Soya's OK?

[Guest guest]

I saw this article posted as a response to the one published in the

Guardian. It was published on the Guardian's website at:

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1839434,00.html

 

===========================================================================

There's no risk to humans from soya

 

The hormones in cow's milk are potentially far more harmful than those in

plants, says Justine Butler

 

Dr Justine Butler

 

Tuesday August 8, 2006

The Guardian

 

 

Felicity Lawrence's article on soya was potentially misleading (Soya: it's

in most of the processed food we eat, but is it safe?, July 25). Lawrence

described how a dead parrot in New Zealand led Dr Mike Fitzpatrick to

investigate the safety of phytoestrogens (plant hormones) in soya. She

didn't mention that he is a director of the Weston A Price Foundation, a

body that promotes traditional farming and the consumption of butter, eggs,

whole milk, meat and saturated animal fat. It is also responsible for a

long-running campaign against soya.

 

Lawrence states: "In its raw form, the mature [soya] bean is known not only

for its oestrogenic qualities but also for its anti-nutrients, according to

the clinical nutritionist Kaayla Daniel, author of The Whole Soy Story." Yet

Daniel too is a director of the foundation.

Moreover, Lawrence presents the conclusions of the government's committee on

the toxicity of food in 2002 as saying that "in general the health benefits

claimed for soya were not supported by clear evidence and [it] judged that

there could be risks from high levels of consumption for certain age

groups". In fact, the committee concluded that neither the risks nor

benefits were supported by clear evidence.

 

However, the UK's Joint Health Claims Initiative is so convinced of the

health benefits of soya that it has approved the following health claim:

"The inclusion of at least 25 grams soya protein per day as part of a diet

low in saturated fat can help reduce blood cholesterol." Lawrence

acknowledges that "30-40% of all infants in the US are raised on soya

formula", but doesn't point out that, if soya is so harmful to babies, then

this massive sample would prove it. It doesn't.

 

It's one thing to feed experimental animals massive doses of soya isolates,

but human studies show a different result. In 1998, one study (Klein) looked

at soya formulas, found no risk to infants and found them to be a

nutritionally complete feeding option. Another study (Strom, 2001) looked at

the effect of soya on reproductive health and found none.

 

As a health campaigner, I think it would be extraordinary for any

organisation to promote cow's milk as a better alternative to soya when it

contains 35 different hormones and 11 growth factors, which can be up to

20,000 times stronger than phytoestrogens, and have been linked to cancers

of the breast, ovaries, prostate and colon - as we in the Vegetarian & Vegan

Foundation established in White Lies, our report on the health consequences

of consuming cow's milk. Two-thirds of UK milk comes from pregnant cows,

when hormone levels are particularly high. In a country where breast cancer

has increased 80% since 1971 and now affects one in nine women, we should be

much more concerned about oestrogen rather than phytoestrogen, a plant

hormone that has been consumed by millions of people for thousands of years.

 

Lawrence is right, soya production is devastating the rainforests: but as at

least 80% goes for animal feed, including dairy cows, the promotion of dairy

will ensure the destruction continues.

 

.. Dr Justine Butler is a health campaigner for the Vegetarian & Vegan

Foundation justine (AT) vegetarian (DOT) co.uk