation of potential
dangers and a plea from concerned scientists and parents to pull soy-based
infant formula from the market. Under pressure from the Jameses, the New
Zealand Government had issued a health warning about soy infant formula in
1998; it was time for the American government to do the same.

On the last day of the symposium, presentations on new findings related to
toxicity sent a well-oxygenated chill through the giddy helium hype. Dr Lon
White reported on a study of Japanese Americans living in Hawaii, that
showed a significant statistical relationship between two or more servings
of tofu a week and "accelerated brain aging".64

Those participants who consumed tofu in mid-life had lower cognitive
function in late life and a greater incidence of Alzheimer's disease and
dementia. "What's more," said Dr White, "those who ate a lot of tofu, by the
time they were 75 or 80 looked five years older".65 White and his colleagues
blamed the negative effects on isoflavones - a finding that supports an
earlier study in which postmenopausal women with higher levels of
circulating estrogen experienced greater cognitive decline.66

Scientists Daniel Sheehan and Daniel Doerge, from the National Center for
Toxicological Research, ruined PTI's day by presenting findings from rat
feeding studies, indicating that genistein in soy foods causes irreversible
damage to enzymes that synthesise thyroid hormones.67

"The association between soybean consumption and goiter in animals and
humans has a long history," wrote Dr Doerge. "Current evidence for the
beneficial effects of soy requires a full understanding of potential adverse
effects as well."

Dr Claude Hughes reported that rats born to mothers that were fed genistein
had decreased birth weights compared to controls, and onset of puberty
occurred earlier in male offspring.68 His research suggested that the
effects observed in rats "...will be at least somewhat predictive of what
occurs in humans.

There is no reason to assume that there will be gross malformations of
fetuses but there may be subtle changes, such as neurobehavioral attributes,
immune function and sex hormone levels." The results, he said, "could be
nothing or could be something of great concern...if mom is eating something
that can act like sex hormones, it is logical to wonder if that could change
the baby's development".69

A study of babies born to vegetarian mothers, published in January 2000,
indicated just what those changes in baby's development might be. Mothers
who ate a vegetarian diet during pregnancy had a fivefold greater risk of
delivering a boy with hypospadias, a birth defect of the penis.70 The
authors of the study suggested that the cause was greater exposure to
phytoestrogens in soy foods popular with vegetarians.

Problems with female offspring of vegetarian mothers are more likely to show
up later in life. While soy's estrogenic effect is less than that of
diethylstilbestrol (DES), the dose is likely to be higher because it's
consumed as a food, not taken as a drug. Daughters of women who took DES
during pregnancy suffered from infertility and cancer when they reached
their twenties.



Question Marks Over GRAS Status

Lurking in the background of industry hype for soy is the nagging question
of whether it's even legal to add soy protein isolate to food. All food
additives not in common use prior to 1958, including casein protein from
milk, must have GRAS (Generally Recognized As Safe) status. In 1972, the
Nixon administration directed a re-examination of substances believed to be
GRAS, in the light of any scientific information then available.

This re-examination included casein protein that became codified as GRAS in
1978. In 1974, the FDA obtained a literature review of soy protein because,
as soy protein had not been used in food until 1959 and was not even in
common use in the early 1970s, it was not eligible to have its GRAS status
grandfathered under the provisions of the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act.71

The scientific literature up to 1974 recognized many antinutrients in
factory-made soy protein, including trypsin inhibitors, phytic acid and
genistein. But the FDA literature review dismissed discussion of adverse
impacts, with the statement that it was important for "adequate processing"
to remove them.

Genistein could be removed with an alcohol wash, but it was an expensive
procedure that processors avoided. Later studies determined that trypsin
inhibitor content could be removed only with long periods of heat and
pressure, but the FDA has imposed no requirements for manufacturers to do
so.

The FDA was more concerned with toxins formed during processing,
specifically nitrites and lysinoalanine.72 Even at low levels of
consumption - averaging one-third of a gram per day at the time - the
presence of these carcinogens was considered too great a threat to public
health to allow GRAS status.

Soy protein did have approval for use as a binder in cardboard boxes, and
this approval was allowed to continue, as researchers considered that
migration of nitrites from the box into the food contents would be too small
to constitute a cancer risk. FDA officials called for safety specifications
and monitoring procedures before granting of GRAS status for food.

