Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Soy

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Piscator View Post
    I think most of the claims made by WAPF are what JamesS would counter. He's alluded to that in the iodine thread. Reading WAPF was what led to me finding MDA - don't remember if there was a link there, but somehow I found MDA. Anyway, I've followed much of what they promote, but I'm looking forward to reading some rebuttal of that data when and if JamesS weighs in.
    I have addressed the bogus claims repeated by the Weston Price Foundation (WAPF) a number of times. What people need to realize is that they are funded by the beef and dairy industries and act as spokespeople for WAPF. This is like relying on pharmaceutical drug reps to get valid safety information on drugs sold by the pharmaceutical companies.

    Here are some of the rebuttals I have written in the past:

    Weston Price Foundatoin's links to beef and dairy industries

    Weston Price soy myths debunked

    And since Mercola is now on the payroll of WAPF:

    Addressing Mercola's anti-soy propaganda

    I am not the only one that has called Mercola and WAPF on their bogus soy claims:

    Mercola, Weston Price wrong on Soy "dangers"

    If people want to stop generalizing about soy supposedly being dangerous and want to state specifically what they think is dangerous I will address those claims.

    Comment


    • #17
      "Dr. Kaayla Daniel, aka “The Naughty Nutritionist.” A firm supporter of the work promoted by The Weston A. Price Foundation"

      That's enough right there to reduce Dr. Daniel's credibility to near zero. If she is such a firm supporter of WAPF then she is likely just parroting the same old debunked claims WPF has made about soy.

      If you have anything specifically though that you think she has correct bring it up and I will address it.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by ChocoTaco369 View Post
        The fact that you can immediately feel the effects of wheat but can't feel the effects of soy is another reason why soy is worse.
        People can have adverse effects to anything. People have developed heart disease, osteoporosis, hypothyroidism and numerous other adverse effects from eating beef and dairy. People can also have problems with the lactose in milk. Milk and eggs are also very common allergens. The list can go on and on of things in common foods people can have bad reactions to. This does not make the food inherently dangerous or bad for everyone. If someone has an allergic reaction to chicken does that make chicken evil and therefore should be avoided by everyone?

        Comment


        • #19
          Simple, even if I Haven't done a thorough study: Soy = promotes estrogen growth = shown to cause breast cancer = no soy for me

          Comment


          • #20
            In to see other responses.

            Personally, it's a legume, so I avoid it. Regardless of where WAPF gets their funding, the issues they raise are concerning.

            Comment


            • #21
              So... Don't eat soy? Thanks for the tip.
              "All of God's creatures have a natural habitat... my dinner plate." -Me

              Comment


              • #22
                Hey JamesS - thanks for joining!

                As for Omega 6s - I didn't state that they were dangerous, just that from what I've read, the balance between 6 and 3 needs to be as close to 1:1 as possible. MDA promotes this, and the wiki link I provided indicates some benefits specifically to asthmatics, arthritics and cancer patients with a ratio closer to 1:1. From what I understand, the typical western diet (promoted by USDA/FDA and the medical community) has an unbalanced ratio which promotes body-wide inflamation. And yes, PB does promote a diet with plenty of meat and animal fat, but also informs that most meat and eggs and dairy (coming from grain fed critters) is high in Omega 6 - hence my supplementing with fish oil. Apparently, pastured, grass fed animals have a much more favorable level of Omega 3 and a traditional hunter/gatherer diet would provide a more optimal ratio. I think my 6:3 ratio was really unfavorable as I ate lots of chips, loved microwave popcorn and all kinds of processed crap. In fact, my supplement intake is very inconsistent, yet I am still able to stay off of the asthma meds.

                As I mentioned, I don't have a science background, so can't debate the point really well. However, following this way of eating seems to be working for me. I'm in better shape than I've been for about 15 years and my energy level has increased substantially. So...probably won't be adding soy - but I will look into the links you've provided.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by JamesS View Post
                  This also brings up the point that humans do not consume one food, we consume a variety of foods. Soy may be high in linoleic acid, but again this can can convert in to both anti-inflammatory and inflammatory compounds. But this would only be an issue if all the person ate was soy. Just like if all someone ate was beef they are going to cause all sorts of problems including heart disease since beef is so high in the inflammatory omega 6 fatty acid AA. Since we eat varied diets though we can consume other compounds that keep the AA acid in check, or the resulting inflammation from AA.
                  I hardly see this as a "point". You could make this argument for eating twinkies.
                  -Chuck

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by JamesS View Post
                    Seems to me from what I have seen the primal diet is rich in meats. Most meats are rich in the pro-inflammatory omega 6 fatty acid arachidonic acid (AA).

