• Newest Research On Why You Should Avoid Soy-immediately below
• Soy May Cause Cancer and Brain Damage
• The Trouble With Tofu: Soy and the Brain 
• Soy: Too Good to be True
• Link Between High Soy Diet During Pregnancy and Nursing and Eventual Developmental Changes in Children
• Soybean concerns
• Allergies
• Menopause
• Thyroid
• Pregnant Women Should Not Eat Soy Products
• Soy-Bean Crisis: Scientists versus the soy industry
• Response To Those Who Believe Soy Is Healthy
• Soy Can Lead to Kidney Stones
• Food Information Sheet

Newest Research On Why You Should Avoid Soy 
by Sally Fallon & Mary G. Enig, Ph.D.
Cinderella's Dark Side 

The propaganda that has created the soy sales miracle is all the more remarkable because, only a few decades ago, the soybean was considered unfit to eat - even in Asia. During the Chou Dynasty (1134-246 BC) the soybean was designated one of the five sacred grains, along with barley, wheat, millet and rice.
However, the pictograph for the soybean, which dates from earlier times, indicates that it was not first used as a food; for whereas the pictographs for the other four grains show the seed and stem structure of the plant, the pictograph for the soybean emphasizes the root structure. Agricultural literature of the period speaks frequently of the soybean and its use in crop rotation. Apparently the soy plant was initially used as a method of fixing nitrogen.13 

The soybean did not serve as a food until the discovery of fermentation techniques, some time during the Chou Dynasty. The first soy foods were fermented products like tempeh, natto, miso and soy sauce.

At a later date, possibly in the 2nd century BC, Chinese scientists discovered that a purée of cooked soybeans could be precipitated with calcium sulfate or magnesium sulfate (plaster of Paris or Epsom salts) to make a smooth, pale curd - tofu or bean curd. The use of fermented and precipitated soy products soon spread to other parts of the Orient, notably Japan and Indonesia.

The Chinese did not eat unfermented soybeans as they did other legumes such as lentils because the soybean contains large quantities of natural toxins or "antinutrients". First among them are potent enzyme inhibitors that block the action of trypsin and other enzymes needed for protein digestion.

These inhibitors are large, tightly folded proteins that are not completely deactivated during ordinary cooking. They can produce serious gastric distress, reduced protein digestion and chronic deficiencies in amino acid uptake. In test animals, diets high in trypsin inhibitors cause enlargement and pathological conditions of the pancreas, including cancer.14

Soybeans also contain haemagglutinin, a clot-promoting substance that causes red blood cells to clump together.

Trypsin inhibitors and haemagglutinin are growth inhibitors. Weanling rats fed soy containing these antinutrients fail to grow normally. Growth-depressant compounds are deactivated during the process of fermentation, so once the Chinese discovered how to ferment the soybean, they began to incorporate soy foods into their diets.
In precipitated products, enzyme inhibitors concentrate in the soaking liquid rather than in the curd. Thus, in tofu and bean curd, growth depressants are reduced in quantity but not completely eliminated.
Soy also contains goitrogens - substances that depress thyroid function.

Additionally 99% a very large percentage of soy is genetically modified and it also has one of the highest percentages contamination by pesticides of any of our foods.

Soybeans are high in phytic acid, present in the bran or hulls of all seeds. It's a substance that can block the uptake of essential minerals - calcium, magnesium, copper, iron and especially zinc - in the intestinal tract.
Although not a household word, phytic acid has been extensively studied; there are literally hundreds of articles on the effects of phytic acid in the current scientific literature. Scientists are in general agreement that grain- and legume-based diets high in phytates contribute to widespread mineral deficiencies in third world countries.15
Analysis shows that calcium, magnesium, iron and zinc are present in the plant foods eaten in these areas, but the high phytate content of soy- and grain-based diets prevents their absorption.

The soybean has one of the highest phytate levels of any grain or legume that has been studied,16 and the phytates in soy are highly resistant to normal phytate-reducing techniques such as long, slow cooking.17 Only a long period of fermentation will significantly reduce the phytate content of soybeans.

When precipitated soy products like tofu are consumed with meat, the mineral-blocking effects of the phytates are reduced.18 The Japanese traditionally eat a small amount of tofu or miso as part of a mineral-rich fish broth, followed by a serving of meat or fish.

Vegetarians who consume tofu and bean curd as a substitute for meat and dairy products risk severe mineral deficiencies. The results of calcium, magnesium and iron deficiency are well known; those of zinc are less so.
Zinc is called the intelligence mineral because it is needed for optimal development and functioning of the brain and nervous system. It plays a role in protein synthesis and collagen formation; it is involved in the blood-sugar control mechanism and thus protects against diabetes; it is needed for a healthy reproductive system.
Zinc is a key component in numerous vital enzymes and plays a role in the immune system. Phytates found in soy products interfere with zinc absorption more completely than with other minerals.19 Zinc deficiency can cause a "spacey" feeling that some vegetarians may mistake for the "high" of spiritual enlightenment.
Milk drinking is given as the reason why second-generation Japanese in America grow taller than their native ancestors. Some investigators postulate that the reduced phytate content of the American diet - whatever may be its other deficiencies - is the true explanation, pointing out that both Asian and Western children who do not get enough meat and fish products to counteract the effects of a high phytate diet, frequently suffer rickets, stunting and other growth problems.20

Soy Protein Isolate: Not So Friendly 
Soy processors have worked hard to get these antinutrients out of the finished product, particularly soy protein isolate (SPI) which is the key ingredient in most soy foods that imitate meat and dairy products, including baby formulas and some brands of soy milk.

SPI is not something you can make in your own kitchen. Production takes place in industrial factories where a slurry of soy beans is first mixed with an alkaline solution to remove fiber, then precipitated and separated using an acid wash and, finally, neutralized in an alkaline solution.

Acid washing in aluminum tanks leaches high levels of aluminum into the final product. The resultant curds are spray- dried at high temperatures to produce a high-protein powder. A final indignity to the original soybean is high-temperature, high-pressure extrusion processing of soy protein isolate to produce textured vegetable protein (TVP).

Much of the trypsin inhibitor content can be removed through high-temperature processing, but not all. Trypsin inhibitor content of soy protein isolate can vary as much as fivefold.21 (In rats, even low-level trypsin inhibitor SPI feeding results in reduced weight gain compared to controls.22)

But high-temperature processing has the unfortunate side-effect of so denaturing the other proteins in soy that they are rendered largely ineffective.23 That's why animals on soy feed need lysine supplements for normal growth.

Nitrites, which are potent carcinogens, are formed during spray-drying, and a toxin called lysinoalanine is formed during alkaline processing.24 Numerous artificial flavorings, particularly MSG, are added to soy protein isolate and textured vegetable protein products to mask their strong "beany" taste and to impart the flavor of meat.25
In feeding experiments, the use of SPI increased requirements for vitamins E, K, D and B12 and created deficiency symptoms of calcium, magnesium, manganese, molybdenum, copper, iron and zinc.26 Phytic acid remaining in these soy products greatly inhibits zinc and iron absorption; test animals fed SPI develop enlarged organs, particularly the pancreas and thyroid gland, and increased deposition of fatty acids in the liver.27
Yet soy protein isolate and textured vegetable protein are used extensively in school lunch programs, commercial baked goods, diet beverages and fast food products. They are heavily promoted in third world countries and form the basis of many food giveaway programs. 

In spite of poor results in animal feeding trials, the soy industry has sponsored a number of studies designed to show that soy protein products can be used in human diets as a replacement for traditional foods. 
An example is "Nutritional Quality of Soy Bean Protein Isolates: Studies in Children of Preschool Age", sponsored by the Ralston Purina Company.28 A group of Central American children suffering from malnutrition was first stabilized and brought into better health by feeding them native foods, including meat and dairy products. Then, for a two-week period, these traditional foods were replaced by a drink made of soy protein isolate and sugar. 

All nitrogen taken in and all nitrogen excreted was measured in truly Orwellian fashion: the children were weighed naked every morning, and all excrement and vomit gathered up for analysis. The researchers found that the children retained nitrogen and that their growth was "adequate", so the experiment was declared a success.
Whether the children were actually healthy on such a diet, or could remain so over a long period, is another matter. The researchers noted that the children vomited "occasionally", usually after finishing a meal; that over half suffered from periods of moderate diarrhea; that some had upper respiratory infections; and that others suffered from rash and fever.

It should be noted that the researchers did not dare to use soy products to help the children recover from malnutrition, and were obliged to supplement the soy-sugar mixture with nutrients largely absent in soy products - notably, vitamins A, D and B12, iron, iodine and zinc.

Marketing The Perfect Food 

"Just imagine you could grow the perfect food. This food not only would provide affordable nutrition, but also would be delicious and easy to prepare in a variety of ways. It would be a healthful food, with no saturated fat. In fact, you would be growing a virtual fountain of youth on your back forty."

The author is Dean Houghton, writing for The Furrow,2 a magazine published in 12 languages by John Deere. "This ideal food would help prevent, and perhaps reverse, some of the world's most dreaded diseases. You could grow this miracle crop in a variety of soils and climates. Its cultivation would build up, not deplete, the land...this miracle food already exists... It's called soy."

Just imagine. Farmers have been imagining - and planting more soy. What was once a minor crop, listed in the 1913 US Department of Agriculture (USDA) handbook not as a food but as an industrial product, now covers 72 million acres of American farmland. Much of this harvest will be used to feed chickens, turkeys, pigs, cows and salmon. Another large fraction will be squeezed to produce oil for margarine, shortenings and salad dressings.
Advances in technology make it possible to produce isolated soy protein from what was once considered a waste product - the defatted, high-protein soy chips - and then transform something that looks and smells terrible into products that can be consumed by human beings. Flavorings, preservatives, sweeteners, emulsifiers and synthetic nutrients have turned soy protein isolate, the food processors' ugly duckling, into a New Age Cinderella.

The new fairy-tale food has been marketed not so much for her beauty but for her virtues. Early on, products based on soy protein isolate were sold as extenders and meat substitutes - a strategy that failed to produce the requisite consumer demand. The industry changed its approach. 

"The quickest way to gain product acceptability in the less affluent society," said an industry spokesman, "is to have the product consumed on its own merit in a more affluent society."3 So soy is now sold to the upscale consumer, not as a cheap, poverty food but as a miracle substance that will prevent heart disease and cancer, whisk away hot flushes, build strong bones and keep us forever young. 

The competition - meat, milk, cheese, butter and eggs - has been duly demonised by the appropriate government bodies. Soy serves as meat and milk for a new generation of virtuous vegetarians. 

Marketing Costs Money

This is especially when it needs to be bolstered with "research", but there's plenty of funds available. All soybean producers pay a mandatory assessment of one-half to one per cent of the net market price of soybeans. The total - something like US$80 million annually4 - supports United Soybean's program to "strengthen the position of soybeans in the marketplace and maintain and expand domestic and foreign markets for uses for soybeans and soybean products". 

State soybean councils from Maryland, Nebraska, Delaware, Arkansas, Virginia, North Dakota and Michigan provide another $2.5 million for "research".5 Private companies like Archer Daniels Midland also contribute their share. ADM spent $4.7 million for advertising on Meet the Press and $4.3 million on Face the Nation during the course of a year.6

Public relations firms help convert research projects into newspaper articles and advertising copy, and law firms lobby for favorable government regulations. IMF money funds soy processing plants in foreign countries, and free trade policies keep soybean abundance flowing to overseas destinations.

The push for more soy has been relentless and global in its reach. Soy protein is now found in most supermarket breads. It is being used to transform "the humble tortilla, Mexico's corn-based staple food, into a protein-fortified 'super-tortilla' that would give a nutritional boost to the nearly 20 million Mexicans who live in extreme poverty".7 Advertising for a new soy-enriched loaf from Allied Bakeries in Britain targets menopausal women seeking relief from hot flushes. Sales are running at a quarter of a million loaves per week.8

The soy industry hired Norman Robert Associates, a public relations firm, to "get more soy products onto school menus".9 The USDA responded with a proposal to scrap the 30 per cent limit for soy in school lunches. The NuMenu program would allow unlimited use of soy in student meals. With soy added to hamburgers, tacos and lasagna, dieticians can get the total fat content below 30 per cent of calories, thereby conforming to government dictates. "With the soy-enhanced food items, students are receiving better servings of nutrients and less cholesterol and fat."

Soy milk has posted the biggest gains, soaring from $2 million in 1980 to $300 million in the US last year.10 Recent advances in processing have transformed the gray, thin, bitter, beany-tasting Asian beverage into a product that Western consumers will accept - one that tastes like a milkshake, but without the guilt.
Processing miracles, good packaging, massive advertising and a marketing strategy that stresses the products' possible health benefits account for increasing sales to all age groups. For example, reports that soy helps prevent prostate cancer have made soy milk acceptable to middle-aged men. "You don't have to twist the arm of a 55- to 60-year-old guy to get him to try soy milk," says Mark Messina. Michael Milken, former junk bond financier, has helped the industry shed its hippie image with well-publicized efforts to consume 40 grams of soy protein daily.

America today, tomorrow the world. Soy milk sales are rising in Canada, even though soy milk there costs twice as much as cow's milk. Soybean milk processing plants are sprouting up in places like Kenya.11 Even China, where soy really is a poverty food and whose people want more meat, not tofu, has opted to build Western-style soy factories rather than develop western grasslands for grazing animals.12

FDA Health Claim Challenged
On October 25, 1999 the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) decided to allow a health claim for products "low in saturated fat and cholesterol" that contain 6.25 grams of soy protein per serving. Breakfast cereals, baked goods, convenience food, smoothie mixes and meat substitutes could now be sold with labels touting benefits to cardiovascular health, as long as these products contained one heaping teaspoon of soy protein per 100-gram serving. 

The best marketing strategy for a product that is inherently unhealthy is, of course, a health claim.
"The road to FDA approval," writes a soy apologist, "was long and demanding, consisting of a detailed review of human clinical data collected from more than 40 scientific studies conducted over the last 20 years. Soy protein was found to be one of the rare foods that had sufficient scientific evidence not only to qualify for an FDA health claim proposal but to ultimately pass the rigorous approval process."29

The "long and demanding" road to FDA approval actually took a few unexpected turns. The original petition, submitted by Protein Technology International, requested a health claim for isoflavones, the estrogen-like compounds found plentifully in soybeans, based on assertions that "only soy protein that has been processed in a manner in which isoflavones are retained will result in cholesterol lowering".

In 1998, the FDA made the unprecedented move of rewriting PTI's petition, removing any reference to the phyto-estrogens and substituting a claim for soy protein - a move that was in direct contradiction to the agency's regulations. The FDA is authorized to make rulings only on substances presented by petition.

The abrupt change in direction was no doubt due to the fact that a number of researchers, including scientists employed by the US Government, submitted documents indicating that isoflavones are toxic.

The FDA had also received, early in 1998, the final British Government report on phytoestrogens, which failed to find much evidence of benefit and warned against potential adverse effects.30 

Even with the change to soy protein isolate, FDA bureaucrats engaged in the "rigorous approval process" were forced to deal nimbly with concerns about mineral blocking effects, enzyme inhibitors, goitrogenicity, endocrine disruption, reproductive problems and increased allergic reactions from consumption of soy products.31

One of the strongest letters of protest came from Dr Dan Sheehan and Dr Daniel Doerge, government researchers at the National Center for Toxicological Research.32 Their pleas for warning labels were dismissed as unwarranted.

"Sufficient scientific evidence" of soy's cholesterol-lowering properties is drawn largely from a 1995 meta-analysis by Dr James Anderson, sponsored by Protein Technologies International and published in the New England Journal of Medicine.33

A meta-analysis is a review and summary of the results of many clinical studies on the same subject. Use of meta-analyses to draw general conclusions has come under sharp criticism by members of the scientific community.

"Researchers substituting meta-analysis for more rigorous trials risk making faulty assumptions and indulging in creative accounting," says Sir John Scott, President of the Royal Society of New Zealand. "Like is not being lumped with like. Little lumps and big lumps of data are being gathered together by various groups."34
There is the added temptation for researchers, particularly researchers funded by a company like Protein Technologies International, to leave out studies that would prevent the desired conclusions. Dr Anderson discarded eight studies for various reasons, leaving a remainder of twenty-nine. 

The published report suggested that individuals with cholesterol levels over 250 mg/dl would experience a "significant" reduction of 7 to 20 per cent in levels of serum cholesterol if they substituted soy protein for animal protein. Cholesterol reduction was insignificant for individuals whose cholesterol was lower than 250 mg/dl.

In other words, for most of us, giving up steak and eating vegieburgers instead will not bring down blood cholesterol levels. The health claim that the FDA approved "after detailed review of human clinical data" fails to inform the consumer about these important details.

Research that ties soy to positive effects on cholesterol levels is "incredibly immature", said Ronald M. Krauss, MD, head of the Molecular Medical Research Program and Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.35 He might have added that studies in which cholesterol levels were lowered through either diet or drugs have consistently resulted in a greater number of deaths in the treatment groups than in controls - deaths from stroke, cancer, intestinal disorders, accident and suicide.36 

Cholesterol-lowering measures in the US have fuelled a $60 billion per year cholesterol-lowering industry, but have not saved us from the ravages of heart disease.

Soy And Cancer 
The new FDA ruling does not allow any claims about cancer prevention on food packages, but that has not restrained the industry and its marketers from making them in their promotional literature. 
"In addition to protecting the heart," says a vitamin company brochure, "soy has demonstrated powerful anticancer benefits...the Japanese, who eat 30 times as much soy as North Americans, have a lower incidence of cancers of the breast, uterus and prostate."37 

Indeed they do. But the Japanese, and Asians in general, have much higher rates of other types of cancer, particularly cancer of the esophagus, stomach, pancreas and liver.38 Asians throughout the world also have high rates of thyroid cancer.39 The logic that links low rates of reproductive cancers to soy consumption requires attribution of high rates of thyroid and digestive cancers to the same foods, particularly as soy causes these types of cancers in laboratory rats.