These were never performed. To this day, use of soy protein is codified as
GRAS only for this limited industrial use as a cardboard binder. This means
that soy protein must be subject to premarket approval procedures each time
manufacturers intend to use it as a food or add it to a food.

Soy protein was introduced into infant formula in the early 1960s. It was a
new product with no history of any use at all. As soy protein did not have
GRAS status, premarket approval was required. This was not and still has not
been granted. The key ingredient of soy infant formula is not recognized as
safe.

The Next Asbestos?


"Against the backdrop of widespread praise...there is growing suspicion that
soy - despite its undisputed benefits - may pose some health hazards,"
writes Marian Burros, a leading food writer for the New York Times. More
than any other writer, Ms Burros's endorsement of a low-fat, largely
vegetarian diet has herded Americans into supermarket aisles featuring soy
foods.

Yet her January 26, 2000 article, "Doubts Cloud Rosy News on Soy", contains
the following alarming statement: "Not one of the 18 scientists interviewed
for this column was willing to say that taking isoflavones was risk free."
Ms Burros did not enumerate the risks, nor did she mention that the
recommended 25 daily grams of soy protein contain enough isoflavones to
cause problems in sensitive individuals, but it was evident that the
industry had recognized the need to cover itself.

Because the industry is extremely exposed...contingency lawyers will soon
discover that the number of potential plaintiffs can be counted in the
millions and the pockets are very, very deep. Juries will hear something
like the following: "The industry has known for years that soy contains many
toxins.

At first they told the public that the toxins were removed by processing.
When it became apparent that processing could not get rid of them, they
claimed that these substances were beneficial. Your government granted a
health claim to a substance that is poisonous, and the industry lied to the
public to sell more soy."

The "industry" includes merchants, manufacturers, scientists, publicists,
bureaucrats, former bond financiers, food writers, vitamin companies and
retail stores. Farmers will probably escape because they were duped like the
rest of us. But they need to find something else to grow before the soy
bubble bursts and the market collapses: grass-fed livestock, designer
vegetables...or hemp to make paper for thousands and thousands of legal
briefs.

Extracted from Nexus Magazine, Volume 7, Number 3 (April-May 2000)


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----

About the Authors:


Sally Fallon is the author of Nourishing Traditions: The Cookbook that
Challenges Politically Correct Nutrition and the Diet Dictocrats (1999, 2nd
edition, New Trends Publishing, tel +1 877 707 1776 or +1 219 268 2601) and
President of the Weston A. Price Foundation, Washington, DC
(www.WestonAPrice.org)

Mary G. Enig, Ph.D., a nutritionist widely known for her research on the
nutritional aspects of fats and oils, is a consultant, clinician, and the
Director of the Nutritional Sciences Division of Enig Associates, Inc.,
Silver Spring, Maryland.

She received her PhD in Nutritional Sciences from the University of
Maryland, College Park in 1984, taught a graduate course in nutrient-drug
interactions for the University's Graduate Program in Nutritional Sciences,
and held a Faculty Research Associateship from 1984 through 1991 with the
Lipids Research Group in the Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry.

Dr. Enig is a Fellow of the American College of Nutrition, and a member of
the American Institute of Nutrition. Her many years of experience as a
"bench chemist" in the analysis of food fats and oils, provides a foundation
for her active roles in food labeling and composition issues at the federal
and state levels.

Dr. Enig is a Consulting Editor to the "Journal of the American College of
Nutrition" and formerly served as a Contributing Editor to "Clinical
Nutrition." She has published 14 scientific papers on the subject of food
fats and oils, several chapters on nutrition for books, and presented over
35 scientific papers on food and nutrition topics.

She is the President of the Maryland Nutritionists Association, past
President of the Coalition of Nutritionists of Maryland and was appointed by
the Governor in 1986 to the Maryland State Advisory Council on Nutrition and
served as the Chairman of the Health Subcommittee until the Council was
disbanded in 1988.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----

COMMENT:

Sally Fallon and Dr. Enig are to be highly commended for this much needed
soy update. Together they have compiled the most definitive document to date
on why one should avoid soy. This is a MAJOR work and I am hoping to promote
it for the national media attention that it deserves.

