Any good articles debunking the anti-soy health claims?

[Guest guest]

John Robbins has an article about soy on his website:

http://www.foodrevolution.org/what_about_soy.htm

 

(If that link doesn't come through, then go to foodrevolution.org and look

for the " What About Soy " article.)

 

What I took away from the article is that it's best to eat soy foods that

are as natural as possible (tofu, tempeh, soymilk made from whole soybeans,

etc.) and avoid processed soy foods that contain isolated soy protein.

 

Of course, you can have a great vegan diet without any soy at all, if

that's a concern...

 

Ian

 

 

>Hi,

>A few people have recently asked me about the bad rap that soy got a

>while back about it possibly causing cancer and having other negative

>health consequences. (One person was actually a friend who said she

>was thinking about veg'ism but was concerned about replacing meat and

>dairy with so much soy.) I remember reading articles on veg sites

>after 20/20 or Dateline (or whoever it was) did their story (which I

>didn't see), but my Google search didn't turn up much, and I didn't

>see anything on PCRM or Jack's site, although I might've just missed

>it. I saw discussions of it on Vegsource, but I'd like to have a

>great article or two specifically addressing those claims. Can anyone

>help?

>Thanks!

>Nora

>

>

>*Got Questions? We got answers! See the SFBAVeg FAQ at

>http://www.generationv.org/faq.htm

>

>*SFBAVeg Charter: http://www.generationv.org/charter.htm

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Nora,

 

Here's a link:

 

http://www.veganoutreach.org/health/soysafe.html

 

Hope that helps,

 

Jack

 

-

" Ian Albert " <ialbert

<SFBAVeg >

Monday, November 18, 2002 11:48 AM

Re: [sFBAVeg] Any good articles debunking the anti-soy health

claims?

 

 

> John Robbins has an article about soy on his website:

> http://www.foodrevolution.org/what_about_soy.htm

>

> >A few people have recently asked me about the bad rap that soy got a

> >while back about it possibly causing cancer and having other negative

> >health consequences. (One person was actually a friend who said she

> >was thinking about veg'ism but was concerned about replacing meat and

> >dairy with so much soy.) I remember reading articles on veg sites

> >after 20/20 or Dateline (or whoever it was) did their story (which I

> >didn't see), but my Google search didn't turn up much, and I didn't

> >see anything on PCRM or Jack's site, although I might've just missed

> >it. I saw discussions of it on Vegsource, but I'd like to have a

> >great article or two specifically addressing those claims. Can anyone

> >help?

> >Thanks!

> >Nora

[Guest guest]

The bad news about cooking beans vs. cooking meat is that beans have more

carbohydrates, and cooked carbs lead to nasty compounds (see

http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2002/11/12/cook021112). Other dangerous

compounds can form such as cancer-causing acrylamide, which depends on how

much amino acid arginine is present, temperature, duration of cooking,

presence of water, etc. Steaming soybeans (edamame) would be much better

than tofu and tempeh, or any of the other processed soy products, but how

about sprouting beans for cold or warm dishes? The most long-lived peoples

seem to be the ones who eat the most fresh, raw and less-cooked/processed

foods (e.g. Japanese islanders). JP

 

 

> Hi,

> A few people have recently asked me about the bad rap that soy got a

> while back about it possibly causing cancer and having other negative

> health consequences. (One person was actually a friend who said she

> was thinking about veg'ism but was concerned about replacing meat and

> dairy with so much soy.) I remember reading articles on veg sites

> after 20/20 or Dateline (or whoever it was) did their story (which I

> didn't see), but my Google search didn't turn up much, and I didn't

> see anything on PCRM or Jack's site, although I might've just missed

> it. I saw discussions of it on Vegsource, but I'd like to have a

> great article or two specifically addressing those claims. Can anyone

> help?

> Thanks!

> Nora

>

>

> *Got Questions? We got answers! See the SFBAVeg FAQ at

> http://www.generationv.org/faq.htm

>

> *SFBAVeg Charter: http://www.generationv.org/charter.htm

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Coincidentally, good ole Slashdot had a story on soybeans today that

make me wonder if it's wise to eat ANY of the heavily

genetically-modified crops, no matter if they are labelled non-GMO or how

they are prepared:

 

http://science.slashdot.org/science/02/11/18/1236258.shtml?tid=134

 

</.>

Drug Making Genes Added To Corn Jump To Soya

 

Posted by Hemos on Monday November 18, @09:29AM from the look-over-there

dept.