Just how much soy do Asians eat? A 1998 survey found that the average daily amount of soy protein consumed in Japan was about eight grams for men and seven for women - less than two teaspoons.40 The famous Cornell China Study, conducted by Colin T. Campbell, found that legume consumption in China varied from 0 to 58 grams per day, with a mean of about twelve.41

Assuming that two-thirds of legume consumption is soy, then the maximum consumption is about 40 grams, or less than three tablespoons per day, with an average consumption of about nine grams, or less than two teaspoons. A survey conducted in the 1930s found that soy foods accounted for only 1.5 per cent of calories in the Chinese diet, compared with 65 per cent of calories from pork.42 (Asians traditionally cooked with lard, not vegetable oil!)

Traditionally fermented soy products make a delicious, natural seasoning that may supply important nutritional factors in the Asian diet. But except in times of famine, Asians consume soy products only in small amounts, as condiments, and not as a replacement for animal foods - with one exception. Celibate monks living in monasteries and leading a vegetarian lifestyle find soy foods quite helpful because they dampen libido.
It was a 1994 meta-analysis by Mark Messina, published in Nutrition and Cancer, that fuelled speculation on soy's anticarcinogenic properties.43 Messina noted that in 26 animal studies, 65 per cent reported protective effects from soy. He conveniently neglected to include at least one study in which soy feeding caused pancreatic cancer - the 1985 study by Rackis.44 In the human studies he listed, the results were mixed.

A few showed some protective effect, but most showed no correlation at all between soy consumption and cancer rates. He concluded that "the data in this review cannot be used as a basis for claiming that soy intake decreases cancer risk". Yet in his subsequent book, The Simple Soybean and Your Health, Messina makes just such a claim, recommending one cup or 230 grams of soy products per day in his "optimal" diet as a way to prevent cancer.

Thousands of women are now consuming soy in the belief that it protects them against breast cancer. Yet, in 1996, researchers found that women consuming soy protein isolate had an increased incidence of epithelial hyperplasia, a condition that presages malignancies.45 A year later, dietary genistein was found to stimulate breast cells to enter the cell cycle - a discovery that led the study authors to conclude that women should not consume soy products to prevent breast cancer.46

Phytoestrogens: Panacea Or Poison? 

The male species of tropical birds carries the drab plumage of the female at birth and 'colors up' at maturity, somewhere between nine and 24 months.

In 1991, Richard and Valerie James, bird breeders in Whangerai, New Zealand, purchased a new kind of feed for their birds - one based largely on soy protein.47 When soy-based feed was used, their birds 'colored up' after just a few months. In fact, one bird-food manufacturer claimed that this early development was an advantage imparted by the feed.

A 1992 ad for Roudybush feed formula showed a picture of the male crimson rosella, an Australian parrot that acquires beautiful red plumage at 18 to 24 months, already brightly colored at 11 weeks old.
Unfortunately, in the ensuing years, there was decreased fertility in the birds, with precocious maturation, deformed, stunted and stillborn babies, and premature deaths, especially among females, with the result that the total population in the aviaries went into steady decline. 

The birds suffered beak and bone deformities, goiter, immune system disorders and pathological, aggressive behavior. Autopsy revealed digestive organs in a state of disintegration. The list of problems corresponded with many of the problems the Jameses had encountered in their two children, who had been fed soy-based infant formula.

Startled, aghast, angry, the Jameses hired toxicologist Mike Fitzpatrick. PhD, to investigate further. Dr Fitzpatrick's literature review uncovered evidence that soy consumption has been linked to numerous disorders, including infertility, increased cancer and infantile leukemia; and, in studies dating back to the 1950s,48 that genistein in soy causes endocrine disruption in animals. 

Dr Fitzpatrick also analyzed the bird feed and found that it contained high levels of phytoestrogens, especially genistein. When the Jameses discontinued using soy-based feed, the flock gradually returned to normal breeding habits and behavior.

The Jameses embarked on a private crusade to warn the public and government officials about toxins in soy foods, particularly the endocrine-disrupting isoflavones, genistein and diadzen. Protein Technology International received their material in 1994.

In 1991, Japanese researchers reported that consumption of as little as 30 grams or two tablespoons of soybeans per day for only one month resulted in a significant increase in thyroid-stimulating hormone.49 Diffuse goiter and hypothyroidism appeared in some of the subjects and many complained of constipation, fatigue and lethargy, even though their intake of iodine was adequate.

In 1997, researchers from the FDA's National Center for Toxicological Research made the embarrassing discovery that the goitrogenic components of soy were the very same isoflavones.50
Twenty-five grams of soy protein isolate, the minimum amount PTI claimed to have cholesterol-lowering effects, contains from 50 to 70 mg of isoflavones. It took only 45 mg of isoflavones in premenopausal women to exert significant biological effects, including a reduction in hormones needed for adequate thyroid function. These effects lingered for three months after soy consumption was discontinued.51 

One hundred grams of soy protein - the maximum suggested cholesterol-lowering dose, and the amount recommended by Protein Technologies International - can contain almost 600 mg of isoflavones,52 an amount that is undeniably toxic. In 1992, the Swiss health service estimated that 100 grams of soy protein provided the estrogenic equivalent of the Pill.53

In vitro studies suggest that isoflavones inhibit synthesis of estradiol and other steroid hormones.54 Reproductive problems, infertility, thyroid disease and liver disease due to dietary intake of isoflavones have been observed for several species of animals including mice, cheetah, quail, pigs, rats, sturgeon and sheep.55 

It is the isoflavones in soy that are said to have a favorable effect on postmenopausal symptoms, including hot flushes, and protection from osteoporosis. Quantification of discomfort from hot flushes is extremely subjective, and most studies show that control subjects report reduction in discomfort in amounts equal to subjects given soy.56 The claim that soy prevents osteoporosis is extraordinary, given that soy foods block calcium and cause vitamin D deficiencies.

If Asians indeed have lower rates of osteoporosis than Westerners, it is because their diet provides plenty of vitamin D from shrimp, lard and seafood, and plenty of calcium from bone broths. The reason that Westerners have such high rates of osteoporosis is because they have substituted soy oil for butter, which is a traditional source of vitamin D and other fat-soluble activators needed for calcium absorption.

Birth Control Pills For Babies

But it was the isoflavones in infant formula that gave the Jameses the most cause for concern. In 1998, investigators reported that the daily exposure of infants to isoflavones in soy infant formula is 6 to11 times higher on a body-weight basis than the dose that has hormonal effects in adults consuming soy foods. Circulating concentrations of isoflavones in infants fed soy-based formula were 13,000 to 22,000 times higher than plasma estradiol concentrations in infants on cow's milk formula.57

Approximately 25 per cent of bottle-fed children in the US receive soy-based formula - a much higher percentage than in other parts of the Western world. Fitzpatrick estimated that an infant exclusively fed soy formula receives the estrogenic equivalent (based on body weight) of at least five birth control pills per day.58 By contrast, almost no phytoestrogens have been detected in dairy-based infant formula or in human milk, even when the mother consumes soy products. 

Scientists have known for years that soy-based formula can cause thyroid problems in babies. But what are the effects of soy products on the hormonal development of the infant, both male and female?
Male infants undergo a "testosterone surge" during the first few months of life, when testosterone levels may be as high as those of an adult male. During this period, the infant is programmed to express male characteristics after puberty, not only in the development of his sexual organs and other masculine physical traits, but also in setting patterns in the brain characteristic of male behavior.

In monkeys, deficiency of male hormones impairs the development of spatial perception (which, in humans, is normally more acute in men than in women), of learning ability and of visual discrimination tasks (such as would be required for reading).59 It goes without saying that future patterns of sexual orientation may also be influenced by the early hormonal environment. 

Male children exposed during gestation to diethylstilbestrol (DES), a synthetic estrogen that has effects on animals similar to those of phytoestrogens from soy, had testes smaller than normal on manturation.60
Learning disabilities, especially in male children, have reached epidemic proportions. Soy infant feeding - which began in earnest in the early 1970s - cannot be ignored as a probable cause for these tragic developments.
As for girls, an alarming number are entering puberty much earlier than normal, according to a recent study reported in the journal Pediatrics.61 Investigators found that one per cent of all girls now show signs of puberty, such as breast development or pubic hair, before the age of three; by age eight, 14.7 per cent of white girls and almost 50 per cent of African-American girls have one or both of these characteristics.

New data indicate that environmental estrogens such as PCBs and DDE (a breakdown product of DDT) may cause early sexual development in girls.62 In the 1986 Puerto Rico Premature Thelarche study, the most significant dietary association with premature sexual development was not chicken - as reported in the press - but soy infant formula.63

The consequences of this truncated childhood are tragic. Young girls with mature bodies must cope with feelings and urges that most children are not well-equipped to handle. And early maturation in girls is frequently a harbinger for problems with the reproductive system later in life, including failure to menstruate, infertility and breast cancer.

Parents who have contacted the Jameses recount other problems associated with children of both sexes who were fed soy-based formula, including extreme emotional behavior, asthma, immune system problems, pituitary insufficiency, thyroid disorders and irritable bowel syndrome - the same endocrine and digestive havoc that afflicted the Jameses' parrots.

Dissension In The Ranks 

Organizers of the Third International Soy Symposium would be hard-pressed to call the conference an unqualified success. On the second day of the symposium, the London-based Food Commission and the Weston A. Price Foundation of Washington, DC, held a joint press conference, in the same hotel as the symposium, to present concerns about soy infant formula.

Industry representatives sat stony-faced through the recitation of potential dangers and a plea from concerned scientists and parents to pull soy-based infant formula from the market. Under pressure from the Jameses, the New Zealand Government had issued a health warning about soy infant formula in 1998; it was time for the American government to do the same.

On the last day of the symposium, presentations on new findings related to toxicity sent a well-oxygenated chill through the giddy helium hype. Dr Lon White reported on a study of Japanese Americans living in Hawaii, that showed a significant statistical relationship between two or more servings of tofu a week and "accelerated brain aging".64 

Those participants who consumed tofu in mid-life had lower cognitive function in late life and a greater incidence of Alzheimer's disease and dementia. "What's more," said Dr White, "those who ate a lot of tofu, by the time they were 75 or 80 looked five years older".65 White and his colleagues blamed the negative effects on isoflavones - a finding that supports an earlier study in which postmenopausal women with higher levels of circulating estrogen experienced greater cognitive decline.66

Scientists Daniel Sheehan and Daniel Doerge, from the National Center for Toxicological Research, ruined PTI's day by presenting findings from rat feeding studies, indicating that genistein in soy foods causes irreversible damage to enzymes that synthesise thyroid hormones.67

"The association between soybean consumption and goiter in animals and humans has a long history," wrote Dr Doerge. "Current evidence for the beneficial effects of soy requires a full understanding of potential adverse effects as well."

Dr Claude Hughes reported that rats born to mothers that were fed genistein had decreased birth weights compared to controls, and onset of puberty occurred earlier in male offspring.68 His research suggested that the effects observed in rats "...will be at least somewhat predictive of what occurs in humans.

There is no reason to assume that there will be gross malformations of fetuses but there may be subtle changes, such as neurobehavioral attributes, immune function and sex hormone levels." The results, he said, "could be nothing or could be something of great concern...if mom is eating something that can act like sex hormones, it is logical to wonder if that could change the baby's development".69

A study of babies born to vegetarian mothers, published in January 2000, indicated just what those changes in baby's development might be. Mothers who ate a vegetarian diet during pregnancy had a fivefold greater risk of delivering a boy with hypospadias, a birth defect of the penis.70 The authors of the study suggested that the cause was greater exposure to phytoestrogens in soy foods popular with vegetarians.

Problems with female offspring of vegetarian mothers are more likely to show up later in life. While soy's estrogenic effect is less than that of diethylstilbestrol (DES), the dose is likely to be higher because it's consumed as a food, not taken as a drug. Daughters of women who took DES during pregnancy suffered from infertility and cancer when they reached their twenties.

Question Marks Over GRAS Status 

Lurking in the background of industry hype for soy is the nagging question of whether it's even legal to add soy protein isolate to food. All food additives not in common use prior to 1958, including casein protein from milk, must have GRAS (Generally Recognized As Safe) status. In 1972, the Nixon administration directed a re-examination of substances believed to be GRAS, in the light of any scientific information then available.

This re-examination included casein protein that became codified as GRAS in 1978. In 1974, the FDA obtained a literature review of soy protein because, as soy protein had not been used in food until 1959 and was not even in common use in the early 1970s, it was not eligible to have its GRAS status grandfathered under the provisions of the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act.71

The scientific literature up to 1974 recognized many antinutrients in factory-made soy protein, including trypsin inhibitors, phytic acid and genistein. But the FDA literature review dismissed discussion of adverse impacts, with the statement that it was important for "adequate processing" to remove them.

Genistein could be removed with an alcohol wash, but it was an expensive procedure that processors avoided. Later studies determined that trypsin inhibitor content could be removed only with long periods of heat and pressure, but the FDA has imposed no requirements for manufacturers to do so.

The FDA was more concerned with toxins formed during processing, specifically nitrites and lysinoalanine.72 Even at low levels of consumption - averaging one-third of a gram per day at the time - the presence of these carcinogens was considered too great a threat to public health to allow GRAS status.

Soy protein did have approval for use as a binder in cardboard boxes, and this approval was allowed to continue, as researchers considered that migration of nitrites from the box into the food contents would be too small to constitute a cancer risk. FDA officials called for safety specifications and monitoring procedures before granting of GRAS status for food.

These were never performed. To this day, use of soy protein is codified as GRAS only for this limited industrial use as a cardboard binder. This means that soy protein must be subject to premarket approval procedures each time manufacturers intend to use it as a food or add it to a food.

Soy protein was introduced into infant formula in the early 1960s. It was a new product with no history of any use at all. As soy protein did not have GRAS status, premarket approval was required. This was not and still has not been granted. The key ingredient of soy infant formula is not recognized as safe.

The Next Asbestos? 

"Against the backdrop of widespread praise...there is growing suspicion that soy - despite its undisputed benefits - may pose some health hazards," writes Marian Burros, a leading food writer for the New York Times. More than any other writer, Ms Burros's endorsement of a low-fat, largely vegetarian diet has herded Americans into supermarket aisles featuring soy foods.

Yet her January 26, 2000 article, "Doubts Cloud Rosy News on Soy", contains the following alarming statement: "Not one of the 18 scientists interviewed for this column was willing to say that taking isoflavones was risk free." Ms Burros did not enumerate the risks, nor did she mention that the recommended 25 daily grams of soy protein contain enough isoflavones to cause problems in sensitive individuals, but it was evident that the industry had recognized the need to cover itself.

Because the industry is extremely exposed...contingency lawyers will soon discover that the number of potential plaintiffs can be counted in the millions and the pockets are very, very deep. Juries will hear something like the following: "The industry has known for years that soy contains many toxins.

At first they told the public that the toxins were removed by processing. When it became apparent that processing could not get rid of them, they claimed that these substances were beneficial. Your government granted a health claim to a substance that is poisonous, and the industry lied to the public to sell more soy."
The "industry" includes merchants, manufacturers, scientists, publicists, bureaucrats, former bond financiers, food writers, vitamin companies and retail stores. Farmers will probably escape because they were duped like the rest of us. But they need to find something else to grow before the soy bubble bursts and the market collapses: grass-fed livestock, designer vegetables...or hemp to make paper for thousands and thousands of legal briefs.

Extracted from Nexus Magazine, Volume 7, Number 3 (April-May 2000)
 
About the Authors:
Sally Fallon is the author of Nourishing Traditions: The Cookbook that Challenges Politically Correct Nutrition and the Diet Dictocrats (1999, 2nd edition, New Trends Publishing, tel +1 877 707 1776 or +1 219 268 2601) and President of the Weston A. Price Foundation, Washington, DC (www.WestonAPrice.org)
Mary G. Enig, Ph.D., a nutritionist widely known for her research on the nutritional aspects of fats and oils, is a consultant, clinician, and the Director of the Nutritional Sciences Division of Enig Associates, Inc., Silver Spring, Maryland. 
She received her PhD in Nutritional Sciences from the University of Maryland, College Park in 1984, taught a graduate course in nutrient-drug interactions for the University's Graduate Program in Nutritional Sciences, and held a Faculty Research Associateship from 1984 through 1991 with the Lipids Research Group in the Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry. 
Dr. Enig is a Fellow of the American College of Nutrition, and a member of the American Institute of Nutrition. Her many years of experience as a "bench chemist" in the analysis of food fats and oils, provides a foundation for her active roles in food labeling and composition issues at the federal and state levels.
Dr. Enig is a Consulting Editor to the "Journal of the American College of Nutrition" and formerly served as a Contributing Editor to "Clinical Nutrition." She has published 14 scientific papers on the subject of food fats and oils, several chapters on nutrition for books, and presented over 35 scientific papers on food and nutrition topics. 
She is the President of the Maryland Nutritionists Association, past President of the Coalition of Nutritionists of Maryland and was appointed by the Governor in 1986 to the Maryland State Advisory Council on Nutrition and served as the Chairman of the Health Subcommittee until the Council was disbanded in 1988.
 