                    And this brings up another point. Omega 6 fatty acids serve useful purposes, and are not all dangerous. For example, AA is a pro-inflammatory omega 6 fatty acid while dihomo gamma linolenic acid (DGLA), derived from linoleic acid, is also an omega 6 fatty with anti-inflammatory properties. Although DGLA can convert in to AA.

                    Another thing that has to be kept in mind is that isolated compounds do not have the same properties as whole foods. Anti-inflammatory DGLA may convert in to inflammatory AA, but these are not the only compounds in soy that play a role in inflammatory responses. Soy also contains anti-inflammatory sterols.

                    You also mentioned that you are supplementing fish oil to balance out your omega 3 to 6 ratio. First of all why would you have to do that in the first place if your diet alone had a proper omega 3 to 6 ratio? Could it be to balance out all the inflammatory omega 6 fatty acids from the meat in your diet? This also brings up the point that humans do not consume one food, we consume a variety of foods. Soy may be high in linoleic acid, but again this can can convert in to both anti-inflammatory and inflammatory compounds. But this would only be an issue if all the person ate was soy. Just like if all someone ate was beef they are going to cause all sorts of problems including heart disease since beef is so high in the inflammatory omega 6 fatty acid AA. Since we eat varied diets though we can consume other compounds that keep the AA acid in check, or the resulting inflammation from AA.
                    Arachidonic acid is often regarded as pro-inflammatory because it is required for the healing process in the body. Arachidonic acid is a crucial component of your body and if you do not have adequate AA in your body, you will not be able to heal properly. The healing process in the body is inflammation - it seems ridiculous to paint arachidonic acid as being unhealthy for being pro-inflammatory when its entire purpose is to promote healing. You need inflammation to survive, and arachidonic acid causes inflammation where needed, not chronic inflammation (unlike soy).

                    In addition to being involved in cellular signaling as a lipid second messenger involved in the regulation of signaling enzymes...arachidonic acid is a key inflammatory intermediate and can also act as a vasodilator...Arachidonic acid is a precursor in the production of eicosanoids...They exert complex control over many bodily systems, mainly in inflammation or immunity, and as messengers in the central nervous system. The networks of controls that depend upon eicosanoids are among the most complex in the human body.

                    Arachidonic acid - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
                    Arachidonic acid is very important inside the human body. Linoleic acid isn't. The human body isn't designed to take in large quantities of fat from plant sources, and in the odd event where it does happen (avocados, olives, coconut, cocoa) it is almost entirely monounsaturated or saturated, or if polyunsaturated fat content is high it comes loaded with lots of Vitamin E and phenolic content (nuts) to help stop the oxidative damage. Soy comes packed with highly inflammatory polyunsaturated fat (linoleic, which your body doesn't need much of at all) with hardly any monounsaturated or saturated fats to prevent oxidation and has almost no Vitamin E to be found.

                    We won't even get into the protein issue. Nearly half of soy's protein is not available for use by the human body, and the phytoestrogens are so potent that it counteracts it entirely and reverses any positive effect trace protein may have.

                    True Story: “Soy-Rich Vegan Diet Killed My Sex Drive & Gave Me Man Boobs!

                    News Flash: Vegan Soy Consumption Gives You a Limp Dick | Free The Animal

                    BWVAKTBOOM: Vegan Male Sexual Performance Propaganda | Free The Animal


                    Mmm, soy. Not only does it taste terrible, but I get a limp dick, bitch tits, breast cancer and atherosclerosis along with it! Where do I sign up? Exactly how long has soy been a significant portion of the human diet again?
                    Last edited by ChocoTaco369; 08-19-2012, 08:29 PM.
                    Don't put your trust in anyone on this forum, including me. You are the key to your own success.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Enilegna/hearts View Post
                      Simple, even if I Haven't done a thorough study: Soy = promotes estrogen growth = shown to cause breast cancer = no soy for me
                      That is not true. Soy contains phytoestrogens, which antagonize estrogen. This is one of the reasons why so many studies have shown soy to have anti-cancer properties:

                      Soy Phytoestrogens May Block Estrogen Effects

                      Tofu, Soy Diet Linked to Lower Death in Breast Cancer Survivors

                      Women With Breast Cancer Who Consume Soy Food Have Lower Risk of Cancer Recurrence

                      Soy and early puberty myth

                      And an example of how studies are manipulated to make soy appear carcinogenic:

                      Great example of how studies are misinterpreted to make a point

                      And more on phytoestrogens that are found in all plants humans consume and that are considerably weaker than the estrogens found in animal sources such as beef:

                      Dietary phytoestrogens and cancer

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Interesting stuff to consider (still reading the links) but I think I will stick to meat anyway.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Jerseyjim View Post
                          In to see other responses.