 

Anonymous Cowdog writes " Google News turned up a scary item today:

Apparently, genetically altered corn, designed not to repel pests or

withstand bad weather, but rather to grow pharmecuticals (for diabetes and

diarrhea) has been accidentally mixed with soy plants in the field,

resulting in 500,000 bushels of contaminated soybeans being quarantined by

the US FDA. Ooops. Here's the story, and here's another story about the same

case. The company who brought us this nice event is called ProdiGene. Looks

like they're also working on an edible AIDS vaccine (kinda makes sense, eat

Tofu, enjoy free love!) Now, I was thinking, will our government protect us

from doom-by-hand-me-down-genes? and on a hunch (honest!) I did this google

search for keywords ProdiGene and " george w bush " . Result? A not so

reassuring article. "

</./>

 

>Re: [sFBAVeg] Any good articles debunking the anti-soy health

claims?

><jacknorris

>Mon, November 18, 2002 3:57 pm

>

>

>Nora,

>

>Here's a link:

>

>http://www.veganoutreach.org/health/soysafe.html

>

>Hope that helps,

>

..Jack

[Guest guest]

> The European Commission's Opinion of the Scientific Committee on Food

> on New Findings Regarding the Presence of Acrylamide in Food was that

> fried foods, especially potato chips, french fries, deep fried or

> oven-baked potato products, and some crips bread, buiscuits, crackers

> and breakfast cereals has significant amounts of acrymalide. No

> acrymalide formation was detected in boiled food, which is usually how

> beans are prepared (though tempeh would be an exception).

 

as would refried or baked beans... so I'm not sure that boiling is the most

common form of preparation, at least in North America. I didn't mean to

single out acrylamide as the worst toxin created by cooking either. My

roommate in college was in Food Science, and I recall seeing in his

textbooks (8 years ago) the graphs which plotted the rising formation of

mutagenic/carcinogenic compounds against cooking temperature of different

foods. It would seem that science has known about the problems of baked and

fried foods for some time, just not with precision.

 

> But, I don't

> mean to act like I know much about acrymalide because all I've done is

> skim the above report. There are all sorts of nasty compounds in food

> in general and until something is actually shown to harm humans (which

> acrymalide hasn't been shown to do yet, nor has AGEs from the info

> given in the article you linked to above), I personally do not think it

> is worth worrying about. Otherwise, there will be no end to worrying.

 

The EPA considers it a high risk:

 

" Short-term: EPA has found acrylamide to potentially cause the following

health effects when people are exposed to it at levels above the MCL for

relatively short periods of time: damage to the nervous system, weakness and

incoordination in the legs.

 

Long-term: Acrylamide has the potential to cause the following effects from

a lifetime exposure at levels above the MCL: damage to the nervous system,

paralysis; cancer. "

 

So do the Europeans:

 

" What do we know about acrylamide and its health risks?

 

On the basis of animal data and understanding of its biological effects,

acrylamide is considered to be a probable human carcinogen. It has caused

nerve damage in people who have been exposed to it at work. In studies on

male animals, acrylamide was shown to impair fertility.

 

As acrylamide has only very recently been discovered in food at these

levels, practically nothing is known about its effects on humans via the

diet. The FSA believes that exposure to DNA damaging carcinogens such as

acrylamide should be as low as reasonably practicable. "

 

http://www.foodstandards.gov.uk/multimedia/webpage/acrylamide_study_faq/

 

 

>> The most long-lived peoples

>> seem to be the ones who eat the most fresh, raw and

>> less-cooked/processed foods (e.g. Japanese islanders). JP

>

> A recent analysis showed that non-Hispanic, white, Californian

> Seventh-day Adventists are the longest lived formerly studied

> population (with an average life span of 78.5 years for men, 82.3 for

> women). The vegetarians within this group live longer than the

> non-vegetarians (80.2 years for men, 84.8 for women). The study that

> released these results:

 

Well then the Japanese as a nation do have a higher life expectancy than 7th

Day Adventists (Japanese women higher than even vegetarian 7th Day

Adentists), according to Reuters:

 

" LIFE EXPECTANCY IN JAPAN NOW LONGER THAN EVER

By Reuters Health News- Hanna Kite

Aug 2, 2002, 10:53pm

The life expectancy of Japanese men jumped by over four months to 78.07

years, the first time the expected life span for Japanese men has exceeded

78 years, according to new data released by the Japanese Health and Welfare

Ministry. The Ministry released new figures from 2001 this week.