Another article on How Much Soy Asians Actually Eat

ENDNOTES:

1. Program for the Third International Symposium on the Role of Soy in
Preventing and Treating Chronic Disease, Sunday, October 31, through
Wednesday, November 3, 1999, Omni Shoreham Hotel, Washington, DC.
2. Houghton, Dean, "Healthful Harvest", The Furrow, January 2000, pp. 10-13.
3. Coleman, Richard J., "Vegetable Protein - A Delayed Birth?" Journal of
the American Oil Chemists' Society 52:238A, April 1975.
4. See www/unitedsoybean.org.
5. These are listed in http://www.soyonlineservice.co.nz.
6. Wall Street Journal, October 27, 1995.
7. Smith, James F., "Healthier tortillas could lead to healthier Mexico",
Denver Post, August 22, 1999, p. 26A.
8. "Bakery says new loaf can help reduce hot flushes", Reuters, September
15, 1997.
9. "Beefing Up Burgers with Soy Products at School", Nutrition Week,
Community Nutrition Institute, Washington, DC, June 5, 1998, p. 2.
10. Urquhart, John, "A Health Food Hits Big Time", Wall Street Journal,
August 3, 1999, p. B1
11. "Soyabean Milk Plant in Kenya", Africa News Service, September 1998.
12. Simoons, Frederick J., Food in China: A Cultural and Historical Inquiry,
CRC Press, Boca Raton, 1991, p. 64.
13. Katz, Solomon H., "Food and Biocultural Evolution: A Model for the
Investigation of Modern Nutritional Problems", Nutritional Anthropology,
Alan R. Liss Inc., 1987, p. 50.
14. Rackis, Joseph J. et al., "The USDA trypsin inhibitor study. I.
Background, objectives and procedural details", Qualification of Plant Foods
in Human Nutrition, vol. 35, 1985.
15. Van Rensburg et al., "Nutritional status of African populations
predisposed to esophageal cancer", Nutrition and Cancer, vol. 4, 1983, pp.
206-216; Moser, P.B. et al., "Copper, iron, zinc and selenium dietary intake
and status of Nepalese lactating women and their breastfed infants",
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 47:729-734, April 1988; Harland, B.F.
et al., "Nutritional status and phytate: zinc and phytate X calcium: zinc
dietary molar ratios of lacto-ovovegetarian Trappist monks: 10 years later",
Journal of the American Dietetic Association 88:1562-1566, December 1988.
16. El Tiney, A.H., "Proximate Composition and Mineral and Phytate Contents
of Legumes Grown in Sudan", Journal of Food Composition and Analysis (1989)
2:6778.
17. Ologhobo, A.D. et al., "Distribution of phosphorus and phytate in some
Nigerian varieties of legumes and some effects of processing", Journal of
Food Science 49(1):199-201, January/February 1984.
18. Sandstrom, B. et al., "Effect of protein level and protein source on
zinc absorption in humans", Journal of Nutrition 119(1):48-53, January 1989;
Tait, Susan et al., "The availability of minerals in food, with particular
reference to iron", Journal of Research in Society and Health 103(2):74-77,
April 1983.
19. Phytate reduction of zinc absorption has been demonstrated in numerous
studies. These results are summarised in Leviton, Richard, Tofu, Tempeh,
Miso and Other Soyfoods: The 'Food of the Future' - How to Enjoy Its
Spectacular Health Benefits, Keats Publishing, Inc., New Canaan, CT, USA,
1982, p. 1415.
20. Mellanby, Edward, "Experimental rickets: The effect of cereals and their
interaction with other factors of diet and environment in producing
rickets", Journal of the Medical Research Council 93:265, March 1925; Wills,
M.R. et al., "Phytic Acid and Nutritional Rickets in Immigrants", The
Lancet, April 8,1972, pp. 771-773.
21. Rackis et al., ibid.
22. Rackis et al., ibid., p. 232.
23. Wallace, G.M., "Studies on the Processing and Properties of Soymilk",
Journal of Science and Food Agriculture 22:526-535, October 1971.
24. Rackis, et al., ibid., p. 22; "Evaluation of the Health Aspects of Soy
Protein Isolates as Food Ingredients", prepared for FDA by Life Sciences
Research Office, Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology
(9650 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, MD 20014), USA, Contract No. FDA