                          Personally, it's a legume, so I avoid it. Regardless of where WAPF gets their funding, the issues they raise are concerning.
                          What's wrong with legumes? Legumes have health benefits as well.

                          And as far as the issues WAPF has brought up they have been discredited by real research and even some common sense. For example, Mercola who as I pointed out is now a paid spokesperson for WAPF claims that the phytoestrogens are so dangerous and that consuming soy is like taking 5 birth control pills, which is total BS. But the funny thing is that Mercola at the same time calls flax seed a health food even though it is nearly 4 times higher in phytoestrogens than raw soy, an even higher compared to fermented or cooked soy.

                          The flax seed Mercola calls a health food also contains other compounds Mercola bashes about soy such as phytic acid. If Mercola and WAPF were not contradicting themselves so much all the time then maybe they would have some resemblance of credibility.

                          Mercola is bashing soy because he is paid to do so by WAPF, who promotes beef and dairy that contain real estrogens that are hundreds to thousands of times stronger than the phytoestrogens Mercola tries to falsely equate to birth control pills.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            I stopped eating soy a few months back when I noticed that my bottle of soy sauce listed wheat on the ingredients, and I only recently noticed that the bottle I got to replace it (which I've barely used) was "soy style" sauce and doesn't actually contain any soy.

                            That said, the main reason I don't eat soy is habit. It's mostly not in anything I'm used to eating, and the things it's in that I used to eat also contain other things I'm limiting these days. Besides which, how can you tell if the soy in something is GM or not?
                            Argue not with idiots, lest they drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Piscator View Post
                              Hey JamesS - thanks for joining!

                              As for Omega 6s - I didn't state that they were dangerous, just that from what I've read, the balance between 6 and 3 needs to be as close to 1:1 as possible. MDA promotes this, and the wiki link I provided indicates some benefits specifically to asthmatics, arthritics and cancer patients with a ratio closer to 1:1. From what I understand, the typical western diet (promoted by USDA/FDA and the medical community) has an unbalanced ratio which promotes body-wide inflamation. And yes, PB does promote a diet with plenty of meat and animal fat, but also informs that most meat and eggs and dairy (coming from grain fed critters) is high in Omega 6 - hence my supplementing with fish oil. Apparently, pastured, grass fed animals have a much more favorable level of Omega 3 and a traditional hunter/gatherer diet would provide a more optimal ratio. I think my 6:3 ratio was really unfavorable as I ate lots of chips, loved microwave popcorn and all kinds of processed crap. In fact, my supplement intake is very inconsistent, yet I am still able to stay off of the asthma meds.

                              As I mentioned, I don't have a science background, so can't debate the point really well. However, following this way of eating seems to be working for me. I'm in better shape than I've been for about 15 years and my energy level has increased substantially. So...probably won't be adding soy - but I will look into the links you've provided.
                              Asthma is an inflammatory condition, which is why the fish oil helps to reduce it.

                              And yes, grass fed beef does have a little better profile but it still very high in omega 6 fatty acids. Primarily arachidonic acid.

                              This also brings me back to my earlier point. If your diet was strictly grass fed beef this would not have made your asthma better, it would have become worse due to the increase of arachidonic acid and its further production from linoleic acid in the beef. But the addition of other foods helps to balance out the inflammatory omega 6 fatty acids that are much higher in beef than soy. So it is wrong to single out a specific food to claim it is somehow dangerous while promoting other specific foods like beef that pose more dangers if either were consumed as the sole food. Again, we eat a variety of foods in our diets that help to balance out the potential negative effects of other foods. For example, the fish oil helps to counter the inflammatory effects of the arachidonic acid in beef. Soy contains sterols that reduce the inflammation from the arachidonic acid formed from the anti-inflammatory DGLA. B vitamin rich foods can help the liver break down the dangerous estrogens in beef and dairy. Plants provide fiber that feed the flora that in turn break the estrogen metabolites down even further so they do not add to the estrogen load. I can go on and on with examples. But again, the ingestion of any single food as sole food source is going to cause health issues no matter how "safe" the food is considered.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by impala454 View Post
                                I hardly see this as a "point". You could make this argument for eating twinkies.
                                If you believe that then please explain to everyone here what in the Twinkies is anti-inflammatory. That is what you would have to do in order to prove your argument so let's hear how Twinkies reduce inflammation.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X