 

Life expectancy for Japanese females increased from 84.60 years to 84.93

years, the highest life expectancy in the world. "

 

Perhaps there are other lifestyle or genetic factors which favor the

Japanese. But I also remember a German study presented by a doctor at the

World Vegetarian Congress in 2000, which concluded that the vegetarians

weren't living appreciably longer than the meat-eaters studied there. My

point is that more and more people are hypothesizing that vegetarians and

vegans are substituting fried and baked food laden with starch and trans

fats instead of meat, thereby minimizing the gains of eating a meatless

diet.

 

> Do you know of any studies

> that measured the life expectancies of the Japanese you are referring

> to? I'm in the process of obtaining one Okinawans that might have this

> information.

 

check out this excellent site, I urge everyone:

 

http://www.okinawaprogram.com/

 

As a side note: my roommate gave up his career as a food scientist at

Nabisco partly due to the hypocrisy and while he never converted to

vegetarianism, he avoids most baked and fried food as I do.

 

My recommendation then for a protein source is raw soaked flax seed (golden

flax is better), you really don't need much! (a couple tablespoons per day

works for me, ymmv). JP

[Guest guest]

Ian's last statement is certainly true, since this vegan is allergic to

soy, so my diet excludes it. Seitan (meat substitute made from vital

wheat gluten) is a good protein source. Quinoa is a grain with a high

protein content and one of my favorite foods. Lots of plant based foods

have protein in them. Most Americans eat way too much protein. Unless

you're eating a lot of food, vegan or not, you should have no problem

meeting your protein needs without soy while eating vegan.

 

DeniseC

One Planet ~ One People

 

:

:Ian Albert [ialbert]

:Re: [sFBAVeg] Any good articles debunking the anti-soy health

:claims?

:

:John Robbins has an article about soy on his website:

:http://www.foodrevolution.org/what_about_soy.htm

:

:(If that link doesn't come through, then go to foodrevolution.org and

look

:for the " What About Soy " article.)

:

:What I took away from the article is that it's best to eat soy foods

that

:are as natural as possible (tofu, tempeh, soymilk made from whole

soybeans,

:etc.) and avoid processed soy foods that contain isolated soy protein.

:

:Of course, you can have a great vegan diet without any soy at all, if

:that's a concern...

:

:Ian

[Guest guest]

JP,

 

> > No

> > acrymalide formation was detected in boiled food, which is usually how

> > beans are prepared (though tempeh would be an exception).

>

> as would refried or baked beans... so I'm not sure that boiling is the

most

> common form of preparation, at least in North America.

 

But if someone wants to eat beans for protein, fiber, or just because they

taste good, they can simply boil them without creating acrylamides if they

are concerned about them.

 

> I didn't mean to

> single out acrylamide as the worst toxin created by cooking either. My

> roommate in college was in Food Science, and I recall seeing in his

> textbooks (8 years ago) the graphs which plotted the rising formation of

> mutagenic/carcinogenic compounds against cooking temperature of different

> foods. It would seem that science has known about the problems of baked

and

> fried foods for some time, just not with precision.

 

I agree that the higher you heat food, the more carcinogens are created.

Whether these carcinogens contribute significantly to cancer in humans

appears to be debatable. Many of the foods that supposedly have

acrymalides -- deep fried foods -- should probably be limited anyway

(limited to what, is a good question) because of the trans fats that raise

the risk for heart disease. But I do not think this data warrants that

people stop eating breakfast cereal (listed as a food that has acrylamides)

out of fear that it causes cancer. As the souce you cite below says:

 

> http://www.foodstandards.gov.uk/multimedia/webpage/acrylamide_study_faq/

 

" Can I still eat chips and crisps?

