Most informative, least biased article on pros & cons of Soy I've ever read page 6

[BONZ]

.......Most of the oxalic acid will be lost by cooking, and more will bind to minerals so it is not in a tissue irritating free form. But this is a very common mistake among people who have no concepts of chemistry or know anything really about oxalic acid.

Wait wait wait.... binding to minerals? Eating soy causes mineral deficiencies? Well shut the front door! Next you're gonna tell me that there's a lot of glucose in beef..... you big kidder! 3....2....1....

[JamesS]

I'm flexible, I can be a King if he wishes.

Just curious why it is when I disagree with him and give NOTHING but my personal opinion about soy (ie, i think it's awful crap) that I'm "controlling the boards"?

Simply disagreeing is not controlling the boards. But I would not expect someone who cannot understand the other simple concepts I presented to understand that.

All I did was point out that he is being a bit inconsistent in his own theories of Big Money squashing information if he says it is happening in one pet area but not another... It was just a thought on the subject.

How was I being inconsistent? I simply pointed out that I have seen no evidence of your claims of the information being suppressed and asked you to provide evidence. Then all of a sudden you started on a back peddle instead of providing examples of evidence to your claim. Interesting though how you try so desperately to shift the focus on the other person when caught making up claims.

And I really don't understand asking someone for evidence when all they did was provide their personal opinion in the first place. Defensive 101.

No, you made a claim that information was being suppressed by big industry. So I am not supposed to ask for proof to such a claim? Talk about DEFENSIVE 101!!!

[JamesS]

Wait wait wait.... binding to minerals? Eating soy causes mineral deficiencies? Well shut the front door! Next you're gonna tell me that there's a lot of glucose in beef..... you big kidder! 3....2....1....

The games people play when they are completely clueless!

[cori93437]

I did not make a claim... I stated that YOU had made claim in other areas of this forum that Big Money (such as Monsanto could possibly do with Soy... my postulation) had suppressed publication of finding that were contrary to their own likings.

The point of my statement was not to say that Monsanto HAD done this, it was to point out that you had said elsewhere on this that the publication of credible scientific research was subject to such influences. And that I found it very inconsistent that you think that no such suppressed information is possible in the case of soy when you have gripped about it in another of your pet causes. *shrug*


I did't read your information because I didn't NEED to... I offered my opinion that soy is gross and tastes awful. Not that it will cause you to grow a third testicle.

Also, I'm not interested enough in soy to research it for the "good of the world" like you... you golly jolly do-gooder.
There is no benefit to me, as I won't ever be eating/consuming it.
It's not good for me at the very least for personal medical reasons, and it tastes absolutely terrible. Like it's rancid, or some sort of chemical taste... not exactly "yummy food".
Those are reasons enough in my book.

[Belforte]

I should have hung around.

I re-read my post and I wanted to make a few things clearer. When my mother was eating soy, it was in fact soy milk. I have no problem with the traditional methods of eating soy, with knowledge, that I think most people lack, and for those people soy milk, soy yoghurt are the lazy way out, soy is healthy, I am too lazy to prepare properly therefore I will drink soy milk. I think nutrition wise this is quite a dangerous leap of logic. The rate that my mother's teeth deteriorated without other changes in lifestyle and eating, was quite scary and I think for me was a lesson learned for me as we are close genetically (or so she tells me!)

To avoid the general category of bone diseases one needs to do the following, and they are all things that women have trouble doing:

Exercise and weight bearing exercise in particular (women do not like to gain muscle and mots of girls from 12 on try to skip PE lessons)

Go in the sun (most women now avoid the sun using sunscreens)

Drink milk or other fat products (most women drink low fat milk)

And James as you said the body requires collagen for bone building, most women these days are not big meat eaters and broth is not a big part of people's diets these days.

So if you have a woman doing this for about 35 years, and then decides at menopause to drink soy milk because it is good for her, while not doing the other activities either, I think it would be impossible to say that soy does not contribute problems to a diet already lacking, especially if that person picks 'lazy soy' as opposed to traditional soy. It may not be bone density issues, it could be something else, depending on the person.

But of course there are no studies, this all my own opinion.

But soy like wheat, was food for poor people and eaten during famine or when times were hard (also polenta another 'good' food), so if you can have nutrient rich food why not? I think these bone diseases are proof, that we are animals and need to eat animal products, because the best sources of collagen and gelatine and all these other trace minerals is from meat.

Soy has ruined it for itself, it is generally genetically modified and other than traditional products needs to be so processed to be edible that by definition it cannot be edible.

James I know that I have no studies or medical journals to back me up, this is all my opinion, but I know I am not the only person to have a gut feeling on soy. And no one knows how it mixes with excess sugar (of all kinds), vegetable oils, and other chemicals in our food.

[cori93437]

Not useless at all. You claimed that it was high in oxalic acid, which the chart shows is untrue. Percentage is a perfectly valid measurement of level. Of course anyone proven wrong by the chart would disagree.