223-75-2004, 1979.
25. See www/truthinlabeling.org.
26. Rackis, Joseph, J., "Biological and Physiological Factors in Soybeans",
Journal of the American Oil Chemists' Society 51:161A-170A, January 1974.
27. Rackis, Joseph J. et al., "The USDA trypsin inhibitor study", ibid.
28. Torum, Benjamin, "Nutritional Quality of Soybean Protein Isolates:
Studies in Children of Preschool Age", in Soy Protein and Human Nutrition,
Harold L Wilcke et al. (eds), Academic Press, New York, 1979.
29. Zreik, Marwin, CCN, "The Great Soy Protein Awakening", Total Health
32(1), February 2000.
30. IEH Assessment on Phytoestrogens in the Human Diet, Final Report to the
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, UK, November 1997, p. 11.
31. Food Labeling: Health Claims: Soy Protein and Coronary Heart Disease,
Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR, Part 101 (Docket No. 98P-0683).
32. Sheegan, Daniel M. and Daniel R Doerge, Letter to Dockets Management
Branch (HFA-305), February 18, 1999.
33. Anderson, James W. et al., "Meta-analysis of the Effects of Soy Protein
Intake on Serum Lipids", New England Journal of Medicine (1995)
333:(5):276-282.
34. Guy, Camille, "Doctors warned against magic, quackery", New Zealand
Herald, September 9, 1995, section 8, p. 5.
35. Sander, Kate and Hilary Wilson, "FDA approves new health claim for soy,
but litte fallout expected for dairy", Cheese Market News, October 22, 1999,
p. 24.
36. Enig, Mary G. and Sally Fallon, "The Oiling of America", NEXUS Magazine,
December 1998-January 1999 and February-March 1999; also available at
http://www.WestonAPrice.org.
37. Natural Medicine News (L & H Vitamins, 32-33 47th Avenue, Long Island
City, NY 11101), USA, January/February 2000, p. 8.
38. Harras, Angela (ed.), Cancer Rates and Risks, National Institutes of
Health, National Cancer Institute, 1996, 4th edition.
39. Searle, Charles E. (ed.), Chemical Carcinogens, ACS Monograph 173,
American Chemical Society, Washington, DC, 1976.
40. Nagata, C. et al., Journal of Nutrition (1998) 128:209-213.
41. Campbell, Colin T. et al., The Cornell Project in China.
42. Chang, K.C. (ed.), Food in Chinese Culture: Anthropological and
Historical Perspectives, New Haven, 1977.
43. Messina, Mark J. et al., "Soy Intake and Cancer Risk: A Review of the In
Vitro and In Vivo Data", Nutrition and Cancer (1994) 21(2):113-131.
44. Rackis et al, "The USDA trypsin inhibitor study", ibid.
45. Petrakis, N.L. et al., "Stimulatory influence of soy protein isolate on
breast secretion in pre- and post-menopausal women", Cancer Epid. Bio. Prev.
(1996) 5:785-794.
46. Dees, C. et al., "Dietary estrogens stimulate human breast cells to
enter the cell cycle", Environmental Health Perspectives (1997) 105(Suppl.
3):633-636.
47. Woodhams, D.J., "Phytoestrogens and parrots: The anatomy of an
investigation", Proceedings of the Nutrition Society of New Zealand (1995)
20:22-30.
48. Matrone, G. et al., "Effect of Genistin on Growth and Development of the
Male Mouse", Journal of Nutrition (1956) 235-240.
49. Ishizuki, Y. et al., "The effects on the thyroid gland of soybeans
administered experimentally in healthy subjects", Nippon Naibunpi Gakkai
Zasshi (1991) 767:622-629.
50. Divi, R.L. et al., "Anti-thyroid isoflavones from the soybean",
Biochemical Pharmacology (1997) 54:1087-1096.
51. Cassidy, A. et al., "Biological Effects of a Diet of Soy Protein Rich in
Isoflavones on the Menstrual Cycle of Premenopausal Women", American Journal
of Clinical Nutrition (1994) 60:333-340.
52. Murphy, P.A., "Phytoestrogen Content of Processed Soybean Foods", Food
Technology, January 1982, pp. 60-64.
53. Bulletin de L'Office Fédéral de la Santé Publique, no. 28, July 20,
1992.
54. Keung, W.M., "Dietary oestrogenic isoflavones are potent inhibitors of
B-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase of P. testosteronii", Biochemical and
Biophysical Research Committee (1995) 215:1137-1144; Makela, S.I. et al.,