COMMENT: 
Sally Fallon and Dr. Enig are to be highly commended for this much needed soy update. Together they have compiled the most definitive document to date on why one should avoid soy. This is a MAJOR work and I am hoping to promote it for the national media attention that it deserves.
 

ENDNOTES:
1. Program for the Third International Symposium on the Role of Soy in Preventing and Treating Chronic Disease, Sunday, October 31, through Wednesday, November 3, 1999, Omni Shoreham Hotel, Washington, DC.
2. Houghton, Dean, "Healthful Harvest", The Furrow, January 2000, pp. 10-13.
3. Coleman, Richard J., "Vegetable Protein - A Delayed Birth?" Journal of the American Oil Chemists' Society 52:238A, April 1975.
4. See www/unitedsoybean.org. 
5. These are listed in www.soyonlineservice.co.nz. 
6. Wall Street Journal, October 27, 1995.
7. Smith, James F., "Healthier tortillas could lead to healthier Mexico", Denver Post, August 22, 1999, p. 26A.
8. "Bakery says new loaf can help reduce hot flushes", Reuters, September 15, 1997.
9. "Beefing Up Burgers with Soy Products at School", Nutrition Week, Community Nutrition Institute, Washington, DC, June 5, 1998, p. 2.
10. Urquhart, John, "A Health Food Hits Big Time", Wall Street Journal, August 3, 1999, p. B1
11. "Soyabean Milk Plant in Kenya", Africa News Service, September 1998.
12. Simoons, Frederick J., Food in China: A Cultural and Historical Inquiry, CRC Press, Boca Raton, 1991, p. 64.
13. Katz, Solomon H., "Food and Biocultural Evolution: A Model for the Investigation of Modern Nutritional Problems", Nutritional Anthropology, Alan R. Liss Inc., 1987, p. 50.
14. Rackis, Joseph J. et al., "The USDA trypsin inhibitor study. I. Background, objectives and procedural details", Qualification of Plant Foods in Human Nutrition, vol. 35, 1985.
15. Van Rensburg et al., "Nutritional status of African populations predisposed to esophageal cancer", Nutrition and Cancer, vol. 4, 1983, pp. 206-216; Moser, P.B. et al., "Copper, iron, zinc and selenium dietary intake and status of Nepalese lactating women and their breastfed infants", American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 47:729-734, April 1988; Harland, B.F. et al., "Nutritional status and phytate: zinc and phytate X calcium: zinc dietary molar ratios of lacto-ovovegetarian Trappist monks: 10 years later", Journal of the American Dietetic Association 88:1562-1566, December 1988.
16. El Tiney, A.H., "Proximate Composition and Mineral and Phytate Contents of Legumes Grown in Sudan", Journal of Food Composition and Analysis (1989) 2:6778.
17. Ologhobo, A.D. et al., "Distribution of phosphorus and phytate in some Nigerian varieties of legumes and some effects of processing", Journal of Food Science 49(1):199-201, January/February 1984.
18. Sandstrom, B. et al., "Effect of protein level and protein source on zinc absorption in humans", Journal of Nutrition 119(1):48-53, January 1989; Tait, Susan et al., "The availability of minerals in food, with particular reference to iron", Journal of Research in Society and Health 103(2):74-77, April 1983.
19. Phytate reduction of zinc absorption has been demonstrated in numerous studies. These results are summarised in Leviton, Richard, Tofu, Tempeh, Miso and Other Soyfoods: The 'Food of the Future' - How to Enjoy Its Spectacular Health Benefits, Keats Publishing, Inc., New Canaan, CT, USA, 1982, p. 1415.
20. Mellanby, Edward, "Experimental rickets: The effect of cereals and their interaction with other factors of diet and environment in producing rickets", Journal of the Medical Research Council 93:265, March 1925; Wills, M.R. et al., "Phytic Acid and Nutritional Rickets in Immigrants", The Lancet, April 8,1972, pp. 771-773.
21. Rackis et al., ibid.
22. Rackis et al., ibid., p. 232.
23. Wallace, G.M., "Studies on the Processing and Properties of Soymilk", Journal of Science and Food Agriculture 22:526-535, October 1971.
24. Rackis, et al., ibid., p. 22; "Evaluation of the Health Aspects of Soy Protein Isolates as Food Ingredients", prepared for FDA by Life Sciences Research Office, Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology (9650 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, MD 20014), USA, Contract No. FDA 223-75-2004, 1979.
25. See www/truthinlabeling.org. 
26. Rackis, Joseph, J., "Biological and Physiological Factors in Soybeans", Journal of the American Oil Chemists' Society 51:161A-170A, January 1974.
27. Rackis, Joseph J. et al., "The USDA trypsin inhibitor study", ibid.
28. Torum, Benjamin, "Nutritional Quality of Soybean Protein Isolates: Studies in Children of Preschool Age", in Soy Protein and Human Nutrition, Harold L Wilcke et al. (eds), Academic Press, New York, 1979.
29. Zreik, Marwin, CCN, "The Great Soy Protein Awakening", Total Health 32(1), February 2000.
30. IEH Assessment on Phytoestrogens in the Human Diet, Final Report to the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, UK, November 1997, p. 11.
31. Food Labeling: Health Claims: Soy Protein and Coronary Heart Disease, Food and Drug Administration 21 CFR, Part 101 (Docket No. 98P-0683).
32. Sheegan, Daniel M. and Daniel R Doerge, Letter to Dockets Management Branch (HFA-305), February 18, 1999.
33. Anderson, James W. et al., "Meta-analysis of the Effects of Soy Protein Intake on Serum Lipids", New England Journal of Medicine (1995) 333:(5):276-282.
34. Guy, Camille, "Doctors warned against magic, quackery", New Zealand Herald, September 9, 1995, section 8, p. 5.
35. Sander, Kate and Hilary Wilson, "FDA approves new health claim for soy, but litte fallout expected for dairy", Cheese Market News, October 22, 1999, p. 24.
36. Enig, Mary G. and Sally Fallon, "The Oiling of America", NEXUS Magazine, December 1998-January 1999 and February-March 1999; also available at www.WestonAPrice.org.
37. Natural Medicine News (L & H Vitamins, 32-33 47th Avenue, Long Island City, NY 11101), USA, January/February 2000, p. 8.
38. Harras, Angela (ed.), Cancer Rates and Risks, National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute, 1996, 4th edition. 
39. Searle, Charles E. (ed.), Chemical Carcinogens, ACS Monograph 173, American Chemical Society, Washington, DC, 1976.
40. Nagata, C. et al., Journal of Nutrition (1998) 128:209-213.
41. Campbell, Colin T. et al., The Cornell Project in China.
42. Chang, K.C. (ed.), Food in Chinese Culture: Anthropological and Historical Perspectives, New Haven, 1977.
43. Messina, Mark J. et al., "Soy Intake and Cancer Risk: A Review of the In Vitro and In Vivo Data", Nutrition and Cancer (1994) 21(2):113-131.
44. Rackis et al, "The USDA trypsin inhibitor study", ibid.
45. Petrakis, N.L. et al., "Stimulatory influence of soy protein isolate on breast secretion in pre- and post-menopausal women", Cancer Epid. Bio. Prev. (1996) 5:785-794.
46. Dees, C. et al., "Dietary estrogens stimulate human breast cells to enter the cell cycle", Environmental Health Perspectives (1997) 105(Suppl. 3):633-636.
47. Woodhams, D.J., "Phytoestrogens and parrots: The anatomy of an investigation", Proceedings of the Nutrition Society of New Zealand (1995) 20:22-30.
48. Matrone, G. et al., "Effect of Genistin on Growth and Development of the Male Mouse", Journal of Nutrition (1956) 235-240.
49. Ishizuki, Y. et al., "The effects on the thyroid gland of soybeans administered experimentally in healthy subjects", Nippon Naibunpi Gakkai Zasshi (1991) 767:622-629.
50. Divi, R.L. et al., "Anti-thyroid isoflavones from the soybean", Biochemical Pharmacology (1997) 54:1087-1096.
51. Cassidy, A. et al., "Biological Effects of a Diet of Soy Protein Rich in Isoflavones on the Menstrual Cycle of Premenopausal Women", American Journal of Clinical Nutrition (1994) 60:333-340.
52. Murphy, P.A., "Phytoestrogen Content of Processed Soybean Foods", Food Technology, January 1982, pp. 60-64.
53. Bulletin de L'Office Fédéral de la Santé Publique, no. 28, July 20, 1992.
54. Keung, W.M., "Dietary oestrogenic isoflavones are potent inhibitors of B-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase of P. testosteronii", Biochemical and Biophysical Research Committee (1995) 215:1137-1144; Makela, S.I. et al., "Estrogen-specific 12 B-hydroxysteroid oxidoreductase type 1 (E.C. 1.1.1.62) as a possible target for the action of phytoestrogens", PSEBM (1995) 208:51-59.
55. Setchell, K.D.R. et al., "Dietary oestrogens - a probable cause of infertility and liver disease in captive cheetahs", Gastroenterology (1987) 93:225-233; Leopald, A.S., "Phytoestrogens: Adverse effects on reproduction in California Quail," Science (1976) 191:98-100; Drane, H.M. et al., "Oestrogenic activity of soya-bean products", Food, Cosmetics and Technology (1980) 18:425-427; Kimura, S. et al., "Development of malignant goiter by defatted soybean with iodine-free diet in rats", Gann. (1976) 67:763-765; Pelissero, C. et al., "Oestrogenic effect of dietary soybean meal on vitellogenesis in cultured Siberian Sturgeon Acipenser baeri", Gen. Comp. End. (1991) 83:447-457; Braden et al., "The oestrogenic activity and metabolism of certain isoflavones in sheep", Australian J. Agricultural Research (1967) 18:335-348.
56. Ginsburg, Jean and Giordana M. Prelevic, "Is there a proven place for phytoestrogens in the menopause?", Climacteric (1999) 2:75-78.
57. Setchell, K.D. et al., "Isoflavone content of infant formulas and the metabolic fate of these early phytoestrogens in early life", American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, December 1998 Supplement, 1453S-1461S.
58. Irvine, C. et al., "The Potential Adverse Effects of Soybean Phytoestrogens in Infant Feeding", New Zealand Medical Journal May 24, 1995, p. 318.
59. Hagger, C. and J. Bachevalier, "Visual habit formation in 3-month-old monkeys (Macaca mulatta): reversal of sex difference following neonatal manipulations of androgen", Behavior and Brain Research (1991) 45:57-63.
60. Ross, R.K. et al., "Effect of in-utero exposure to diethylstilbestrol on age at onset of puberty and on post-pubertal hormone levels in boys", Canadian Medical Association Journal 128(10):1197-8, May 15, 1983.
61. Herman-Giddens, Marcia E. et al., "Secondary Sexual Characteristics and Menses in Young Girls Seen in Office Practice: A Study from the Pediatric Research in Office Settings Network", Pediatrics 99(4):505-512, April 1997.
62. Rachel's Environment & Health Weekly 263, "The Wingspread Statement", Part 1, December 11, 1991; Colborn, Theo, Dianne Dumanoski and John Peterson Myers, Our Stolen Future, Little, Brown & Company, London, 1996.
63. Freni-Titulaer, L.W., "Premature Thelarch in Puerto Rico: A search for environmental factors", American Journal of Diseases of Children 140(12):1263-1267, December 1986.
64. White, Lon, "Association of High Midlife Tofu Consumption with Accelerated Brain Aging", Plenary Session #8: Cognitive Function, The Third International Soy Symposium, November 1999, Program, p. 26. 
65. Altonn, Helen, "Too much tofu induces 'brain aging', study shows", Honolulu Star-Bulletin, November 19, 1999.
66. Journal of the American Geriatric Society (1998) 46:816-21.
67. Doerge, Daniel R., "Inactivation of Thyroid Peroxidase by Genistein and Daidzein in Vitro and in Vivo; Mechanism for Anti-Thyroid Activity of Soy", presented at the November 1999 Soy Symposium in Washington, DC, National Center for Toxicological Research, Jefferson, AR 72029, USA.
68. Hughes, Claude, Center for Women's Health and Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA.
69. Soy Intake May Affect Fetus", Reuters News Service, November 5, 1999.
70. "Vegetarian diet in pregnancy linked to birth defect", BJU International 85:107-113, January 2000.
71. FDA ref 72/104, Report FDABF GRAS - 258.
72. "Evaluation of the Health Aspects of Soy Protein Isolates as Food Ingredients", prepared for FDA by Life Sciences Research Office, Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology (FASEB) (9650 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, MD 20014, USA), Contract No, FDA 223-75-2004, 1979.
 

The Trouble With Tofu: Soy and the Brain 
By John D. MacArthur 
"Tofu Shrinks Brain!" Not a science fiction scenario, this sobering soybean revelation is for real. But how did the "poster bean" of the '90s go wrong? Apparently, in many ways — none of which bode well for the brain. 
In a major ongoing study involving 3,734 elderly Japanese-American men, those who ate the most tofu during midlife had up to 2.4 times the risk of later developing Alzheimer's disease. As part of the three-decade long Honolulu-Asia Aging Study, 27 foods and drinks were correlated with participants' health. Men who consumed tofu at least twice weekly had more cognitive impairment, compared with those who rarely or never ate the soybean curd. [1,2] 
"The test results were about equivalent to what they would have been if they were five years older," said lead researcher Dr. Lon R. White from the Hawaii Center for Health Research. For the guys who ate no tofu, however, they tested as though they were five years younger. 
What's more, higher midlife tofu consumption was also associated with low brain weight. Brain atrophy was assessed in 574 men using MRI results and in 290 men using autopsy information. Shrinkage occurs naturally with age, but for the men who had consumed more tofu, White said "their brains seemed to be showing an exaggeration of the usual patterns we see in aging." 

Phytoestrogens — Soy Self Defense 
Tofu and other soybean foods contain isoflavones, three-ringed molecules bearing a structural resemblance to mammalian steroidal hormones. White and his fellow researchers speculate that soy's estrogen-like compounds (phytoestrogens) might compete with the body's natural estrogens for estrogen receptors in brain cells. 
Plants have evolved many different strategies to protect themselves from predators. Some have thorns or spines, while others smell bad, taste bad, or poison animals that eat them. Some plants took a different route, using birth control as a way to counter the critters who were wont to munch. 
Plants such as soy are making oral contraceptives to defend themselves, says Claude Hughes, Ph.D., a neuroendocrinologist at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center. They evolved compounds that mimic natural estrogen. These phytoestrogens can interfere with the mammalian hormones involved in reproduction and growth — a strategy to reduce the number and size of predators. 

Toxicologists Concerned About Soy's Health Risks 
The soy industry says that White's study only shows an association between tofu consumption and brain aging, but does not prove cause and effect. On the other hand, soy experts at the National Center for Toxicological Research, Daniel Sheehan, Ph.D., and Daniel Doerge, Ph.D., consider this tofu study very important. "It is one of the more robust, well-designed prospective epidemiological studies generally available. . . We rarely have such power in human studies, as well as a potential mechanism." 
In a 1999 letter to the FDA (and on the ABC News program 20/20), the two toxicologists expressed their opposition to the agency's health claims for soy, saying the Honolulu study "provides evidence that soy (tofu) phytoestrogens cause vascular dementia. Given that estrogens are important for maintenance of brain function in women; that the male brain contains aromatase, the enzyme that converts testosterone to estradiol; and that isoflavones inhibit this enzymatic activity, there is a mechanistic basis for the human findings." [3] 
Although estrogen's role in the central nervous system is not well understood, White notes that "a growing body of information suggests that estrogens may be needed for optimal repair and replacement of neural structures eroded with aging." 
One link to the puzzle may involve calcium-binding proteins, which are associated with protection against neurodegenerative diseases. In recent animal studies at Brigham Young University's Neuroscience Center, researchers found that consumption of phytoestrogens via a soy diet for a relatively short interval can significantly elevate phytoestrogens levels in the brain and decrease brain calcium-binding proteins. [4] 

Concerns About Giving Soy to Infants 
The most serious problem with soy may be its use in infant formulas. "The amount of phytoestrogens that are in a day's worth of soy infant formula equals 5 birth control pills," says Mary G. Enig, Ph.D., president of the Maryland Nutritionists Association. She and other nutrition experts believe that infant exposure to high amounts of phytoestrogens is associated with early puberty in girls and retarded physical maturation in boys. [5] 
A study reported in the British medical journal Lancet found that the "daily exposure of infants to isoflavones in soy infant-formulas is 6-11 fold higher on a bodyweight basis than the dose that has hormonal effects in adults consuming soy foods." (A dose, equivalent to two glasses of soy milk per day, that was enough to change menstrual patterns in women. [6]) In the blood of infants tested, concentrations of isoflavones were 13000-22000 times higher than natural estrogen concentrations in early life. [7] 