 

" The Agency is not advising people to stop eating any of the foods sampled

in this test. However, the Agency advises that as part of a balanced diet

you should limit the amount of fried and fatty foods you eat, including

chips and crisps.

 

" What can be done to avoid acrylamide in food?

 

" There are no practical ways in which it can be avoided. A healthy, balanced

diet, including plenty of fruit and vegetables will help to protect against

some cancers.

 

" So should I change my diet as a result of these new findings?

 

" No, we are not advising consumers to change their diet. Acrylamide would

appear to be present in many common foods but it is not possible to have a

balanced diet without incurring some risk. There are considerable benefits

to be gained from eating a healthy, balanced diet including at least 5

portions of fruit and vegetables per day.

 

" Should I avoid the foods named in the study by the FSA?

 

" The FSA is not advising consumers to avoid any of the foods named in the

study. "

 

> > A recent analysis showed that non-Hispanic, white, Californian

> > Seventh-day Adventists are the longest lived formerly studied

> > population (with an average life span of 78.5 years for men, 82.3 for

> > women). The vegetarians within this group live longer than the

> > non-vegetarians (80.2 years for men, 84.8 for women). The study that

> > released these results:

>

> Well then the Japanese as a nation do have a higher life expectancy than

7th

> Day Adventists (Japanese women higher than even vegetarian 7th Day

> Adentists), according to Reuters:

>

> " LIFE EXPECTANCY IN JAPAN NOW LONGER THAN EVER

> By Reuters Health News- Hanna Kite

> Aug 2, 2002, 10:53pm

> The life expectancy of Japanese men jumped by over four months to 78.07

> years, the first time the expected life span for Japanese men has exceeded

> 78 years, according to new data released by the Japanese Health and

Welfare

> Ministry. The Ministry released new figures from 2001 this week.

>

> Life expectancy for Japanese females increased from 84.60 years to 84.93

> years, the highest life expectancy in the world. "

>

> Perhaps there are other lifestyle or genetic factors which favor the

> Japanese. But I also remember a German study presented by a doctor at the

> World Vegetarian Congress in 2000, which concluded that the vegetarians

> weren't living appreciably longer than the meat-eaters studied there. My

> point is that more and more people are hypothesizing that vegetarians and

> vegans are substituting fried and baked food laden with starch and trans

> fats instead of meat, thereby minimizing the gains of eating a meatless

> diet.

 

I had not seen this and will forward it on to the authors of the study

saying SDAs are the longest lived and see if they have changed their

opinion. However, the difference seems relatively minimal and I would think

that people, in general, who eat the diet of SDA vegetarians should have

little need to worry that they are eating too many carcinogens. It's not

clear (to me) that the Okinawans eat more raw food, or less fried foods than

do the SDAs. I would think they eat stir frys regularly, but, of course,

don't know for sure.

 

I have two studies on these SDAs that describe some components of their

diet, but do not give a full picture (and don't measure how much food is

cooked). They actually eat soft margarine about 6 times per week.

SDAs may eat very little fried foods, though they seem to fry foods in their

cafeterias if memory serves me right. They also eat soy products somewhat

regularly (the vegetarians average 3.5 " vegetarian meat substitutes " per

week).

 

> My recommendation then for a protein source is raw soaked flax seed

(golden

> flax is better), you really don't need much! (a couple tablespoons per day

> works for me, ymmv). JP

 

That's 4 grams of protein.

 

Jack

[Guest guest]

> But if someone wants to eat beans for protein, fiber, or just because

> they taste good, they can simply boil them without creating acrylamides

> if they are concerned about them.

 

Acrylamide is just one of several objections to eating cooked beans. Others

include the combination of high protein, carbs and fats together (bad food

combining), gas and indigestion due to galactose and other compounds (Dr.

Fred Bisci, at a June lecture in SF, brought up the fact that some

researchers, including one Nobel laureate whose name escapes me, believe the

results of such fermentation are a major cause of cancer),

hormone-analogues etc.