"Estrogen-specific 12 B-hydroxysteroid oxidoreductase type 1 (E.C. 1.1.1.62)
as a possible target for the action of phytoestrogens", PSEBM (1995)
208:51-59.
55. Setchell, K.D.R. et al., "Dietary oestrogens - a probable cause of
infertility and liver disease in captive cheetahs", Gastroenterology (1987)
93:225-233; Leopald, A.S., "Phytoestrogens: Adverse effects on reproduction
in California Quail," Science (1976) 191:98-100; Drane, H.M. et al.,
"Oestrogenic activity of soya-bean products", Food, Cosmetics and Technology
(1980) 18:425-427; Kimura, S. et al., "Development of malignant goiter by
defatted soybean with iodine-free diet in rats", Gann. (1976) 67:763-765;
Pelissero, C. et al., "Oestrogenic effect of dietary soybean meal on
vitellogenesis in cultured Siberian Sturgeon Acipenser baeri", Gen. Comp.
End. (1991) 83:447-457; Braden et al., "The oestrogenic activity and
metabolism of certain isoflavones in sheep", Australian J. Agricultural
Research (1967) 18:335-348.
56. Ginsburg, Jean and Giordana M. Prelevic, "Is there a proven place for
phytoestrogens in the menopause?", Climacteric (1999) 2:75-78.
57. Setchell, K.D. et al., "Isoflavone content of infant formulas and the
metabolic fate of these early phytoestrogens in early life", American
Journal of Clinical Nutrition, December 1998 Supplement, 1453S-1461S.
58. Irvine, C. et al., "The Potential Adverse Effects of Soybean
Phytoestrogens in Infant Feeding", New Zealand Medical Journal May 24, 1995,
p. 318.
59. Hagger, C. and J. Bachevalier, "Visual habit formation in 3-month-old
monkeys (Macaca mulatta): reversal of sex difference following neonatal
manipulations of androgen", Behavior and Brain Research (1991) 45:57-63.
60. Ross, R.K. et al., "Effect of in-utero exposure to diethylstilbestrol on
age at onset of puberty and on post-pubertal hormone levels in boys",
Canadian Medical Association Journal 128(10):1197-8, May 15, 1983.
61. Herman-Giddens, Marcia E. et al., "Secondary Sexual Characteristics and
Menses in Young Girls Seen in Office Practice: A Study from the Pediatric
Research in Office Settings Network", Pediatrics 99(4):505-512, April 1997.
62. Rachel's Environment & Health Weekly 263, "The Wingspread Statement",
Part 1, December 11, 1991; Colborn, Theo, Dianne Dumanoski and John Peterson
Myers, Our Stolen Future, Little, Brown & Company, London, 1996.
63. Freni-Titulaer, L.W., "Premature Thelarch in Puerto Rico: A search for
environmental factors", American Journal of Diseases of Children
140(12):1263-1267, December 1986.
64. White, Lon, "Association of High Midlife Tofu Consumption with
Accelerated Brain Aging", Plenary Session #8: Cognitive Function, The Third
International Soy Symposium, November 1999, Program, p. 26.
65. Altonn, Helen, "Too much tofu induces 'brain aging', study shows",
Honolulu Star-Bulletin, November 19, 1999.
66. Journal of the American Geriatric Society (1998) 46:816-21.
67. Doerge, Daniel R., "Inactivation of Thyroid Peroxidase by Genistein and
Daidzein in Vitro and in Vivo; Mechanism for Anti-Thyroid Activity of Soy",
presented at the November 1999 Soy Symposium in Washington, DC, National
Center for Toxicological Research, Jefferson, AR 72029, USA.
68. Hughes, Claude, Center for Women's Health and Department of Obstetrics &
Gynecology, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA.
69. Soy Intake May Affect Fetus", Reuters News Service, November 5, 1999.
70. "Vegetarian diet in pregnancy linked to birth defect", BJU International
85:107-113, January 2000.
71. FDA ref 72/104, Report FDABF GRAS - 258.
72. "Evaluation of the Health Aspects of Soy Protein Isolates as Food
Ingredients", prepared for FDA by Life Sciences Research Office, Federation
of American Societies for Experimental Biology (FASEB) (9650 Rockville Pike,
Bethesda, MD 20014, USA), Contract No, FDA 223-75-2004, 1979.




 

<< Return to the standard message view

fetched in 0.28 sec, referred by http://www.curezone.org/forums/fmp.asp?i=68860