Soy Interferes with Enzymes 
While soybeans are relatively high in protein compared to other legumes, Enig says they are a poor source of protein because other proteins found in soybeans act as potent enzyme inhibitors. These "anti-nutrients" block the action of trypsin and other enzymes needed for protein digestion. Trypsin inhibitors are large, tightly folded proteins that are not completely deactivated during ordinary cooking and can reduce protein digestion. Therefore, soy consumption may lead to chronic deficiencies in amino acid uptake. [8] 
Soy's ability to interfere with enzymes and amino acids may have direct consequence for the brain. As White and his colleagues suggest, "isoflavones in tofu and other soyfoods might exert their influence through interference with tyrosine kinase-dependent mechanisms required for optimal hippocampal function, structure and plasticity." [2] 
High amounts of protein tyrosine kinases are found in the hippocampus, a brain region involved with learning and memory. One of soy's primary isoflavones, genistein, has been shown to inhibit tyrosine kinase in the hippocampus, where it blocked "long-term potentiation," a mechanism of memory formation. [9] 
Tyrosine, Dopamine, and Parkinson's Disease 
The brain uses the amino acids tyrosine or phenylalanine to synthesize the key neurotransmitters dopamine and norepinephrine, brain chemicals that promote alertness and activity. Dopamine is crucial to fine muscle coordination. People whose hands tremble from Parkinson's disease have a diminished ability to synthesize dopamine. An increased incidence of depression and other mood disorders are associated with low levels of dopamine and norepinephrine. Also, the current scientific consensus on attention-deficit disorder points to a dopamine imbalance. 
Soy has been shown to affect tyrosine hydroxylase activity in animals, causing the utilization rate of dopamine to be "profoundly disturbed." When soy lecithin supplements were given throughout perinatal development, they reduced activity in the cerebral cortex and "altered synaptic characteristics in a manner consistent with disturbances in neural function." [10] 
Researchers at Sweden's Karolinska Institute at the National Institutes of Health and are finding a connection between tyrosine hydroxylase activity, thyroid hormone receptors, and depleted dopamine levels in the brain — particularly in the substantia nigra, a region associated with the movement difficulties characteristic of Parkinson's disease. [11-13] 

Soy Affects the Brain via the Thyroid Gland 
Tyrosine is crucial to the brain in another way. It's needed for the body to make active thyroid hormones, which are a major physiological regulator of mammalian brain development. By affecting the rate of cell differentiation and gene expression, thyroid hormones regulate the growth and migration of neurons, including synaptic development and myelin formation in specific brain regions. Low blood levels of tyrosine are associated with an underactive thyroid gland. 
Scientists have known for years that isoflavones in soy products can depress thyroid function, causing goiter (enlarged thyroid gland) and autoimmune thyroid disease. In the early 1960s, goiter and hypothyroidism were reported in infants fed soybean diets. [14] Scientists at the National Center for Toxicological Research showed that the soy isoflavones genistein and daidzein "inhibit thyroid peroxidase-catalyzed reactions essential to thyroid hormone synthesis." [15] 
Japanese researchers studied effects on the thyroid from soybeans administered to healthy subjects. They reported that consumption of as little as 30 grams (two tablespoons) of soybeans per day for only one month resulted in a significant increase in thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH), which is produced by the brain's pituitary gland when thyroid hormones are too low. Their findings suggested that "excessive soybean ingestion for a certain duration might suppress thyroid function and cause goiters in healthy people, especially elderly subjects." [16] 

Thyroid Hormones and Fetal Brain Development 
Thyroid alterations are among the most frequently encountered autoimmune conditions in children. Researchers at Cornell University Medical College showed that the "frequency of feedings with soy-based milk formulas in early life was significantly higher in children with autoimmune thyroid disease." [17] In a previous study, they found that twice as many diabetic children had received soy formula in infancy as compared to non-diabetic children. [18] 
Recognizing the risk, Swiss health authorities recommend "very restrictive use" of soy for babies. In England and Australia, public health agencies tell parents to first seek advice from a doctor before giving their infants soy formula. The New Zealand Ministry of Health recommends that "Soy formula should only be used under the direction of a health professional for specific medical indications. . . Clinicians who are treating children with a soy-based infant formula for medical conditions should be aware of the potential interaction between soy infant formula and thyroid function." [19] 
Thyroid hormones exert their influence during discrete windows of time. Inappropriate hormone levels can have a devastating effect on the developing human brain, especially during the first 12 weeks of pregnancy when the fetus depends on the mother's thyroid hormones for brain development. After that, both maternal and fetal thyroid hormone levels affect the central nervous system. 
A 1999 study published in the New England Journal of Medicine showed that pregnant women with underactive thyroids were four times more likely to have children with low IQs if the disorder is left untreated. The study found that 19% of the children born to mothers with thyroid deficiency had IQ scores of 85 or lower, compared with only 5% of those born to mothers without such problems. [20] 

Thyroid, Brain, and Environmental Toxins 
Children exposed prenatally and during infancy to common environmental toxins like dioxin and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) can suffer behavioral, learning, and memory problems because these chemicals may be disrupting the normal action of thyroid hormone. [21] 
Soybeans grown in the United States contain residues of the pesticide dieldrin, an organochlorine similar to DDT. Although both chemicals were banned in the 1970s, dieldrin still persists in soils and is absorbed through the roots. Today it is the most toxic residue found on domestic soybeans. [22] In Silent Spring, Rachel Carson warned that dieldrin is nearly 50 times as poisonous as DDT. In addition to disrupting hormones, it can have long delayed neurological effects, ranging from loss of memory to mania. [23] 
Combinations of insecticides, weed killers, and artificial fertilizers — even at low levels — have measurable detrimental effects on thyroid and other hormones as well as on the brain. [24] EPA scientists now want to upgrade the commonly used herbicide, atrazine, to a "likely carcinogen." In animal tests, atrazine attaches to sites on the hypothalamus, a crucial brain region involved with regulating levels of stress and sex hormones. [25] 
Individuals newly diagnosed with Parkinson's disease were more than twice as likely to have been exposed to insecticides in their home, compared to those without the disease. [26] 
Soy formulas for infants can contain other neurotoxins: aluminum, cadmium, and fluoride. Studies found that aluminum concentrations in soy-based formulas were a 100-fold greater compared to human breast milk, while cadmium content was 8-15 times higher than in milk-based formulas. In an Australian study, the fluoride content of soy-based formulas ranged from 1.08 to 2.86 parts per million. The authors concluded that "prolonged consumption (beyond 12 months of age) of infant formula reconstituted with optimally-fluoridated water could result in excessive amounts of fluoride being ingested." A study of Connecticut children revealed that mild-to-moderate fluorosis was strongly associated with soy-based infant formula use. [27-30] 
In May 2000, Boston Physicians for Social Responsibility released their report, "The Toxic Threats to Child Development." In the section on neurotoxins, they concluded: "Studies in animals and human populations suggest that fluoride exposure, at levels that are experienced by a significant proportion of the population whose drinking water is fluoridated, may have adverse impacts on the developing brain." [31] 

Iodine vs. Fluorine 
The thyroid gland uses tyrosine and the natural element iodine to make thyroxine (T4), a thyroid hormone containing four iodine atoms. The other, much more biologically active thyroid hormone is tri-iodothyronine (T3), which has three iodine atoms. Lack of dietary iodine has long been identified as the problem in diminished thyroid hormone synthesis. 
According to the International Council for the Control of Iodine Deficiency Disorders: "Iodine deficiency has been called the world's major cause of preventable mental retardation. Its severity can vary from mild intellectual blunting to frank cretinism, a condition that includes gross mental retardation, deaf mutism, short stature, and various other defects. . . The damage to the developing brain results in individuals poorly equipped to fight disease, learn, work effectively, or reproduce satisfactorily." 
This crucial role of iodine is another reason why the thyroid gland is especially vulnerable today. Canadian researcher Andreas Schuld has documented more than 100 studies during the last 70 years that demonstrate adverse effects of fluoride on the thyroid gland. [32] Schuld says, "Fluorine, being the strongest in the group of halogens, will seriously interfere with iodine and iodine synthesis, forcing more urinary elimination of ingested iodine as fluoride ingestion or absorption increases." 
Fluorides were actually used in the past, specifically to reduce thyroid function. In the 1930s through to the 1960s fluorides at 0.9mg to 4.5mg/day were given as effective anti-thyroid medication to hyperthyroid patients." [33] Russian researchers in the 1980s concluded that prolonged consumption of drinking water with a raised fluorine content was a risk factor of more rapid development of thyroid pathology. [34] 
A major source of fluoride exposure in the United States is fluoridated drinking water — including foods and drinks manufactured and processed with this treated water. (Only about 5% of the world's population is fluoridated, and more than half live in North America. 99% of western continental Europe has rejected, banned, or stopped the addition of fluoride compounds to their drinking water. [35]) Also, approximately 45 million pounds of hydrogen fluoride are released from U.S. coal-fired plants every year into the environment. 

Soy Phytates Inhibit Zinc Absorption 
Another way that soybeans may affect brain function is because of their phytic acid content. Phytic acid is an organic acid present in the outer portion of all seeds. Also known as phytates, they block the uptake of essential minerals in the intestinal tract: calcium, magnesium, iron, and especially zinc. According to research cited by the Weston A. Price Foundation, soybeans have very high levels of a form of phytic acid that is particularly difficult to neutralize — and which interferes with zinc absorption more completely than with other minerals. 
The soy industry acknowledges the problem, noting that "one-half cup of cooked soybeans contains one mg of zinc. However, zinc is poorly absorbed from soyfoods." As for iron, "both phytate and soy protein reduce iron absorption so that the iron in soyfoods is generally poorly absorbed." [36] 
Nutritionist Sally Fallon, author of Nourishing Traditions: The Cookbook that Challenges Politically Correct Nutrition and the Diet Dictocrats, says that as early as 1967, researchers testing soy formula found that it caused negative zinc balance in every infant to whom it was given. Even when the diets were additionally supplemented with zinc, there was a strong correlation between phytate content in formula and poor growth. She warns that "a reduced rate of growth is especially serious in the infant as it causes a delay in the accumulation of lipids in the myelin, and hence jeopardizes the development of the brain and nervous system." 

Zinc and the Brain 
Relatively high levels of zinc are found in the brain, especially the hippocampus. Zinc plays an important role in the transmission of the nerve impulse between brain cells. Deficiency of zinc during pregnancy and lactation has been shown to be related to many congenital abnormalities of the nervous system in offspring. In children, "insufficient levels of zinc have been associated with lowered learning ability, apathy, lethargy, and mental retardation." [37] 
The USDA references a study of 372 Chinese school children with very low levels of zinc in their bodies. The children who received zinc supplements had the most improved performance — especially in perception, memory, reasoning, and psychomotor skills such as eye-hand coordination. Three earlier studies with adults also showed that changes in zinc intake affected cognitive function. [38] 
New research has identified a specific contingent of neurons, called "zinc-containing" neurons, which are found almost exclusively in the forebrain, where in mammals they have evolved into a "complex and elaborate associational network that interconnects most of the cerebral cortices and limbic structures." This suggests the importance of zinc in the normal and pathological processes of the cerebral cortex. [39] Furthermore, age-related tissue zinc deficiency may contribute to brain cell death in Alzheimer's dementia. [40] 

Safe Soy 
To produce soy milk, the beans are first soaked in an alkaline solution, then heated to about 115 degrees C in order to remove as much of the trypsin inhibitors as possible. Fallon says this method destroys most, but not all of the anti-nutrients, however it has the "unhappy side effect of so denaturing the proteins that they become very difficult to digest and much reduced in effectiveness." Furthermore, phytates remain in soy milk to block the uptake of essential minerals. 
Only a long period of fermentation will significantly reduce the phytate content of soybeans, as well as the trypsin inhibitors that interfere with enzymes and amino acids. Therefore, fermented soy products such as tempeh and miso (not tofu) provide nourishment that is easily assimilated. 

Links to Further Information: 
Soy Online Service (http://www.soyonlineservice.co.nz/)
Weston A. Price Foundation (http://www.westonaprice.org/)

References 
1. White LR, Petrovich H, Ross GW, Masaki KH, Association of mid-life consumption of tofu with late life cognitive impairment and dementia: the Honolulu-Asia Aging Study. Fifth International Conference on Alzheimer's Disease, #487, 27 July 1996, Osaka, Japan. 
2. White LR, Petrovitch H, Ross GW, Masaki KH, Hardman J, Nelson J, Davis D, Markesbery W, Brain aging and midlife tofu consumption. J Am Coll Nutr 2000 Apr;19(2):242-55. 
3. Doerge and Sheehan, Letter to the FDA, Feb 18, 1999. 
4. Lephart ED, Thompson JM, Setchell KD, Adlercreutz H, Weber KS, Phytoestrogens decrease brain calcium-binding proteins... Brain Res 2000 Mar 17;859(1):123-31. 
5. Soy Infant Formula Could Be Harmful to Infants: Groups Want it Pulled. Nutrition Week, Dec 10, 1999;29(46):1-2. 
6. Cassidy A, Bingham S, Setchell KD, Biological effects of a diet of soy protein rich in isoflavones on the menstrual cycle of premenopausal women. Am J Clin Nutr 1994 Sep;60(3):333-40. 
7. Setchell KD, Zimmer-Nechemias L, Cai J, Heubi JE, Exposure of infants to phyto-oestrogens from soy-based infant formula. Lancet 1997 Jul 5;350(9070):23-27. 
8. Enig MG, Fallon SA, Tragedy and Hype, The Third International Soy Symposium. Nexus Magazine Vol 7, No 3, April-May 2000. 
9. O'Dell TJ, Kandel ER, Grant SG, Long-term potentiation in the hippocampus is blocked by tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Nature 1991 Oct 10 353:6344 558-60. 
10. Bell JM, Whitmore WL, Cowdery T, Slotkin TA, Perinatal dietary supplementation with a soy lecithin preparation: effects on development of central catecholaminergic neurotransmitter systems. Brain Res Bull 1986 Aug;17(2):189-95. 
11. Zetterstrom RH, Williams R, Perlmann T, Olson L, Cellular expression of the immediate early transcription factors Nurr1 and NGFI-B suggests a gene regulatory role in several brain regions including the nigrostriatal dopamine system. Brain Res Mol Brain Res 1996 Sep 5;41(1-2):111-20. 
12. Castillo SO, Baffi JS, Palkovits M, Goldstein DS, Kopin IJ, Witta J, Magnuson MA, Nikodem VM, Dopamine biosynthesis is selectively abolished in substantia nigra... Mol Cell Neurosci 1998 May;11(1-2):36-46. 
13. Baffi JS, Palkovits M, Castillo SO, Mezey E, Nikodem VM, Differential expression of tyrosine hydroxylase in catecholaminergic neurons of neonatal wild-type and Nurr1-deficient mice. Neuroscience 1999;93(2):631-42. 
14. Shepard TH, Soybean goiter. New Eng J Med 1960;262:1099-1103. 
15. Divi RL, Chang HC, Doerge DR, Anti-thyroid isoflavones from soybean: isolation, characterization, and mechanisms of action.Biochem Pharmacol 1997 Nov 15;54(10):1087-96. 
16. Ishizuki Y, Hirooka Y, Murata Y, Togashi K,The effects on the thyroid gland of soybeans administered experimentally in healthy subjects. Nippon Naibunpi Gakkai Zasshi 1991 May 20;67(5):622-29. 
17. Fort P, Moses N, Fasano M, Goldberg T, Lifshitz F, Breast and soy-formula feedings in early infancy and the prevalence of autoimmune thyroid disease in children. J Am Coll Nutr 1990 Apr;9(2):164-67. 
18. Fort P, Lanes R, Dahlem S, Recker B, Weyman-Daum M, Pugliese M, Lifshitz FJ, Breast feeding and insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus in children. Am Coll Nutr 1986;5(5):439-41. 
19. Regulatory Guidance in Other Countries: New Zealand Ministry of Health Position Statement on Soy Formulas (Adobe Acrobat file). 
20. Haddow JE, Palomaki GE, Allan WC, Williams JR, Knight GJ, Gagnon J, O'Heir CE, Mitchell ML, Hermos RJ, Waisbren SE, Faix JD, Klein RZ, Maternal thyroid deficiency during pregnancy and subsequent neuropsychological development of the child. N Engl J Med 1999 Aug 19;341(8):549-55. 
21. Hauser P, McMillin JM, Bhatara VS, Resistance to thyroid hormone: implications for neurodevelopmental research on the effects of thyroid hormone disruptors. Toxicol Ind Health 1998 Jan-Apr;14(1-2):85-101. 
22. Groth E, Benbrook CM, Lutz K, Update: pesticides in children's foods, an analysis of 1998 USDA PDP data on pesticide residues, Consumers Union of U.S., Inc., May, 2000 (Adobe Acrobat file). 
23. Hayes WJ, The toxicity of dieldrin to man. Bull World Health Organ 1959;20:891-92. 
24. Porter WP, Jaeger JW, Carlson IH, Endocrine, immune and behavioral effects of aldicarb (carbamate), atrazine (triazine) and nitrate (fertilizer) mixtures at groundwater concentrations. Toxicol Ind Health 1999 Jan-Mar;15(1-2):133-50. 
25. Watson, Traci, Common herbicide likely causes cancer. USA Today, June 29, 2000. 
26. Nelson L, American Academy of Neurology's 52nd annual meeting in San Diego, CA, April 29-May 6, 2000. 
27. McGraw M, Bishop N, Jameson R, Robinson MJ, O'Hara M, Hewitt CD, Day JP, Aluminium content of milk formulae and intravenous fluids used in infants. Lancet 1986 Jan 18;1(8473):157. 
28. Dabeka RW, McKenzie AD, Lead, cadmium, and fluoride levels in market milk and infant formulas in Canada. J Assoc Off Anal Chem 1987;70(4):754-57. 
29. Silva M, Reynolds EC, Fluoride content of infant formulae in Australia. Aust Dent J 1996 Feb;41(1):37-42. 
30. Pendrys DG, Katz RV, Morse DE, Risk factors for enamel fluorosis in a fluoridated population. Am J Epidemiol 1994 Sep 1;140(5):461-71. 
31. Schettler T, Stein J, Reich F, Valenti M, In Harm's Way: Toxic Threats to Child Development. Greater Boston Physicians for Social Responsibility, May 2000. 
32. Studies Dealing with Fluoride and the Thyroid Gland. See also: Fluoride Controversy in Townsend Letter for Doctors and Patients. 
33. Galetti PM, Joyet, G, Effect of fluorine on thyroidal iodine metabolism in hyperthyroidism. J Clin Endocrinol 1958;18:1102-10. 
34. Bachinskii PP, Gutsalenko OA, Naryzhniuk ND, Sidora VD, Shliakhta AI, Action of the body fluorine of healthy persons and thyroidopathy patients on the function of hypophyseal-thyroid the system. Probl Endokrinol (Mosk) 1985 Nov-Dec;31(6):25-29. 
35. Fluoridation Status of Some Countries, Fluoride: Protected Pollutant or Panacea? 
36. Soy Nutritive Content, United Soybean Board. 
37. Pfeiffer CC, Braverman ER, Zinc, the brain and behavior. Biol Psychiatry 1982 Apr;17(4):513-32. 
38. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Food & Nutrition Research Briefs, July 1997. 
39. Frederickson CJ, Suh SW, Silva D, Frederickson CJ, Thompson RB, Importance of zinc in the central nervous system: the zinc-containing neuron. J Nutr 2000 May;130(5S Suppl):1471S-83S. 
40. Ho LH, Ratnaike RN, Zalewski PD, Involvement of intracellular labile zinc in suppression of DEVD-caspase activity in human neuroblastoma cells. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 2000 Feb 5;268(1):148-54. 
Originally Appearing on Brain.com
DR. MERCOLA'S COMMENTS: Further information documenting the unwise choice many people are making by consuming such large amounts of soy. They are being deceived by the effective marketing efforts of the multi-billion dollar edible oil industry which, in many ways, is not to dissimilar to what we see with the drug industry's influence in the traditional medical paradigm.