 

> I agree that the higher you heat food, the more carcinogens are

> created. Whether these carcinogens contribute significantly to cancer

> in humans appears to be debatable.

 

The problem with that reasoning is that even if the carcinogens do not lead

to cancer, there is evidence (though I am loathe to quote a study on animals

esp. on a vegan list) that constantly triggering the immune system to

suppress cancer leads to more rapid aging and cell damage. Sure you might

live nearly as long on a diet laden with carcinogens, but who wants to wind

up in the kind of condition that, say, Ronald Reagan has been for the last

decades of life?

 

 

> Many of the foods that supposedly

> have

> acrymalides -- deep fried foods -- should probably be limited anyway

> (limited to what, is a good question) because of the trans fats that

> raise the risk for heart disease. But I do not think this data warrants

> that people stop eating breakfast cereal

 

You surprise me there, even McDonald's is going to reduce it's trans fat in

fry oil by 50% in the next few years, with the goal of phasing it out. More

and more people seem to be calling for warning labels on trans fat, if not

an outright ban (you can't buy any products with trans fat at Rainbow

coop, for instance). Here is an article on how trans fat may be far worse

than you think:

 

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2002/01/30/FD40307.DTL

 

<excerpt from above>

Some of the nation's leading medical researchers,

including many in the Bay Area, also believe that the

trans fat that marbles the modern American diet

may be why kids are so fat, diabetes is at record

levels and why some people develop cancer. They

say trans fat is a big player in Syndrome X, a cluster

of health problems characterized by a beer belly,

high blood pressure and out-of-whack blood fats

and sugars.

 

" There should be a warning on food made with this

stuff like there is on nicotine products. It's that bad

for you, " says Dr. Jeffrey Aron, a University of

California at San Francisco professor of medicine

and one of the nation's leading experts on fatty acids

and their effects on the body.

</excerpt>

 

>(listed as a food that has

> acrylamides) out of fear that it causes cancer. As the souce you cite

> below says:

>

>> http://www.foodstandards.gov.uk/multimedia/webpage/acrylamide_study_faq/

>

> " Can I still eat chips and crisps?

>

> " The Agency is not advising people to stop eating any of the foods

> sampled in this test. However, the Agency advises that as part of a

> balanced diet you should limit the amount of fried and fatty foods you

> eat, including chips and crisps.

>

> " What can be done to avoid acrylamide in food?

>

> " There are no practical ways in which it can be avoided. A healthy,

> balanced diet, including plenty of fruit and vegetables will help to

> protect against some cancers.

>

> " So should I change my diet as a result of these new findings?

>

> " No, we are not advising consumers to change their diet.

 

So they are advising us to " limit the amount " of crisps, then they say " we

are not advising consumers to change " ?? Sounds like bureaucratic-doublespeak

to me, designed to appease their baked good industries.

 

> I would

> think that people, in general, who eat the diet of SDA vegetarians

> should have little need to worry that they are eating too many

> carcinogens. It's not clear (to me) that the Okinawans eat more raw

> food, or less fried foods than do the SDAs. I would think they eat stir

> frys regularly, but, of course, don't know for sure.

 

If you delve more deeply into that website and its links you will find that

the Okinawans eat a lot of bitter melon, raw fish, and boiled foods like

rice (i.e. food cooked at a lower temperature). Also, these Okinawans eating

a traditional diet generally don't enjoy the kind of medical care that

American SDAs probably do, so that is why this " minimal " advantage in life

expectancy is even more remarkable.

 

I agree that more research is necessary in all these areas to make

definitive claims. However, if someone is going through the effort to eat a

healthy vegetarian diet, it is inconsistent, imo, to react to the suspected

dangers of meat eating, without noting the suspected dangers of cooked foods

and trans fats in particular. Raising public consciousness will also lead to

more studies eventually. It's clear to me that there are huge gaps in human

knowledge of nutrition, in these days of the Zone diet, belated clinical

proof of Lorenzo's oil to combat ADL (which underscores the importance of

essential fatty acids like Omega-3s as found in flax seeds), and other

conundra. JP

 

" Wherever flax seed becomes a regular food item among the people,

there will be better health. " . ... Mahatma Gandhi

 

" The only constant is change " - Heraclitus