And I am sure you have a magical unicorn as well. Of course we have not seen either one.



Quite high? So why doesn't it have that lemony flavor that plants high in oxalic acid like purslane have? Note, it is the oxalic acid that gives plants high in oxalic acid a lemony flavor.

Regardless, you are still overlooking another basic fact. Most of the oxalic acid will be lost by cooking, and more will bind to minerals so it is not in a tissue irritating free form. But this is a very common mistake among people who have no concepts of chemistry or know anything really about oxalic acid.

I'm glad you think you know everything about everything...

You just seriously don't.

Oxalate and oxalic acid are certainly closely related, but are not identical. Oxalate is the base.

Yes percentages is good for some things. But its not a very good chart for limiting yourself to a specific amount of oxalate/day is it? It has no food serving sizes to go by... nothing. No soluble verses insoluble oxalate content.

Not everything that is high in oxalates has the lemony oxalaic acid bit.
Some plants and greens of course... either oxalate or oxalic acid or BOTH.
Nuts are also very high in oxalates... as are beans/soy/seeds... and some fruits, such as Starfruit.

There is also a difference in cooked and raw... however in some things cooked actually makes it worse, makes the oxalates more available instead of less. Tomatoes is one good example of this... raw tomato is lower oxalate than cooked tomato sauce because cooking breaks the cell walls and frees the oxalate to be absorbed.


Some vegetables benefit more than others from boiling and having the water drained to remove the soluable portion of the oxalates. The insoluable oxalates remain, but are less of a problem in the body. And often a portion of the soluable oxalates remain as well... its really ignorant to assume that cooking removes oxalates from foods. Not a basic fact at all.

But that's what happens when you don't know the difference between oxalate and oxalic acid maybe?

The resource I have lists serving sizes, soluable oxalate content per serving, insoluable content per serving, and soluble/insoluble content for different cooking methods which are very specific such as "boiled 8 minutes, water drained", (and a general category for easy reference such as Extreme, VeryHigh, High, Medium, Low etc).
It is approximately 9-10 pages long... it is extensive, constantly being updated with current information, and is for people with medical conditions who need to follow a Low Oxalate Diet.


.........I'm quite sure Paleobird pointed out to you that I'm female, why are you asking to see a Unicorn?
Play with your own toys!

[Betorq]

I'm glad you think you know everything about everything...

You just seriously don't.

Oxalate and oxalic acid are certainly closely related, but are not identical. Oxalate is the base.

Yes percentages is good for some things. But its not a very good chart for limiting yourself to a specific amount of oxalate/day is it? It has no food serving sizes to go by... nothing. No soluble verses insoluble oxalate content.

Not everything that is high in oxalates has the lemony oxalaic acid bit.
Some plants and greens of course... either oxalate or oxalic acid or BOTH.
Nuts are also very high in oxalates... as are beans/soy/seeds... and some fruits, such as Starfruit.

There is also a difference in cooked and raw... however in some things cooked actually makes it worse, makes the oxalates more available instead of less. Tomatoes is one good example of this... raw tomato is lower oxalate than cooked tomato sauce because cooking breaks the cell walls and frees the oxalate to be absorbed.

Some vegetables benefit more than others from boiling and having the water drained to remove the soluable portion of the oxalates. The insoluable oxalates remain, but are less of a problem in the body. And often a portion of the soluable oxalates remain as well... its really ignorant to assume that cooking removes oxalates from foods. Not a basic fact at all.

But that's what happens when you don't know the difference between oxalate and oxalic acid maybe?

The resource I have lists serving sizes, soluable oxalate content per serving, insoluable content per serving, and soluble/insoluble content for different cooking methods which are very specific such as "boiled 8 minutes, water drained", (and a general category for easy reference such as Extreme, VeryHigh, High, Medium, Low etc).
It is approximately 9-10 pages long... it is extensive, constantly being updated with current information, and is for people with medical conditions who need to follow a Low Oxalate Diet.

.........I'm quite sure Paleobird pointed out to you that I'm female, why are you asking to see a Unicorn?
Play with your own toys!

Wow!. Just...wow! This thread quickly took on a fierceness I would have not predicted. Not my intention, but as someone stated, none of us are in control here.

Hey Cori, have you ever written a definitive post on Oxalates, oxalic acids & what cooking, processing & raw consumption do to various common foods? "and some fruits, such as Starfruit". I chow down on starfruits in India & Hawaii, as I often come across trees, often wild, resplendent with ripe starfruits. What other fruits have high or moderately high oxalates?
That'd be most informative imo, something I would both enjoy & benefit learning from, & I'm certain for many others on here as well... If that has already appeared here on MDA, or elsewhere on some other site, maybe you could post a link to it. Thanks!

"King Cori", I kinda like the sound of that...