While even in 1966 there was considerable research on the harmful substances within soybeans, you'll be hard pressed to find articles today that claim soy is anything short of a miracle-food. As soy gains more and more popularity through industry advertising, we are moved once again to raise our voice of concern. 

The Soybean Industry in America

In 1924 soybean production in the U.S. was only at 1.8 million acres harvested, but by 1954, the harvested acres grew to 18.9 million. Today, the soybean is America's third largest crop (harvesting 72 million acres in 1998), supplying more than 50 percent of the world's soybean demand. 

Most of these beans are made into animal feed and are manufactured into soy oil for use as vegetable oil, margarine and shortening. Of the traditional uses for soy as a food, only soy sauce enjoys widespread consumption in the American diet. Tofu, measuring 90 percent of Asia's use of the soybean, has gained more popularity in the U.S., but soy is still nowhere near a measurable component of the average American diet - or is it?
For more than 20 years now, the soy industry has concentrated on finding alternative uses and new markets for soybeans and soy byproducts. At your local supermarket, soy can now be found disguised as everything from soy cheese, milk, burgers and hot dogs, to ice cream, yogurt, vegetable oil, baby formula and flour (to name just a few). These are often marketed as low-fat, dairy-free, or as a high-protein, meat substitute for vegetarians. But soy isnít always mentioned on the box cover. Today, an alarming 60% of the food on America's supermarket shelves contain soy derivatives (i.e. soy flour, textured vegetable protein, partially hydrogenated soy bean oil, soy protein isolate). When you look at the ingredients list, and really look at the contents of the "Average American Diet," from snack foods and fast foods to prepackaged frozen meals, soy plays a major role. 

Where the soybean goes wrong? 

Here at the Gerson Institute, we feel the positive aspects of the soybean are overshadowed by their potential for harm. Soybeans in fact contain a large number of dangerous substances. One among them is phytic acid, also called phytates. This organic acid is present in the bran or hulls of all seeds and legumes, but none have the high level of phytates that soybeans do. These acids block the bodyís uptake of essential minerals like calcium, magnesium, iron and especially zinc. Adding to the high-phytate problem, soybeans are very resistant to phytate reducing techniques, such as long, slow cooking. 

Soybeans also contain potent enzyme inhibitors. These inhibitors block uptake of trypsin and other enzymes that the body needs for protein digestion. Normal cooking does not deactivate these harmful "antinutrients," that can cause serious gastric distress, reduced protein digestion and can lead to chronic deficiencies in amino acid uptake. 

Beyond these, soybeans also contain hemagglutinin, a clot promoting substance that causes red blood cells to clump together. These clustered blood cells are unable to properly absorb oxygen for distribution to the body's tissues, and cannot help in maintaining good cardiac health. Hemagglutinin and trypsin inhibitors are both "growth depressant" substances. Although the act of fermenting soybeans does deactivate both trypsin inhibitors and hemagglutinin, precipitation and cooking do not. Even though these enzyme inhibitors are reduced in levels within precipitated soy products like tofu, they are not altogether eliminated. 

Only after a long period of fermentation (as in the creation of miso or tempeh) are the phytate and "antinutrient" levels of soybeans reduced, making their nourishment available to the human digestive system. The high levels of harmful substances remaining in precipitated soy products leave their nutritional value questionable at best, and in the least, potentially harmful. 

What About the Studies? 

In recent years, several studies have been made regarding the soybeanís effect on human health. The results of those studies, largely underwritten by various factions of the soy industry, were of course overwhelmingly in favor of soy. The primary claims about soy's health benefits are based purely on bad science. Although primary arguments for cancer patients to use soy focus on statistics showing low rates of breast, colon and prostate cancer among Asian people, there are obvious facts being utterly ignored. While the studies boast that Asian women suffer far fewer cases of breast cancer than American women do, the hype neglects to point out that these Asian women eat a diet that is dramatically different than their American counterparts. 
The standard Asian diet consists of more natural products, far less fatty meat, greater amounts of vegetables and more fish. Their diets are also lower in chemicals and toxins, as they eat far fewer processed (canned, jarred, pickled, frozen) foods. It is likely these studies are influenced by the fact that cancer rates rise among Asian people who move to the U.S. and adopt American-ized diets. Of course, this change of diet goes hand-in-hand with a dramatic shift in lifestyle. Ignoring the remarkable diet and lifestyle changes, to assume only that reduced levels of soy in these Americanized Asian diets is a primary factor in greater cancer rates is poor judgment, and as stated above, bad science. The changes of diet and lifestyle must be considered to reach the correct conclusion. 

A widely circulated article, written by Jane E. Allen, AP Science Writer, titled, "Scientists Suggest More Soy in Diet", cites in the course of a symposium, numerous speakers discussing the probable advantages of soy under the title, "Health Impact of Soy Protein." However, the article states that the $50,000 symposium "was underwritten by Protein Technologies International of St. Louis, a DuPont subsidiary that makes soy protein!" In the course of the same symposium, Thomas Clarkson, professor of comparative medicine at Wake Forest University, states "Current hormone replacement therapy has been a dismal failure from a public health point of view," not because PremarinÆ is known to cause uterine or other female organ cancers, but "because only 20 percent of the women who could benefit from it are taking it." 

Other popular arguments in support of soy state that fermented products, like tempeh or natto, contain high levels of vitamin B-12. However, these supportive arguments fail to mention that soy's B-12 is an inactive B-12 analog, not utilized as a vitamin in the human body. Some researchers speculate this analog may actually serve to block the body's B-12 absorption. It has also been found that allergic reactions to soybeans are far more common than to all other legumes. Even the American Academy of Pediatrics admits that early exposure to soy through commercial infant formulas, may be a leading cause of soy allergies among older children and adults. 
In his classic book, A Cancer Therapy - Results of 50 Cases (p. 237), Dr. Gerson put "Soy and Soy Products" on the "FORBIDDEN" list of foods for Gerson Therapy patients. At the time, his greatest concerns were two items: the high oil content of soy and soy products, and the rather high rate of allergic reactions to soy. Soybeans can add as much as 9 grams of fat per serving, typically adding an average of 5 grams of fat per serving when part of an average American diet. 

The Extraction Process

The processes which render the soybean "edible" are also the processes which render it "inedible." In fermenting soybeans, the process entails that the beans be purÈed and soaked in an alkaline solution. The purÈed mixture is then heated to about 115ƒC (239ƒF) inside a pressure cooker. This heating and soaking process destroys most, but not all, of the anti-nutrients. At the same time, it has the unwelcome effect of denaturing the proteins of the beans so they become very difficult to digest and greatly reduced in effectiveness. Unfortunately, the alkaline solution also produces a carcinogen, lysinealine, while it reduces the already low cystine content within the soybean. Cystine plays an essential role in liver detoxification, allowing our bodies to filter and eliminate toxins. Without proper amounts of cystine, the protein complex of the soybean becomes useless, unless the diet is fortified with cystine-rich meat, egg, or dairy products - not an option for Gerson patients. 

To the soybean's credit, they do contain large amounts of beneficial omega-3 fatty acids, but these are particularly susceptible to rancidity when subjected to high pressures and temperatures. Unfortunately, high pressure and temperature are required to remove soybean oil from the soybean.

Before soybeans are sent to your table, they undergo a rigorous process to strip them of their oil. Hexane or other solvents are first applied to help separate the oil from the beans, leaving trace amounts of these toxins in the commercial product. Hexane by definition is; "any of five colorless, volatile, liquid hydrocarbons C6H14 of the paraffin series," and cannot be the least bit beneficial in anyoneís diet. After the oil is extracted, the defatted flakes are used to form the three basic soy protein products. With the exception of full-fat soy flour, all soybean products contain trace amounts of carcinogenic solvents. 

Personal Experiences 

The following letter was received in November 1998: "I have used soy milk for 12 years with no problems. About 9 months ago, I started to have heart palpitations. I thought maybe that I was in menopause, but I wasnít. I added more potassium to my diet and magnesium and vitamin E. No change. I am already decaffeinated but I also took all sugar out of my diet. I lost 25 pounds and felt great except for the palpitations. I tried hawthorn and garlic but nothing was helping. Recently I came down with acute bronchitis and could only drink water because even the soy milk made me have horrendous bouts of coughing. I realized that after a few days my heart palpitations had stopped. I didn't think anything of it because it never occurred to me that soy was the culprit. As soon as I started drinking it again, my heart went crazy. I went off it for a week and then changed brands. Within 30 minutes of drinking only 4 ounces [of soy milk], my heart was all over the place. I've noticed that it takes about 24 to 36 hours for my heart to settle down. I wondered if your research turned up anything like this in regard to soy. I know it is not within the definition of an allergy, but something is definitely going on. I called the manufacturer of the soy milk, but they were of no help. I am very upset because I only drink soy milk and water. I also use the soy milk to make protein shakes (with what elseÖbut soy protein)." 
In our November/December 1996 issue of the Gerson Healing Newsletter we described another case: a pregnant lady who looked very ill and was terribly deficient! She also described her son, age five, who had many allergies and infections - both were using a good deal of soy in their diet. I recommended that they discontinue the use of all soy products. At the time, I had only just run across this situation. However, a year later, I was in the same area for a lecture, and the lady invited me to dinner. She had cut out all soy products: her skin was now rosy, her face filled out, her sunken eyes normal, her black circles gone and her little boy, now six, was in greatly improved health. 

Just last week, another interesting story came to our attention. A patient at the Gerson Certified Hospital in Mexico told us of her son, now 25, who has total lack of hair (Alopecia) with the exception of eyebrows and eyelashes. She added that this started when he was just three years old. Since the mother asked me about this situation, I considered the problem for a moment. Then, looking at the parents who both have normal hair, I figured that the boy's problem was most probably not genetic. So, I asked the mother if he used a lot of soy. She said, no. But then, after thinking about the question for a moment, she said that at about one year of age, the boy had many allergies, so she regularly fed him soy milk! I explained to her that the enzyme and nutrient blocking ability of soy and the likelihood of the soy milk being the cause of his condition starting at age three. Since we had just witnessed the case of a patient whose hair grew back on his bald pate, (See "Practitioner Training" article in this issue) after being bald for some 20 years, I cautiously suggested that a complete change of diet accompanied by intensive detoxification, may be able to overcome the problem. 

Gerson Institute Newsletter Volume 14 #3
This article is the first of two parts. Part Two will be next week
http://www.soyonlineservice.co.nz/
ìSoybean Products: A Recipe for Disaster?î Extracted from Nexus Magazine, Vol. 4, No. 3 (Apr-May 1997), http://www.icom.net/ ~nexus/soya.html 
Soy Protein Council, http://www.spcouncil.org 
ìJeopardizing the Future? Genetic Engineering, Food and the Environmentî, by Dr. Michael Hanson and Jean Halloran (Consumer Policy Institute /Consumers Union), http://www.pmac.net/
ìMonsanto Genetically Engineered Soya has Elevated Hormone Levels: Public Health Threatî (Oct. 1997), http://www.holisticmed.com/ 
ìMonsantoís Toxic Roundupî (Nov. 1996),http://www.holisticmed.com/ 
ìToxicity from Genetically-Engineered Foodsî, http://www.holisticmed.com/ 
Eat the State!, ìNature & Politicsî by Jeffrey St. Clair and Alexander Cockburn (Feb. 1999), 
'Concerns Regarding Soybeansî, http://www.rheumatic.org/soy.htm 

COMMENT: This is an excellent summary of some of the major reasons why soy is not the health food that you think it is. There are literally billions of dollars of influence in the edible oil industry that is promoting soy's use in natural medical circles so it's use can be then promoted in the general medical public. They are even able to fool otherwise knowledgeable natural medical physicians. I am a monthly columnist in the Townsend Letters and another columnist, Dr. Hudson, who was voted Naturopathic doctor of the year, has an article this month extolling soy's values. Needless to say I quickly wrote a letter to Townsend asking them to print the other side of the soy story. In the meantime, you can save you and your family some potential problems by limiting any soy use to fermented products only, like tempeh or miso.
 
 

Two separate studies – one in animals and the other in humans – that considered together suggest that a diet high in soybeans and other legumes during pregnancy and breastfeeding may have a subtle but long-term impact on the development of children.
Soybeans and other food-source plants contain compounds, called phytoestrogens or isoflavones, which have been found to produce a variety of mild hormonal actions within the human body.
Studies in recent years are confirming that the estrogenic effects of these compounds may be beneficial in preventing or treating a variety of conditions such as the unpleasant symptoms of menopause.
We are a very different creature when we are an embryo or a fetus or a child or a teenager. We’re very different when we are a reproductive-age adult or an aging adult.
At each stage, we have a different profile of risk or benefit. At the beginning of the life span, when tissues in our bodies are being organized in utero and in the first months of life, there is good reason to believe -- based on animal studies and in some human observations -- that sex hormones are very important in getting things organized properly.
These hormones influence the way the brain is organized, the way the reproductive organs and cells develop, even the way immune function develops. Therefore, if mom is eating something or has in her body fat something that can act like sex hormones, it is logical to wonder if that could change the baby’s development. If there is an impact, is it positive, negative or irrelevant?
To determine if unborn babies are indeed exposed to phytoestrogens, the researchers analyzed amniotic fluid samples of 54 pregnant women from the Los Angeles area. No phytoestrogens were detected in 11 samples, extremely high levels were found in seven samples, and the remaining 36 contained modest levels.
The study concluded that about 80 percent of the fetuses were exposed to estrogenic isoflavones at concentrations ranging from 20 to 180 times the levels of naturally occurring female sex hormones in the amniotic fluid of female fetuses.
The amniotic fluid samples were taken during routine amniocentesis between 16 and 20 weeks of gestation – after a baby’s organs have formed but during a critical stage of development.
The researchers used an animal model to begin to determine whether this in utero phytoestrogen exposure might affect the organizational stage of the fetus and the future development of the child. In a controlled study, they fed pregnant female rats genistein, an isoflavone that is known to have significant estrogenic properties. 
The rat study was carefully designed to take into account the obvious differences that exist in the developmental and life cycles of rats and humans, and to correlate as closely as possible to the timing of the amniotic fluid sampling. The mother rats were given genistein from day 14 of gestation through post-natal day 21 when the rat pups were weaned.
Developmentally, this time period is almost exactly the same time that the human amniotic fluid samples were obtained. The major steps of formation of organs in the body occur early on, in both rats and humans. Therefore, the treatment of the rats was intentionally delayed until major organ formation had occurred. 
The goal was to assess the effects of exposure on the developing organism, and this is about as close as one can get to being able to take measurable samples from humans and match them up with meaningful findings in an animal model.
According to the results, the genistein fed to the mother rats had a “masculinizing” effect on both male and female pups, based on the accepted criterion of anogenital distance – the distance between the anus and genitals, adjusted for the animal’s overall size. The lengthening of the anogenital distance strongly suggests a relative masculinization of the pups. 
This may be caused by the anti-estrogenic properties of the genistein being transferred through the mother’s milk to the babies or it is possible that the mom’s intake of genistein changed the amount of her own steroids going into the milk. That’s a little more complicated but if these compounds are reducing the amount of hormones she’s producing, either from her ovaries or her adrenal glands, it could have the same effect.
Male rat pups whose mothers received genistein also experienced early onset of puberty. Normal puberty in a rat life cycle begins about two weeks after weaning. Whatever the clocks are in the brain that control the timing of puberty appear to have been advanced by a couple of days, which is highly significant in this kind of animal model. It is known that sex hormones have important organizational effects in primates in the second and third trimesters of pregnancy through the first six months of life.
Studies have shown that altered male or female hormone levels at this time of life in a rhesus macaque, for example, can change the timing of puberty in males. Concern is based on the expectation that animal models will be at least somewhat predictive of what occurs in humans. There is no reason to assume that there will be gross malformations of fetuses but there may be subtle changes, such as neurobehavioral attributes, immune function, and sex hormone levels.
The researchers are seeking a grant to track outcomes of human babies for whom exposure assessments have been made. There are many long-term health questions that come about when the little clocks in our heads are changed. There may be subtle things occurring and we don’t know it. Or it could be that humans are much more resistant to these effects than are other animals, and this is not an issue.
Researchers in the Center conducted the studies presented for Women’s Health and the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, The Centre for Toxicology at the University of Calgary in Canada, and the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at Duke University in North Carolina. For media information and to arrange an interview, please e-mail sandy@vancommunications.com or call 1-800-396-1002.
Third International Symposium on the Role of Soy in Preventing and Treating Chronic Disease sponsored by the American Oil Chemists’ Society in Washington, D.C. November 3, 1999.  submitted by Michael Belkin
 
DR. MERCOLA'S COMMENT:
More early research that soy is not all that is cracked up to be. If you have not read the soy article by Dr. Enig, I would strongly encourage you to do so as it provides a broad overview of this topic.
It is also important to realize that soy formula should rarely if ever be used for the above concerns. It is a potent negative hormonal influence on developing children and may have significant adverse side effects. Soy formula also has well over ten times as much aluminum in it as conventional formula.
 

