Soy takes a hit from an unlikely source
Word is finally getting out about soy. Enough doubt has been steadily placed in our minds that both doctors and the public are becoming uneasy about soy in the human diet-and rightly so.
There is a serious connection between soy and cancer-especially breast cancer. The high estrogen content of soy foods is clearly carcinogenic. Plus, soy has been linked to serious sexual abnormalities, thyroid deficiency, and even leukemia (more on this in a minute).
A recent article from Reuters illustrates this interesting trend away from soy (even though it's just citing another of those surveys that the epidemiologists love to scare you with but that has no scientific validity). But regardless, the title of the article reporting on the research study (which was published in the Journal of the American Diatetic Association) is delightfully shocking: "Soy not so smart for lowering breast cancer risk." That's pretty uppity stuff coming from the mainstream press.
I credit the Weston A. Price Foundation for spearheading the attack in spite of a typically hostile press, an even more hostile processed food conglomerate, and a less-than-thrilled medical community.
Less than thrilled or not, Dr. Carolyn Y. Fang of the Fox Chase Cancer Center in Cheltenham, Pennsylvania, and colleagues reported: "While the benefits of soy consumption for cardiovascular health have been confirmed, there is no evidence that soy foods improve breast health."
Well, Carolyn, you got it half right. In fact, the benefits of soy consumption for cardiovascular health have not been confirmed. The soy industry has withdrawn that claim-no doubt with a little arm-twisting from the FDA.
Nevertheless, the researchers concluded: "The message may simply be that we do not have enough information yet to make an informed judgment. Be that as it may, consistent health messages from all sources should help to prevent further misinformation."
Just how is it possible to promote "a consistent health message" when you've just stated that there's not "enough information yet to make an informed judgment"? Regardless of the party line these researchers are spouting, the truth about soy is finally starting to come to light: It's bad for you.
Soy's devastating effect on childhood development
I recently wrote a letter to a major Latin American newspaper in which I debunked some statements by an American university expert concerning juvenile obesity. He was mistakenly linking obesity to problems like premature puberty in girls and delayed puberty in boys. He was obviously unaware of the devastating effect soy food is having on the development of our children. The following is my letter to the editor of La Prensa clearly showing the links between soy and child development:
I read with interest your article on premature puberty. I feel that Dr. Gonzales and most of the medical profession have missed a major cause of the serious social phenomenon of premature puberty in girls. While diet is important in this hormonal change, it's not in the way that most pediatricians, dieticians, and endocrinologists think about diet and nutrition. The premature puberty "epidemic" is not caused by obesity, chicken farms using hormones (unproven), or plastic wrap used in microwave ovens (which, by the way, was proven to be a hoax). Dr. Gonzales should have pointed out that obesity does not increase estrogen levels in females.
A more likely cause is the marked increase in the use of soy protein in diets throughout the world. Soy has replaced animal protein and animal fat in most of the world-at least in the poorer parts of the population. This was well-intentioned as the cheapest way to feed the starving millions worldwide. But is it worth the price of soy-induced disease in the long run?
Here are just a few examples of why a soy diet has been so disastrous for the human race and even our pets:
Serious sexual abnormalities--When infants are fed soy formula, their phytoestrogen levels are 20 times higher than they would be on breast milk. This leads to "a robbery of childhood" in girls, with the onset of puberty as early as age seven. With boys, this soy-induced high estrogen level has the opposite effect, with a delayed onset of normal puberty. This leads to confused sexual identity, a decrease in the size of the male sex organ, and a dramatic increase of homosexuality (a problem no one wants to address because of its political incorrectness).
Leukemia--There is good scientific evidence that the phytoestrogens common in soy products may lead to leukemia in children. Two other known carcinogens, genistein and daidzen, are also present in soy products.
Thyroid deficiency--An article by Dr. Mike Fitzpatrick in the New Zealand Medical Journal (Feb. 11, 2000) warns of the danger to the thyroid from soy-based products. The research appears to be strong: A soy-based diet, at any age, may lead to low thyroid function and goiter. A deficiency of thyroid can lead to all manners of diseases, including cardiovascular problems.
The total dose of "estrogenic equivalent" is far worse than the "20 times" mentioned above because phytoestrogens are only part of the soy problem. The total picture of all the soy toxins (isoflavones) reveals that there are 15,000 times more of these estrogenic compounds in soy milk (and other soy products) than in mother's milk and milk-based formula. When you feed a baby soy formula, he is getting the equivalent of five birth control pills per day. For further study, please go to the following Web site: www.westonaprice.org.
Panamanians eat a lot more soy than they realize, as does the rest of the world. Here is a short list: breads, vegetarian burgers, crackers, meat substitutes, chicken nuggets, yogurt, baby foods, pet foods, "vegetable protein," and, of course, baby formula. To avoid soy, you have to read the labels.
The potential hazard of phytoestrogens in food has long been known by the FDA. FDA regulator, Michael Bolger, in a scientific presentation, made direct reference to the soy isoflavones causing infertility, uterine hypertrophy, and testicular atrophy in rodents; liver disease and reproductive failure in cheetahs; and menstrual cycle effects on women (3rd International Phytoestrogen Conference, 1995).
When the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology (FASEB) undertook the evaluation of the health aspects using soy products in the food industry, they reported that the only safe use for them were as cardboard packaging sealers. The food in the cardboard packages would not be endangered from such use of soy because "not enough carcinogens" would leach into the contents to pose a health hazard.
William Campbell Douglass II, M.D.
By the way, the paper did not print this letter. Commercial interests rule in Latin America, just as everywhere else.
Actions to take:
1). Eliminate as much soy as possible from your diet. I'd say to eliminate it entirely, but it's sneaking its way into some pretty surprising products these days. Then again, if you stick to a diet based on animal protein and fat, which is the only diet that will result in REAL health, soy is a non-issue anyway.
2). Read The Whole Soy Story by Kaayla Daniel, Ph.D. (www.NewTrendsPublising.com). In my opinion, this is one of the most important nutrition books ever written.
"Soy not so smart for lowering breast cancer risk," Reuters, 10/6/05
"Infantile leukemia and soybeans--a hypothesis [editorial]" Leukemia 1999; 13: 317-320
"WHO/Codex general standards for soy protein products," Soy Online Service (www.soyonlineservice.co.nz), accessed 11/8/05