Btw, I eat small amounts of high qual long aged soy sauce but not every day. Sometimes I might not use it for weeks or months, sometimes I'll use a tsp when I saute' my onions instead of seasalt.

But I don't recall an ass taste or after-taste, but I'm not a rim jobber so what do I know...

[JamesS]

I did not make a claim... I stated that YOU had made claim in other areas of this forum that Big Money (such as Monsanto could possibly do with Soy... my postulation) had suppressed publication of finding that were contrary to their own likings.

And once again yes you made a claim. And once again here is your quote:

"what about the big money effect that squashes contrary findings preventing them from being published?"

I have seen no evidence of, nor made any claims of suppression. In fact I made it very clear that I have seen evidence to back both sides. Some of the studies were manipulated, but not suppressed. So again, where is your evidence of suppression?

The point of my statement was not to say that Monsanto HAD done this, it was to point out that you had said elsewhere on this that the publication of credible scientific research was subject to such influences. And that I found it very inconsistent that you think that no such suppressed information is possible in the case of soy when you have gripped about it in another of your pet causes. *shrug*

I have no idea what publication, nor what study you are referring to. So you could be making everything up as far as we know. Again, if you are going to make claims please back them up.

I did't read your information because I didn't NEED to... I offered my opinion that soy is gross and tastes awful. Not that it will cause you to grow a third testicle.

Well at least you are finally stating it as your opinion and not as a fact. You are learning Little Grasshopper. Some people think beef tastes like shit as well. Everyone has different tastes so you don't speak for everyone.

[cori93437]

No, I've not written any such "definitive" post...
I don't really consider myself an expert, just someone who lives the LowOx diet out of necessity... and has therefore immersed myself in it a good bit.

Only recently have there been any kidney stones posts that I've seen ... I posted that if anyone wanted more specific information to inbox me. Maybe I will be more specific in the threads that are open.

I mentioned that I didn't eat soy here for personal reasons... the oxalates, and felt a need to address the serious wrongness that was shot back at it with the "oxalic acid" remark.
That is way off base where oxalates are concerned... so simply telling someone to avoid the greens that have oxalic acid such as those with a sour taste, and that cooking removes the oxlates is very, very wrong.

Oxalates are not a concern to anyone with normal kidney function who has never had a kidney stone.
Also... Calcium Oxalate stones and the relating oxalate/oxalic acid are the only things I know about... because that is where my issue lies.

I also will use some good, real fermented soy such as tamari and miso. Those products are not "modern" soy.

I was referring to the soy milk (gaaaagggg), and soy protien that they make bars out of that they claim are so "healthy".
Those things induce vigorous spitting. I have spit them out before I even knew there was soy in them before. They are just nasty! IMO.

[cori93437]

And once again yes you made a claim. And once again here is your quote:

"what about the big money effect that squashes contrary findings preventing them from being published?"

I have seen no evidence of, nor made any claims of suppression. In fact I made it very clear that I have seen evidence to back both sides. Some of the studies were manipulated, but not suppressed. So again, where is your evidence of suppression?



I have no idea what publication, nor what study you are referring to. So you could be making everything up as far as we know. Again, if you are going to make claims please back them up.



Well at least you are finally stating it as your opinion and not as a fact. You are learning Little Grasshopper. Some people think beef tastes like shit as well. Everyone has different tastes so you don't speak for everyone. I really want you to g to a vegan forum and convince them to eat bacon with that line.

Here you go...
You don't read very well do you?
This is my original post.
I'll annotate it for you so you can understand it better, and perhaps stop taking things out of context...

Blah, blah, blah...
Soy sucks and tastes like ass... Right here 100% a statement of opinion right from the beginning. and we don't want to eat it. message here: this is a Primal/Paleo forum, that means no soy except maybe properly fermented organic, non-GMO
Thanks for your stellar 'help' though. Obviously sarcasm: means I'm not interested in your bunch of studies. I'm not eating the stinking soy.

Also... what about the big money effect that squashes contrary findings preventing them from being published? See that question mark at the end of that sentence... that means it's a question not a claim that I need evidence to support. You answered it above... there was evidence both for and against soy and that some of the evidence was manipulated.
You have complained about that yourself in other threads. This is a statement. Wow... It's also an anecdotal statement. I have no idea what thread to find that bit of text in. But I do remember you making a statement on another topic that you believed that some big money entity suppressing the publication of data that was contrary to what they wanted known, and you did't like it one bit. I don't remember seeing hard evidence for that with my own eyes, much like I have not seen your magical unicorn.
But on this topic it's different? Even though there are bigger entities with even more money behind soy (The big M).This is just a vague hypothesis "what if", Basically, why do you believe it's possible over there at big pharma, but not with Monsanto? Monsanto has covered up the whole GMO thing this long... why not suppress other stuff too? That was a question to you. Not me claiming anything against anyone, unless you count the GMO business... just read a French newspaper.

I hope that helps Little Grasshopper.