Marketing the Soybean 
The truth is, however, that most Americans are unlikely to adopt traditional soy products as their principle food. Tofu, bean curd and tempeh have disagreeable texture and are too bland for the Western palate; pungent and tasty miso and natto lose out in taste; only soy sauce enjoys widespread popularity as a condiment. The soy industry has therefore looked for other ways to market the superabundance of soybeans now grown in the United States. 
Large scale cultivation of the soybean in the United States began only after the Second World War, and quickly rose to 140 billion pounds per year. Most of the crop is made into animal feed, soy oil for hydrogenated fats margarine and shortening. During the past 20 years, the industry has concentrated on finding markets for the byproducts of soy oil manufacture, including soy "lecithin", made from the oil sludge, and soy protein products, made from defatted soy flakes, a challenge that has involved overcoming consumer resistance to soy products, generally considered tasteless "poverty foods. 
The quickest way to gain product acceptability in the less affluent society," said a soy industry spokesman, " ... is to have the product consumed on its own merit in a more affluent society."" Hence the proliferation of soy products resembling traditional American foods-soy milk for cows milk, soy baby formula, soy yogurt, soy ice cream, soy cheese, soy flour for baking and textured soy protein as meat substitutes, usually promoted as high protein, low-fat, no cholesterol "health foods" to the upscale consumer increasingly concerned about his health. The growth of vegetarianism among the more affluent classes has greatly accelerated the acceptability and use of these artificial products. Unfortunately they pose numerous dangers. 
Processing Denatures and Dangers Remain The production of soy milk is relatively simple. In order to remove as much of the trypsin inhibitor content as possible, the beans are first soaked in an alkaline solution. The pureed solution is then heated to about 115 degrees Centigrade in a pressure cooker. This method destroys most (but not all) of the anti-nutrients but has the unhappy side effect of so denaturing the proteins that they become very difficult to digest and much reduced in effectiveness. The phytate content remains in soy milk to block the uptake of essential minerals. In addition, the alkaline soaking solution produces a carcinogen, lysinealine, and reduces the cystine content, which is already low in the soybean. Lacking cystine, the entire protein complex of the soybean becomes useless unless the diet is fortified with cystine-rich meat, eggs, or dairy products. 
Most soy products that imitate traditional American food items, including baby formulas and some brands of soy milk, are made with soy protein isolate, that is the soy protein isolated from the carbohydrate and fatty acid components that naturally occur in the bean. Soy beans are first ground and subjected to high-temperature and solvent extraction processes to remove the oils. The resultant defatted meal is then mixed with an alkaline solution and sugars in a separation process to remove fiber. Then it is precipitated and separated using an acid wash. Finally the resultant curds are neutralized in an alkaline solution and spray dried at high temperatures to produce high protein powder. 
This is a highly refined product in which both vitamin and protein quality are compromised-but some trypsin inhibitors remain, even after such extreme refining. Trypsin inhibitor content of soy protein isolate can vary as much as 5-fold. In rats, even low level trypsin inhibitor soy protein isolate feeding results in reduced weight gain compared to controls. Soy product producers are not required to state trypsin inhibitor content on labels, nor even to meet minimum standards, and the public, trained to avoid dietary cholesterol, a substance vital for normal growth and metabolism, has never heard of the potent anti-nutrients found in cholesterol-free soy products. 

Soy Formula Is Not the Answer 
Soy protein isolate is the main ingredient of soy-based infant formulas. Along with trypsin inhibitors, these formulas have a high phytate content. Use of soy formula has caused zinc deficiency in infants. Aluminum content of soy formula is 10 times greater than milk based formula, and 100 times greater than unprocessed milk. Aluminum has a toxic effect on the kidneys of infants, and has been implicated as cause in Alzheimer's in adults. 
Soy milk formulas are often given to babies with milk allergy; but allergies to soy are almost as common as those to milk. Soy formulas lack cholesterol which is absolutely essential for the development of the brain and nervous system; they also lack lactose and galactose, which play an equally important role in the development of the nervous system. I would strongly discourage the use of soy formulas. 
Nitrosamines, which are potent carcinogens, are often found in soy protein foods, and are greatly increased during the high temperature drying process. Not surprisingly, animal feeding studies show a lower weight gain for rats on soy formula than those on whole milk, high-lactose formula; similar results have been observed in children on macrobiotic diets which include the use of soy milk and large amounts of whole grains. Children brought up on high-phytate diets tend to be thin and scrawny. 

Fabricated Soy Foods 
A final indignity to the original soy bean is high-temperature, high-pressure extrusion processing of soy protein isolate to product textured vegetable protein (TVP). Numerous artificial flavorings, particularly MSG, are added to TVP products to mask their strong "beany" taste, and impart the flavor of meat. Soy protein isolate and textured vegetable protein are used extensively in school lunch programs, commercial baked goods, diet beverages and fast food products. They are heavily promoted in third world countries and form the basis of many food give-away programs. These soy products greatly inhibit zinc and iron absorption; in test animals they cause enlarged organs, particularly the pancreas and thyroid gland, and increased deposition of fatty acids in the liver. 
Human feeding tests to determine the cholesterol lowering properties of soy protein isolate have not shown them to be effective. Nevertheless, they are often promoted as having beneficial effects on cholesterol levels. 
Cancer Preventing or Cancer Causing? The food industry also touts soy products for their cancer preventing properties. Isoflavone aglycones are anticarcinogenic substances found in traditionally fermented soybean products. However, in non-fermented soy products such as tofu and soy milk, these isoflavones are present in an altered form as beta-glycoside conjugates, which have no anti-carcinogenic effect. Some researchers believe the rapid increase in liver and pancreatic cancer in Africa is due to the introduction of soy products there. 
The fatty acid profile of the soybean includes large amounts of beneficial omega-3 fatty acids compared to other pulses legumes); but these omega-3 fatty acids are particularly susceptible to rancidity when subjected to high pressures and temperatures. This is exactly what is required to remove oil from the bean, as soybean oil is particularly difficult to extract. hexane or other solvents are always used to extract oil from soybeans, and traces remain in the commercial product. 
While fermented soy products contain protein, vitamins, anti-carcinogenic substances and important fatty acids, they can under no circumstances be called nutritionally complete. Like all pulses, the soybean lacks vital sulfur-containing amino acids cystine and methionine. These are usually supplied by rice and other grains in areas where the soybean is traditionally consumed. Soy should never be considered as a substitute for animal products like meat or milk. Claims that fermented soy products like tempeh can be relied on as a source of vitamin B12, necessary for healthy blood and nervous system, have not been supported by scientific research.,' Finally, soybeans do not supply all-important fat soluble vitamins D and preformed A (retinol) which act as catalysts for the proper absorption and utilization of all minerals and water soluble vitamins in the diet. 
These "fat soluble activators" are found only in certain animal foods such as organ meats, butter, eggs, fish and shellfish. Carotenes from plant foods and exposure to sunlight are not sufficient to supply the body's requirements for vitamins A and D. Soy products often replace animal products in third world countries where intake of B12 and fat soluble A and D are already low. Soy products actually increase requirements for vitamins B12 and D. 

Are soy products easy to digest, as claimed? 
Fermented soy products probably are; but unfermented products with their cargo of phytates, enzyme inhibitors, rancid fatty acids and altered proteins most certainly are not. Pet food manufacturers promote soy free dog and cat food as "highly digestible" 

Only Fermented Soy Products Are Safe 
To summarize, traditional fermented soy products such as miso, natto and tempeh, which are usually made with organically grown soybeans, have a long history of use that is generally beneficial when combined with other elements of the Oriental diet including rice, sea foods, fish broth, organ meats and fermented vegetables. The value of precipitated soybean products is problematical, especially when they form the major source of protein in the diet. Modern soy products including soy milks and artificial meat and dairy products made from soy protein isolate and textured vegetable protein are new to the diet and pose a number of serious problems. 
The above information was abstracted from an article written by Sally Fallon and Mary Enig, Ph.D. (an international expert renown in the field of lipid chemistry) for Health Freedom News in September of 1995. 
 
 

Disclaimer - Newsletters are based upon the opinions of Dr. Mercola. They are not intended to replace a one-on-one relationship with a qualified health care professional and they are not intended as medical advice. They are intended as a sharing of knowledge and information from the research and experience of Dr. Mercola and his community. Dr. Mercola encourages you to make your own health care decisions based upon your research and in partnership with a qualified health care professional.
 

Environmental scientist and long-time campaigner against soy-based infant formulas, Dr Mike Fitzpatrick, has warned about the risk of thyroid disease in infants fed soy formulas, high soy consumers and users of isoflavone supplements: 
"There is potential for certain individuals to consume levels of isoflavones in the range that could have goitrogenic effects. Most at risk appear to be infants fed soy formulas, followed by high soy users and those using isoflavone supplements". 
The report noted that infants fed soy formulas are exposed to high levels of isoflavones, which are potent anti-thyroid agents, and that the risks to normal growth and development were significant.
Fitzpatrick stated that thyroid problems due to soy might not be recognised "due to difficulties in establishing a cause and effect relationship" and noted that even experienced soy researchers may be ignorant of the connection between isoflavones and goitre.
Fitzpatrick also rejected claims that there was no evidence that isoflavones in soy formulas harmed infants citing the reported cases of goitre that have occurred in infants fed iodine sufficient soy formulas. 
Fitzpatrick stated his support to the position of the New Zealand Ministry of Health: 
"The Ministry of Health has found that infants with a history of thyroid dysfunction should avoid soy formulas and soy milks. Additionally, there is potential for isoflavone exposure to cause chronic thyroid damage in all infants fed soy formulas" Fitzpatrick stated that exposing infants to isoflavones was unnecessary and that the risk of harm could be avoided if manufacturers removed isoflavones from soy formulas. "In the interim" he stated "it is appropriate for medical practitioners to monitor the thyroid status of infants fed soy formulas" 
Fitzpatrick also claimed that high soy consumers and users of isoflavone supplements were also at risk of thyroid disorders. He stated that the subtle effects of anti-thyroid agents on thyroid function would most likely be evidenced as subclinical, or even overt hypothyroidism. 
Fitzpatrick also noted that a sporadic pattern of soy use may also not be without risk since the resulting thyroid stimulation parallels the classic method for inducing thyroid tumours in laboratory animals. He recommended "a more cautionary approach to the use of soy and isoflavone supplements". 
New Zealand Medical Journal (Volume 113, Feb 11, 2000)
 
DR. MERCOLA'S COMMENT:
Folks, soy formula is one of the worst foods that you could feed your child. Not only does it have profoundly adverse hormonal effects as discussed above, but it also has over 1000% more aluminum than conventional milk based formulas.
I don't recommend either, but if one, for whatever reason, cannot breast feed, then Carnation Good Start until six months and Carnation FollowUp after that seem to be the best commercial formula currently available. The milk protein is hydrolyzed 80% which tends to significantly decrease its allergenicity.
It is also important to note that when breast feeding it is wise to avoid drinking milk as it has been shown for several decades that the milk will pass directly into the breast milk which can cause potential problems in the infant.
 

Jane Phillimore addresses some of the concerns raised by new research.

Twelve years ago, I visited an alternative health practitioner with some non-specific health symptoms. I'd hardly sat down before he told me that my diet needed radical attention - I had to cut out all dairy, wheat, alcohol and caffeine, and substitute protein in the form of soy milk and tofu instead. Nowadays this kind of advice is routine, but at the time, it seemed glamorously radical: I had to trek to Clapham's one health-food shop to stock up on soy milk because Sainsbury's certainly didn't have their own brand (as they do now) and veggie/soy sausages were just a glint in Linda McCartney's eye. 

In the event, I lost a stack of weight and felt immensely rejuvenated. So much so that, four months later, I started eating normally again. Just as well, because it has now been found that soy - far from having the magical, health-giving properties that the alternative medicine brigade endlessly bangs on about - can actually be bad for you. Its reputation as an anti-cancer, cholesterol-lowering, osteoporosis-fighting, low-fat all round good egg of a product is based on bad science and superlative marketing by the powerful soy industry. 
Worldwide the evidence is starting to stack up against soy. In this country (United Kingdom), MAFF is so worried about the possible health problems of phytoestrogens in soy that they are funding a rolling programme of 19 separate research projects, due to end in 2002. Preliminary findings by Professor John Ashby of AstraZeneca Central Toxicology Laboratory in Macclesfield, for example, confirm that soy infant formula (currently the sole food of 6,500 British babies) has an oestrogenic effect on rats. According to public health minister Yvette Cooper, no new advice will be given on soy until the independent COT (Committee on Toxicity of Chemicals in Food, Consumer Products and the Environment) has reviewed the programme's findings. 
This could take several years. Meanwhile, if you've been seduced by the message that soy is the healthy 21st-century superfood, read on... 

Is soy bad for you? 
It contains high quantities of various toxic chemicals, which cannot be fully destroyed even by the long cooking process. These are: phytates, which block the body's uptake of minerals; enzyme inhibitors, which hinder protein digestion; and haemaggluttin, which causes red blood cells to clump together and inhibits oxygen take-up and growth. Most controversially of all, soy contains high levels of the phytoestrogens (also known as isoflavones) genistein and daidzein, which mimic and sometimes block the hormone oestrogen. 

Surely, the Japanese eat huge quantities of soy, and as a result have low rates of breast, uterus, colon and prostate cancers? 
That's the big myth on which the idea of 'healthy' soy is built. In fact, the Japanese don't eat that much soy: a 1998 study showed that a Japanese man typically eats about 8g (2 tsp) a day, nothing like the 220g (8oz) that a Westerner could put away by eating a big chunk of tofu and two glasses of soy milk. 
Secondly, although Japanese people may have lower rates of reproductive cancers, this is thought to be due to other dietary and lifestyle factors: they eat less fatty meat, more fish and vegetables and fewer tinned or processed foods than in a typical Western diet. Thirdly, Asians have much higher rates of thyroid and digestive cancers, including cancer of the stomach, pancreas, liver and esophagus. 

I'm vegetarian and eat loads of tofu and soy milk. Should I stop? 
Soy has become vegetarians' meat and milk, the major source of protein in their diet. But eating soy actually puts vegetarians at severe risk of mineral deficiencies, including calcium, copper, iron, magnesium and especially zinc. According to Dr Mike Fitzpatrick, a New Zealand biochemist who runs a soy information website (see below), this is because soy contains high levels of phytic acid, which blocks the absorption of essential minerals in the digestive tract. To reduce the effects of a high-phytate diet, you need to eat, as the Japanese do, lots of meat or fish with tiny bits of soy. 

I'm intolerant to cow's milk, so should I drink soy milk instead? 
Soy has become the fashionable option for people 'intolerant' to dairy products. It's little known that soy is the second most common allergen. Only 1 per cent of the population is truly allergic to cows' milk and, of those, two-thirds will also be intolerant to soy milk. In addition, soy milk is high in aluminium. That's because the soy protein isolate it's made from is acid-washed in aluminium tanks. No wonder it tastes bad. 

Can soy affect your thyroid? 
It's been known for years that phytoestrogens in soy depress thyroid function. In Japan, 1991 research showed that 30g of soy a day results in a huge increase in thyroid-stimulating hormone. This can cause goitre, hypothyroidism, and auto-immune thyroid disease. 

I'm pregnant. Should I avoid soy? 
Probably, and especially if you're vegetarian. A new study of babies born to vegetarian mothers showed that baby boys had a five-fold risk of hypospadias, a birth defect of the penis. The researchers suggest this was due to greater exposure to phytoestrogen rich-foods, especially soy. Inappropriate hormone levels such as that caused by a high intake of soy during the first 12 weeks of pregnancy can also cause damage to the fetus's developing brain. 

But surely I can feed my baby soy formula? It must be safe: it's available in every supermarket and chemist (pharmacy). 
Soy-fed babies are taking part in 'a large, uncontrolled and basically unmonitored human infant experiment', said Daniel Sheehan, director of the FDA's National Center for Toxicological Research, in 1998. A newborn baby's sole food is the milk it drinks: a soy-fed baby receives the equivalent of five birth control pills' worth of estrogen every day, according to Mike Fitzpatrick. These babies' isoflavone levels were found to be from 13,000 to 22,000 times higher than in non-soy fed infants. 

As a result of this phytoestrogen overload, soy-fed babies have a two-fold risk of developing thyroid abnormalities including goitre and auto-immune thyroiditis. Boys risk retarded physical maturation, while girls risk early puberty (1 per cent of girls now show signs of puberty, such as breast development or pubic hair, before the age of three) and infertility. Researchers have also suggested that diabetes, changes in the central nervous system, extreme emotional behaviour, asthma, immune system problems, pituitary insufficiency and IBS may be caused by high phytoestrogen intake in early life. 

Last year, compounds in soy were also implicated in the development of infantile leukaemia. Current government (UK) advice is that breast is best and that soy formula should not be given to infants unless on the advice of a health professional. 

Can soy help with prostate cancer? 
Ex-junk bond trader Michael Milken certainly thinks so. He consumes 40g of soy protein every day with that hope in mind. The science is less conclusive - a recent study on Japanese-Americans living in Hawaii showed that men who had eaten two or more servings of tofu a week during mid-life not only had 'accelerated brain ageing', and more than twice the incidence of Alzheimer's and dementia, but also looked five years older than those men who didn't. 

My mother died of breast cancer and I've been advised by both mainstream and complementary medical sources that increasing my soy intake may offer me protection against the disease. Is this true? 

The evidence is highly inconclusive. In The Breast Cancer Protection Diet , published last year, Dr Bob Arnot states that eating between 35g and 60g of soy protein daily protects against breast cancer by raising intake of the oestrogen-blocker genistein. But this ignores contrary evidence. In 1996, research showed that women eating soy had an increased incidence of epithelial hyperplasia, a condition that presages malignancy. In 1997, genistein in the diet was also found to stimulate human breast cells to enter the cell cycle. As a result, the researchers advised women not to eat soy products to prevent breast cancer. 

But surely soy prevents osteoporosis, the bone thinning that particularly affects post-menopausal women? 
No. In fact, soy blocks calcium and causes a deficiency of vitamin D, both of which are needed for strong bones, say American nutritionists and soy debunkers Sally Fallon and Mary G Enig. 

Is there any kind of soy product I can safely eat? 
Yes. Fermented soy products, such as soy sauce, tempeh and miso. The long fermentation process counteracts the effects of natural toxins in soy. 

Can I avoid soy? 
It's hard. You can stop eating the obvious candidates such as soy milk and tofu, but soy is also to be found in breakfast cereals, ice cream, convenience food such as hamburgers, fish fingers and lasagne, and all manner of baked goods from cakes and biscuits to tortillas and bread. If that's your mission in life, read labels carefully, and eat organic processed foods wherever possible. 

Finally, the pro-soy lobby always says that, in the US, a quarter of the population has been fed infant soy formula for 30 to 40 years, with no adverse health problems. So why should I worry? 
Scientists are only just beginning to research and understand the harmful long-term effects that eating large quantities of soy can have on the human body. As Fallon and Enig write: 'The industry has known for years that soy contains many toxins. At first they told the public that the toxins were removed by processing. Then they claimed that these substances were beneficial.' Sounds like there's a big battle ahead. 

For further information, contact www.soyonlineservice.co.nz, a detailed information resource on soy run by biochemist Dr Mike Fitzpatrick. Sally Fallon and Mary G Enig's excellent article 'Tragedy and Hype: The Third Soy Symposium' is on www.nexusmagazine.com. 'The Trouble With Tofu: Soy and the Brain' by John D MacArthur is on www.brain.com

Sunday Observer, August 27, 2000 
DR. MERCOLA'S COMMENT: An excellent report illustrating the dangers and common misconceptions of soy.
One point in the article that I would disagree with, however, is the author's statement that only 1 percent of the population is allergic to cow's milk. Although this may be true with the conventional means of allergy diagnosis, a large majority of the population has some degree of allergy or sensitivity to cow's milk, and would do much better avoiding it completely.

It would be best to avoid both cow's milk and soy "milk" and drink only water.

In his Guest Editorial of October 2000 in the Townsend Letter, Mr. Bill Sardi expresses surprise that the "greatest criticism of soy has come from natural health advocates." Yet most of the soy-based products on the market today can hardly be called "natural" foods. 
They are produced in factories at high temperatures and pressures and with the help of a variety of chemicals. The soybeans themselves are grown on huge corporate farms, most of which use toxic pesticides and herbicides. 
And a large percentage of soy foods come from genetically engineered plants. 

The fact that these products can be labeled "natural" only demonstrates the power and duplicity of soy interests in America. Dr. Zava is one of many honest scientists who have read the literature and discovered that soy contains:
• allergens
• mineral blockers
• enzyme inhibitors
• hormone modifiers 
• iodine blockers that interfere with normal thyroid function

Mr. Sardi says these characterizations are unfair and inaccurate. Like Dr. Zava, we do not repeat "claims" that soy contains antinutrients and toxins; we quote the scientific literature. Propaganda is "the systemic propagation of a given doctrine or of allegations reflecting its views and interests; material disseminated by the advocates of a doctrine." 

The promotion of soy as a miracle food has been both systematic and reflective of the doctrine of the food industry-that imitation foods are good for us and traditional foods are unhealthy. 

The soy campaign is, in fact, a case study in the use of propaganda to promote commercial interests. 
Mr. Sardi misquotes us frequently. We stated that soy was not considered fit to eat in Asia a few centuries ago (not a few decades ago); we did not "acknowledge that Asians consume 30 times more soy than North Americans." We pointed out studies showing that soy consumption in Asia is actually much lower than claimed-averaging 10 grams per person, less than two teaspoons. 

He does not seem to understand our argument that if soy is given as the reason Asians have lower rates of breast, prostate and colon cancer (simply because Asians supposedly eat large amounts of soy), then the same logic requires us to blame high rates of cancers of the esophagus, stomach, thyroid, pancreas and liver in Asian countries on consumption of soy. 

The truth is that we don't know exactly why Asian countries have certain types of cancers and western countries have other types. Eastern types of cancers have been attributed to many factors, of which soy consumption is one, but to claim that soy consumption is associated with lower rates of certain types of cancers while neglecting to mention that soy is also associated with higher rates of certain types of cancer is typical of industry dishonesty. 

Sardi acknowledges that Asians have higher rates of pancreatic cancers in one paragraph, but states that populations that consume high levels of soy exhibit decreased rates of pancreatic cancer in another. We are confused. 

Messina did indeed omit the Rackis study in his "exhaustive" survey. In fact, Messina did not include any animal studies on pancreatic effects. The Rackis study showed not only enlargement of the pancreas but also precancerous changes. And why the double standard? Why is it appropriate to use rats prone to develop breast cancer in experiments with soy, but not rats prone to demonstrate disturbances in the pancreas? 

It is standard scientific practice to use rats bred to react in specific ways in order to study effects over short periods of time. Normal rat chow did not cause pancreatic changes in sensitive rats-only rat chow based on soy. 

Birds don't eat soy, says Sardi. They know better. The Jameses should have known that soy is not appropriate for birds (something that would come as a surprise to the chicken industry.) The Jameses trusted the literature that came with the product, which stated that soy was an excellent food for birds. They also trusted the claims made for soy infant formula, that soy was "better than breast milk." 

They should have known that soy was not an appropriate food for humans, particularly for babies and so should Mr. Sardi and all the others out there who continue to provide glib assurances that soy formula is a good substitute for milk-based formula. 

The James learned a terrible lesson the hard way-that we should not trust claims for commercial food products, especially when these claims are too good to be true. In the absence of animal instinct, it's important to be skeptical. "Scientists cannot infer that animal data applies to humans," says Sardi. 

But they do it all the time, especially when the data show protective effects. Only when the studies are negative do scientists get reprimanded for using them. Onward with the double standard. It is axiomatic that when a chemical carcinogen is definitely active in one or more animal models, it can be stated with certitude that certain individuals of Homo sapiens would be at risk. 

Soy proponents don't want the public to know that phytoestrogens can induce tumors in several different species of animals.

The younger the animal, the more susceptible it is to the action of plant-based estrogens, as it frequently is to other carcinogens. Sardi objects to some of our references. 

One of them-Natural Health News published by L & H Vitamin Company- was given as an example of promotional advertising, which in this case claimed that soy could prevent cancer. He complains of a missing citation, number 58, but there is no missing citation. It is published on the website and was published in the Townsend Letter. 

Another criticism is that the average published date of our references is 13 years old. We were not aware that averaging publication dates was a valid method for assessing studies and reports. Nevertheless, one of the aims of our article was to show that studies indicating soy toxicity date back as far as fifty to sixty years, especially studies showing adverse affects on the thyroid gland. (Goitrogenic components have been confirmed very recently by Divi and Doerges.) 

Much good scientific work was done in past decades and it is work that can be depended upon because it took place before the soy industry began funding university research. 

We hope that citation of the following recent studies will make our "average published date" more acceptable: 
A study from Cornell University, published in the Journal of the American College of Nutrition, 1986, which found that children who develop diabetes mellitus were twice as likely to have been fed soy. 

A November 1994 warning published in Pediatrics in which the Nutrition Committee of the American Academy of Pediatrics advised against the use of soy formulas due to the diabetes risk. These warnings have been neglected ever since it was reported that the AAP accepted a multi-dollar donation from the Infant Formula Council for their new headquarters building outside Chicago. 

A 1994 article by Lonnerdal published in Acta Paediatr summarizing the reduced bioavailability of trace minerals due to high phytic acid content in soy infant formula; and high levels of manganese in soy formula compared to cows milk formula and breast milk. Excessive intake of manganese is linked to problems with the central nervous system. 

A 1996 report published in the German magazine Klin Padiatr describing the development of hypocalcemic tetany in an infant fed soy formula. 

Two 1997 studies published in Nutrition and Cancer. One found that phytoestrogens at levels close to probable levels in humans stimulate cellular changes leading to breast cancer; the other found that dietary soy suppressed enzymes protective of breast cancer in mice. 

A 1998 study published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition further confirming that soy-protein supplementation stimulates cell proliferation in human breast tissue. 
A 1998 study published in Cancer Research which found that dietary genistein enhances the growth of mammary gland tumors in mice. 
A 1998 study by Nagata and others published in the Journal of Nutrition which gives daily consumption of tofu in Japan's Gifu prefecture as less than 1 gram per day. 
A 1998 study published in Toxicology and Industrial Health indicating the phytoestrogens are potential endocrine disrupters in males. 
A March 12, 1999 Daily Express article with the headline "Soy Allergy/Adverse Effect Rates Skyrocket - Monsanto's Roundup-Ready Soy Blamed" 
A 1999 study at the Clinical Research Center at MIT, published in the Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Pacific Coast Reproductive Society which found that estrogens in soy had no effect on menopausal symptoms such as hot flashes and night sweats. 
May 1999 and June 2000 studies published in Brain Research indicating that phytoestrogens have adverse affects on brain chemistry. 
An April 2000 study published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Science which found that flavonoids, especially genistein, can cross the placenta and induce cell changes that lead to infant leukemia. 
An article published in Nutrition and Cancer 2000 which found lower testosterone levels and higher estrogen levels in Japanese men who consumed higher levels of soy foods. 
Publication in the British Journal of Urology, January 2000, of the study showing a five-time greater risk of delivering a boy with hypospadias, a birth defect of the penis, in mothers who ate a vegetarian diet during pregnancy. The researchers attributed high rates of the birth defect to phytoestrogens in soy products. 
An April 2000 study published in Carcinogenesis found that soy feeding stimulated the growth of rat thyroid with iodine deficiency, partly through a pituitary-dependent pathway. 
A June 2000 article in American Journal of Cardiology which found that soy had no impact on lipid levels in healthy postmenopausal women 
Evidence that disturbing results were omitted from a 1994 study presented to the FDA during the approval process for Roundup Ready Soybeans. Researchers found that raw Roundup Ready meal contained 27 percent more trypsin inhibitor and toasted Roundup Ready meal contained 18 percent more trypsin inhibitor compared to non-genetically manipulated controls. 
The most serious concerns regarding soy foods involve the use of soy infant formula. 
Sardi cites a 1998 Nutrition Reviews article by K. O. Klein of duPont Hospital for Children as proof that soy infant formulas do no harm. 
Yet in the article Klein notes that effects of isoflavones on various animal species include hormonal changes, increased uterine weight and infertility. " It is clear from the literature," says Klein, "that different species and different tissues are affected by isoflavones in markedly different ways. 
It is difficult to know which tissue, if any, are affected in infants, and the variation among species makes extrapolation to infants inappropriate." This is scientific double talk. 
Scientists may be reluctant to extrapolate but parents would certainly err on the side of caution if they knew that "isoflavones affect different tissues in markedly different ways." Klein says that medical literature provides "no evidence of endocrine effects. . and no changes in timing of puberty." 
But she makes no mention of the Puerto Rican study which found that consumption of soy formula correlated strongly with early maturation in girls. 
Why would Dr. Klein leave out any reference to the Puerto Rican study in her review? Is it because DuPont, owner of Protein Technologies International, is the leading manufacturer of soy protein isolate? 
Or is it because her review was sponsored by the Infant Formula Council? Or because Nutrition Reviews, which published her whitewash, is funded by industry giants, including Pillsbury, Hershey Foods, Kellogg, Roche, General Mills, Kraft, Campbell Soup, Monsanto, Coca-Cola, Cargill, Heinz, Nabisco, Proctor and Gamble and Pepsi-Cola? 
Soy can be implicated as a probable cause in the current epidemic of learning disabilities because it has similar effects in monkeys. Sardi is correct in stating the 1997 Journal of Pediatrics article makes no mention of soy. Neither does Time Magazine in their recent article on early puberty in girls. 
The Time article speculates that exogenous estrogens might be the cause. Is it not appropriate to speculate that estrogens in soy formula, which are not "reduced significantly by their first pass through the liver" as Sardi claims but end up in the blood of infants in huge amounts, might also be a cause? 
Perhaps it is the hormones in meat and milk, say the writers of the article. But hormonal levels in these products are minuscule compared to levels in soy formula. And in the Puerto Rican study, consumption of milk was negatively correlated with early maturation, which means that it might be protective. 
We do not claim that Asians have lower rates of osteoporosis-it is the soy supporters who make that claim. But if in fact they do have lower rates of bone loss, it is much more likely due to factors in the diet that are consumed in large amounts and that provide vitamin D and calcium, such as bone broth, shrimp and lard. 
We are aware of new research indicating that consumption of vitamin D is optimal at 4000 IU per day, not the RDA of 400 IU. This research is an excellent confirmation of the work of Weston Price who found that the diets of healthy primitives peoples had at least ten times more vitamin D than that of the average American of his day. (Sunlight will not provide adequate vitamin D unless a large portion of the skin is exposed during the summer months or in tropical latitudes.) 
The textbooks do indeed need to be rewritten to stress consumption of vitamin-D-rich animal foods and to minimize consumption of foods that increase our requirements for vitamin D-like soy. Shrimp sauces and shrimp pastes used in Asia and Africa are made from dried shrimp, hence very concentrated. 
They are eaten daily, often at every meal and could be expected to provide vitamin D in amounts greatly exceeding vitamin D intake levels in the US. The vitamin D content of butter varies with the feed of the animals. Butter from cows on green growing grass is likely to provide far more vitamin D than butter from cows in confinement. We advocate consumption of butter from pasture-fed animals (and eggs, lard and other animal foods for the same).
Townsend Letter April 2001 213:100-103
 

New research indicates that soybeans and soy-based foods, a staple in the diets of many health-conscious consumers, may promote kidney stones in those prone to the painful condition. 
The researchers measured nearly a dozen varieties of soybeans for oxalate, a compound that can bind with calcium in the kidney to form kidney stones. 
They also tested 13 types of soy-based foods, finding enough oxalate in each to potentially cause problems for people with a history of kidney stones, according to Linda Massey, Ph.D., at Washington State University in Spokane.
The amount of oxalate in the commercial products easily eclipsed the American Dietetic Association's 10 milligram-per-serving recommendation for patients with kidney stones, with some foods reaching up to 50 times higher than the suggested limit, she noted. 
"Under these guidelines, no soybean or soy-[based] food tested could be recommended for consumption by patients with a personal history of kidney stones," she said. 
No one had previously examined soy foods for oxalate, thus the researchers are the first to identify oxalate in store-bought products like tofu, soy cheese and soy drinks. Other foods, such as spinach and rhubarb, also contain significant oxalate levels, but are not as widely consumed for their presumed health benefits, Massey said. 
During their testing, the researchers found the highest oxalate levels in textured soy protein, which contains up to 638 milligrams of oxalate per 85-gram serving. 
Soy cheese had the lowest oxalate content, at 16 milligrams per serving. Spinach, measured during previous research, has approximately 543 milligrams per one-cup (2 oz. fresh) serving. 
Soy, a natural source of protein, fiber and healthy oils, is used to enhance a myriad of foods, ranging from hamburgers to ice cream. It can be ground into flour and used in a variety of grain products, or formed into chunks and ground like meat. 
Soy is also being studied for its potential to lower cholesterol, reduce bone loss and prevent breast cancer. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration recently approved a new label on foods containing at least 6.25 grams of soy protein per serving that boasts of a reduced risk of cardiovascular disease. 
Oxalate, however, cannot be metabolized by the body and is excreted only through urine, Massey said. The compound has no nutritional value, but binds to calcium to form a mass (kidney stones) that can block the urinary system, she said. 
Further research is needed to find types of soybeans with less oxalate, or to develop a processing method to remove the compound before it reaches consumers, she added. 
No one knows precisely why kidney stones occur in particular individuals.
But Massey said high levels of oxalate in the urine increase the risk and those with a family history of the ailment are more likely to suffer from the condition; individuals with a low probability of kidney stones are unlikely to be affected by oxalate in soy-based foods. 
More than one million people were diagnosed with kidney stones in the United States in 1996, the most recent available data, according to the National Institutes of Health.
Stones can range in size from the diameter of a grain of rice to the width of a golf ball. An estimated 10 percent of the U.S. population, mostly men, will develop a kidney stone at some point in their lives, according to the NIH. 
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry September 2001 
 
DR. MERCOLA'S COMMENT: 
Yet one more nail in the coffin of non-fermented soy which I do not believe is designed to be eaten. This study suggests that the over one million patients with kidney stones should not consume soy.
If you are still brainwashed by the edible oil industry's incredibly effective media spin on soy, then please review the soy index page link below which has hundreds of pages describing the reason's you will not want to regularly consume non-fermented soy products.
Soy protein powders and soy formula are the worst offenders and I don't believe that they should be consumed by anyone.

Cultivation of soya

Soya is a frost-sensitive summer annual, and it takes about 75-80 days for the beans to fully mature; plants may reach 1 metre high. Seeds are borne in hairy pods which grow in clusters of three to five; each pod contains two or three seeds, which resemble peas. When the seeds are mature, the upright vine and foliage begin to shrivel and the leaves fall away. Harvesting by machine must be completed before the pods shatter.
Roundup® and other non-selective herbicides are used extensively for weed control in soya cultivation, but they cannot be applied to weeds within growing crops because they will kill the crop as well as the weeds. Using biotechnology, plants are being developed that are tolerant to Roundup® herbicide; farmers will be thus able to spray soya crops during the growing season.
Soya is now a global staple food and about 110 million tonnes of beans are produced, mainly in the United States (50%+), Brazil (20%), Argentina (10%) and China (8%). Individual farmer's crops are bulked before export. European oil mills process about 15 Mt of soya beans annually, mainly imported from the USA. Soya beans and their products account for 25% of US agricultural exports to the EU and were worth more than $2 bn last year.

Soya as a food ingredient

About two-thirds of all manufactured food products contain derivatives or ingredients made from soya. Before they can be used in food products the soya beans have to be cleansed, cracked, dehulled and rolled into flakes, which ruptures the oil cells for easy extraction. The oil is extracted using a food-grade solvent, n-hexane - mostly for production of vegetable oil and margarine. In its pure form as a vegetable oil, it is often used in salad dressings and mayonnaise; as a vegetable fat it is used for baking and frying. Soya lecithin acts as an emulsifier in some chocolate, breakfast cereals, ice cream, sweets and margarine. Soya oil is also used in a wide variety of non-food products eg soap, biological detergents, plastics, and CFC-free cooling agents; the derivative glycerine is used in the manufacture of emulsifiers for skin cream and softeners for gelatin capsules.
Soya flours were developed in the 1940s by grinding and screening defatted flakes; these are used to increase the shelf-life of many products and improve the colour of pastry crusts; the flour is free of gluten, so cannot replace all the wheat or rye flour in bread-making but can be used at about 15% to give a dense bread with a nutty flavour and moist quality. Texturised soy protein (TSP or TVP) is made from soya flour that is compressed until the fibres change in structure. It is available to home cooks as a dried, granular product and in chunk-sized pieces for rehydrating and use as a meat-replacer.
Following the development of methods to produce isolated soya proteins in the 1950s, it is also processed for use as soya protein in biscuits, sweets, diet drinks, pasta and frozen foods; it also improves the consistency of meat products. It is added to many foods including pizzas, noodles, bread, foods for special dietary needs, for instance soya drinks, which serve as a substitute for cows milk. Various cheese and other milk and meat substitute products, such as miso, tofu and tempeh, can be made by fermenting soya protein. In addition, naturally-brewed soya sauce uses a starter culture called koji, a member of the Aspergillus family, with a mixture of soya beans and wheat.

Soya in nutrition

Soya bean protein quality is comparable to meat and eggs. The vegetable oil is poly-unsaturated, has a low level of saturated fatty acids and is free from cholesterol, but contains both essential fatty acids - linoleic and linolenic. Soya beans and the foods made from them are also rich in iron, B vitamins, calcium and zinc. Soya protein is said to have the effect of reducing cholesterol levels in hypercholesteroaemic people (Anderson, 1995). The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is proposing to authorise the use of a health claim for foods which contain soy protein which will allow them to state that they can reduce the risk of heart disease. The action comes in response to a petition filed by Protein Technologies Inc (PTI), a leading supplier of soy proteins and a unit of DuPont. If such as claim is allowed soy will join oats as a food allowed to claim on packaging and labels that it "may reduce the risk of heart disease, as part of a diet low in saturated fat and cholesterol". Foods that would be able to carry the claim include soy milk, vegetable burgers and tofu (New Nutrition Business, 4(3), 1999).

Soya and phytoestrogens

Soya is an important source of a group of non-nutrients known as the phytoestrogens; compounds with structural and functional similarities to the natural oestrogenic hormones present in the body. Examples are daidzein and genistein, present at levels around 3mg/100g wet weight in raw beans. In certain situations these chemicals can behave like a very weak form of oestrogen.

Epidemiological studies (primarily from Japan, where soya consumption is high) suggest a beneficial, protective effect for the phytoestrogens against certain sex hormone-dependent cancers - including breast and prostate cancers. Phytoestrogens present in a wide range of food plants (including soya) may have deleterious effects on reproductive efficiency when consumed by animals; there is no evidence for a parallel effect in man. Work is under way which will give a better understanding of how the phytoestrogens in soya behave in humans, since these actions are complex and not completely understood.

Babies may be given soya-based formula milks for one of the following reasons: (1) a small number of babies cannot tolerate cows' milk; (2) some parents choose for themselves to feed their baby soya-based formulae because they have a family history of allergy or for other reasons; (3) soya-based formulae are made entirely from plants and this makes them acceptable to vegans and other groups who do not want to use feeds based on cows' milk. At present there is no evidence that phytoestrogens in soya-based formulae cause any problems.
The UK's Chief Medical Officer recommends that 'if your baby is under one year of age and your doctor has recommended that you feed your baby with a soya-based infant formula, you should continue to do so. If your baby is over one year of age, you should ask your doctor or health care professional about introducing your baby to cows' milk as babies can outgrow allergies. If you are using a soya-based formula, but not on the advice of your doctor or another health care professional, talk to your doctor or other health care professional about whether to continue using it or whether to switch to another type of feed'.

Genetically-engineered soya - the technology

Monsanto, the US-based multinational speciality chemical and pharmaceutical company, has developed a new soya bean plant which is genetically-engineered to be resistant to the Monsanto herbicide, Roundup®. In traditional soya varieties, Roundup® blocks the build-up of essential substances for growth of the soya plant, but the modified plant, Roundup ReadyTM produces a new type of protein enabling it to circumvent this blocker. One of the claimed advantages of using Roundup ReadyTM soya beans is that weeds can be controlled after the young beans have started to grow, with just one herbicide. Monsanto estimate that around one third less herbicide overall can be used with this variety compared with conventional crops.

Monsanto say that genetically-modified (GM) soya is indistinguishable from conventional beans in composition, nutrition and processing characteristics; a US company Genetic ID claims to have a test available that can detect the genetic alteration, but this method will only work prior to processing. The new protein is not found in soya oil or lecithin and it is claimed that protein traces in soya meal are inactivated during processing. People who are allergic to conventional soya products will also be allergic to the genetically-modified soya products.

Genetically-engineered soya - regulation

Oversight of this technology and other genetic modification techniques is provided by the US Department of Agriculture, the Food & Drug Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency. FDA ensures the safety of foods developed by genetic engineering through science-based risk evaluations. This requires developers of foods from modified plants to address whether known allergens have been transferred to the modified product; to demonstrate that the new food does not contain increased levels of previously-known toxic substances or new hazardous substances; and that the nutritional value of the product has not been compromised.
The final US approval for use of Roundup® herbicide with herbicide-tolerant soya beans was granted in Spring 1995 by the US Environmental Protection Agency. The EU authorities issued an import licence according to EC directive 90/220 (product release directive) in Spring 1996 - although this approval is restricted to import and processing. It is also approved as safe by Japan, Argentina and Mexico.
Genetically-engineered soya - production, processing and labelling

The 1996 USA crop of 64 million tonnes contained about 2% of GM soya beans. The 1997 crop contained approximately 15% GM beans. Monsanto says that segregating beans for mass markets would be economically and physically impractical for farmers, grain companies and shippers. The arrival of deliveries of mixed GM and traditional soya beans in Europe (9Mt out of a total European market of 13-14Mt) has resulted in widespread discussion over the safety and labelling of genetically-engineered ingredients in foods.

The UK's Advisory Committee on Novel Foods and Processes stated in 1994 that "the Roundup ReadyTM soya beans ...and products derived from these beans are equivalent to and as safe for human consumption as beans from conventional soya bean strains and products derived from them." At a UK press conference in August 1996, ACNFP Chairman Professor Derek Burke said:- "The beans are processed by a severe extraction procedures that destroy the plants' genetic material and also destroy the bacterial enzyme introduced to make it resistant... In the products there is no bacterial DNA or bacterial enzyme. Flour from the new soya is analytically indistinguishable from the traditional soya."

The USA's Institute of Food Technologists comments that 'food labels have been established to provide "material information" about a product, such as ingredients and nutrition information, or warnings about a health risk. Since genetically-modified foods do not pose any new or unique risks, such labels would not provide health or safety information and could mislead by implying that there is a risk'.

Commodity crops such as soya are traded on the international markets in huge amounts. Segregating of commodity crops requires separate production and handling facilities at every stage of the supply chain. The UK bread-baking industry has bought some supplies of 'identity-preserved' conventional soya from Canada, and the frozen-food supermarket chain Iceland is among many UK retailers avoiding the use of genetically-modified soya in their own-label products.

Agreement has been reached on an EC Regulation (1139/98) on the labelling of (GM) soya and maize (MAFF Food Safety Information Bulletin, July 98). This requires all food products containing GM soya ingredients to be clearly labelled. Declarations will appear in either the ingredients listing, for example, in relation to soya ingredients as follows: soya flour (produced from genetically modified soya); or soya (genetically modified) flour; or soya* flour; then as a footnote, which may be no smaller than the list of ingredients: * genetically modified; or * produced from genetically modified soya. In the case of products where there is no ingredients list, the words 'produced from genetically modified soya' must appear on the product label.

The Regulation came into effect on 1 September 1998. It will not however apply to products manufactured and labelled prior to the Regulation coming into force, nor to products in which neither novel protein nor DNA is present. The Regulation also contained a six month transition period for products where other forms of wording have been used to indicate the presence of GM material.

The UK Consumers' Association commented in the March 1999 edition of 'Which?' magazine that "any food ingredients containing GM material (protein or DNA) from soya are labelled. But where protein or DNA from the GM source is removed in the processing, the regulations consider that these ingredients are equivalent to conventional ones, and so don't have to be labelled. For example, some oils produced from GM soya, contain no detectable protein or DNA in the finished product.

Additives produced using GM technology are also exempt from GM labelling, although this is currently being reviewed and may change in the future. Currently, there is no list of agreed European ingredients that don't need labelling so it is up to the manufacturer to decide which ingredients are exempt. Outside Europe, the international agreements on labelling are still being debated."

Pressure group and public attitudes to genetic engineering in the food chain

Some pressure groups oppose all forms of genetic engineering, but others are either focusing on particular aspects of the technology in plants, or animals, or on environmental concerns. Some prioritise the issue of consumer choice - demanding the labelling of foods containing GM ingredients.

Providing effective communication about the benefits and risks of new technologies depends on understanding the underlying concerns of the public as well as the more technical issues. The public's perception of the risks of genetic engineering is mediated by their recognition of the tangible benefits of specific products of the technology, for example genetically engineered products with health- or environment-related benefits.
If information about genetic engineering in the food chain is perceived by the public as coming from a source that they do not trust, or promoting a particular vested interest, there is a danger that this could result in an unnecessarily negative perception of the technology by consumers. It is also useful to address some of the wider social issues (for example, worries about ethics) in the information provided, as these might also be driving consumer reactions (see publications by Dr Lynn Frewer and colleagues for further information).
Consumers around Europe have recently been questioned on their attitudes to GM foods. Across Europe, in a 5000-person MORI/Greenpeace poll, 59% were opposed to its development and 22% supported it, with the French and Danish coming out most strongly against. The British showed some of the most positive attitudes with only 51% opposing development. A separate survey in Germany found that 95% of consumers wanted mandatory labelling of these foods.

Some publications in the literature
• Anderson, J. W., Johnson, B. M. & Cook-Newell, M. E. (1995) Meta-analysis of the effects of soy protein intake on serum lipids. New England Journal of Medicine 333 276- 
• Burks, A. W. & Fuchs, R. L. (1995) Assessment of endogenous allergens in glyphosate-tolerant and commercial soybean varieties. Journal of Allergy & Clinical Immunology 96 1008- 
• Butler, D. (1996) Europe agrees a compromise on food labels. Nature 384 502-3 
• Frewer, L. J., Howard, C. & Shepherd, R. (1996) Effective communication about genetic engineering and food. British Food Journal 98 (4/5) 48-51 
• Frewer, L. J., Howard, C. & Shepherd, R. (1996) The influence of realistic product exposure on attitudes towards genetic engineering of foodstuffs. Food Quality & Preference 7 (1) 61-67 
• Frewer, L. J. & Shepherd, R. (1995) Ethical concerns and risk perceptions associated with different applications of genetic engineering: Interrelationships with the perceived need for regulation of the technology. Agriculture & Human Values 12 (1) Winter 48 -57 
• Tuley, L. (1996) Healthy outlook for soya proteins. IFI no 5 24/5 and 27/8 
Items from Nature magazine
• Distrust in genetically altered foods - editorial (1996). Nature 383 559 
• Genetic resistance spreads to consumers - news (1996). Nature 383 564 
• Trade war looms over gene-altered foods - news. (1996). Nature 384 301 
• Pros and cons of foreign genes in crops - correspondence (1997) Nature 385 290 
Further information from:-
• Advisory Committee on Novel Foods & Processes, Ergon House c/o Nobel House, 17 Smith Square, London SW1P 3JR tel. 020 7238 3000 (report on herbicide-tolerant soya beans in 1994 Annual Report) 
• Biotechnology & Biological Sciences Research Council PR Dept., Polaris House, North Star Ave, Swindon SN2 1UH tel 01793 413200 (including the booklet 'Ethics, Morality and Crop Biotechnology' by Roger Straughan and Michael Reiss) 
• Biotechnology in our Food Chain - website developed to provide a public information service on some of the key issues of interest to the public; explores the potential opportunities and risks associated with food-related biotechnology (http://www-biofuture.cbcu.cam.ac.uk) 
• European Federation of Biotechnology tel +31 70 3653857 (biotechnology handbook and leaflets) 
• Food Advisory Committee, Ergon House c/o Nobel House, 17 Smith Square, London SW1P 3JR tel. 020 7238 3000 (including Q/A on GM soya beans attached to press release issued as FAC15/96) 
• Food & Drink Federation, 6 Catherine St, London WC2B 5JJ tel. 020 7836 2460 (for a copy of booklets in the 'Food for our Future - a guide to modern biotechnology' series); web site address: http://www.foodfuture.org.uk 
• Genetic ID, 500 North Third St Suite 208, Fairfield Iowa, 52556, USA 
• Genetics Forum, 94 White Lion St, London N1 9PF tel. 020 7837 9229 (for booklets including 'Spilling the Genes - what we should know about genetically-engineered foods') 
• Green Alliance tel 020 7836 0341 (for copy of 'Why are environmental groups concerned about release of genetically modified organisms into the environment?' and other briefing documents); web site address: http://www.gn.apc.org/gralliance 
• Greenpeace, Canonbury Villas, London N1 2PN tel 020 7865 8100 (for a handout entitled 'Health and Environmental Risks of Genetically Modified Soya' and other briefing information) 
• Institute of Food Technologists - 221 N LaSalle St, Suite 300, Chicago Il 60601-1291, USA; tel 001 312 782 8424 and world wide web site at http://www.ift.org/ 
• Institute of Grocery Distribution, Grange Lane, Letchmore Heath, Watford WD2 8DQ tel. 01923 857141 
• http://www.foodstandards.gov.uk/industry/soyalist.htm (for lists of soya bean growers and distributors offering supplies of non GM soya) and for other information on soya (use the 'search' facility on the site) 
• Monsanto Europe S.A./N.V., Avenue de Tervuren 270-272, Tervurenlaan 270-272 Letter Box No 1, B-1150 Brussels tel 00 32 2 776 41 11 (for information packs including 'Plant Biotechnology - harvesting solutions for tomorrow's world' - produced jointly with the American Dietetic Association) 
• National Centre for Biotechnology Education tel 0118 987 3743 and web site http://www.ncbe.reading.ac.uk (for resources for biotechnology education) 
• National Farmers Union, 164 Shaftesbury Avenue, London WC2H 8HL tel. 020 7331 7200 (for information about their Biotechnology Working Party) 
• National Food Alliance, 5-11 Worship St, London EC2A 2BH tel. 020 7628 2442 
• The American Soybean Association, Rue du Commerce 20-22 bte 4 1040 Brussels - Belgium 
• The Food Commission (UK) Ltd, 3rd Floor, 5/11 Worship St, London EC2A 2BH tel. 020 7628 7774 
• The Soya Bean Information Centre, 59 Russell Square, London WC1B 4HJ tel. 0345 023288 (for handouts on soya and access to a 'Careline' operated by Monsanto) 
Compiled and Issued by:
IFR Communications
Institute of Food Research,
Norwich Research Park
Colney, Norwich NR4 7UA, UK
Tel: +44 (0) 1603 255328
Fax: +44 (0) 1603 255168
e-mail: ifr.communications@bbsrc.ac.uk
www site: http://www.ifr.bbsrc.ac.uk
06.00
  
The information and images contained within these pages are © Institute of Food Research unless otherwise stated. Information may be downloaded for educational and research purposes as long as the source is clearly credited.