The Simple Soya Truth
by Patrick
Quanten MD
I hope that
once you have finished reading this article you will never ever make an
issue out of soya. I have finally given in to putting down the
available information on the subject as I am astonished at the
continuing ignorance within the population. One would have hoped that
by now the message had filtered through to the masses, but it just
shows how powerful the advertising machine is and how little attention
our specialist advisers are giving to research that should have
fundamentally changed their views many years ago.
Why did we
get told to use soya, which is alien to the Western diet, in the first
place?
The answer
as to why?, is simply money. The basis on which we were sold this scam
is health, but the motivation is profit. A growing allergy problem
against dairy produce within Western Society, coupled with mad cows
disease and an increasing distrust of the farming and dairy industry,
left our dieticians floundering. They became a willing target for an
"alternate" protein source. Soya was just that. On top of that,
scientists quickly discovered that soya contained two isoflavones,
which they promoted for everything from menopausal relief to cancer
protection. Health areas that were desperate for new ideas and
suggestions of help showed how vulnerable the sufferer is, and proved a
gold mine for the unscrupulous exploiter.
Soya must
be good for you as the Asian cultures have eaten it for thousands of
years and have less cardiovascular disease and lower rates of
reproductive cancers. This generalised statement obviously ignores the
many other differences between the two cultures, as well as the
increased numbers of cancer of the oesophagus, stomach, liver,
pancreas, and thyroid in Asian countries. In laboratory test it is
these same types of cancers that are caused in animals by a diet high
in soya products.
On closer
inspection, the "information" given in the above statement is not only
a long way short of the whole truth, it is actually pretty close to a
damned lie. The tradition with soya is that it was fermented for a long
time, from six months to three years and then eaten as a condiment, not
as a replacement for animal foods. The so-called Asian diet - far from
centring around soya - is based on meat. Approximately 65% of Japanese
calorie intake comes from fish, while in China the same percentage
comes from pork. "They're not using a lot of soya in Asia - an average
of 2 teaspoons a day in China and up to a quarter cup in some parts of
Japan, but not a huge amount." So, while Asians were using limited to
moderate amounts of painstakingly prepared soya foods - the alleged
benefits of which are still controversial - Americans, especially
vegetarians, are consuming more soya products and isoflavones than any
culture in human history!
Oddly,
nowhere in industry promotion does anyone differentiate between
traditional, painstakingly prepared "Asian" soya foods and the modern,
processed items. And therein lies the rub. Modern soya protein foods in
no way resemble the traditional Asian soya foods, and may contain
carcinogens like nitrates, lysinoalanine, as well as a number of
anti-nutrients which are only significantly degraded by fermentation or
other traditional processing, not by our modern processing of food.
Once again a wonderful example of how our Western food processing
manages to turn perfectly good food sources into toxic products. In
this case you should take note of the kind of Western products we refer
to such as soya yoghurt, soya cheese, soya ice cream, soya burgers, and
so on.
Known
Problems
The soya
bean contains large quantities of natural toxins, which 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.
Soya beans
also contain haemagglutinin, a clot-promoting substance that causes red
blood cells to clump together.
One of the
biggest concerns about high intake of soya isoflavones is their clearly
defined toxic effect on the thyroid gland. Increased number of goitres,
but also Hashimoto's disease (an acute auto-immune disease) as well as
simple low thyroid function are a prominent feature of high soya
intake. Dr. Gillespie says the daily amount to cause thyroid problems
may be as low as 30 mg, or less than a serving of soya milk.
The problem
is even magnified for babies who are on substitute soya foods. They are
getting more soya isoflavones, at least on a bodyweight basis, than
anybody else. Mike Fitzpatrick, PhD, was quoted as saying: "When I
first did my review, I did compare the oestrogenic equivalents of the
contraceptive pill with how much soya infants and adults would be
consuming. It's at least the equivalent of one or two oestrogen pills
(contraceptive pills) a day, on an oestrogenic basis. I've been
criticised that it's not the same form of oestrogen, but in terms of
oestrogenicity, it's a crude but valid and alarming statistic."
Baumslag
mentions the high levels of the mineral manganese (no, not magnesium)
often found in soya formula. The problem of manganese is so serious
that even one soya manufacturer put warning labels on its soya milk.
The company's president, in a press release, states that "there is
mounting evidence of a correlation between manganese in soya milk
(including soya-based infant formula) and neurotoxicity in small
infants."
And we
haven't even touched upon the genetically modification of food
products! This is now so wide spread in the Western soya supply that
there is no longer a 100% guarantee of GM-free soya products.
Animal
studies link a high soya intake further to almost any dysfunction of
the metabolism one can think of, ranging from cancer, to intestinal and
absorption problems, to malfunctioning of the reproductive organs and
the nervous system. Mountains of evidence that is available to anyone
who cares to look! On line there are many sites that provide you with
all the information you need.
Food
Safety
There's
been such a rush to market isoflavones that the multinational
corporation, Archer Daniels Midlands, in 1998, petitioned the Food and
Drug Agency for GRAS (Generally Recognised As Safe) status for soya
isoflavones. For those who don't know GRAS, the designation is used for
foods, and in some cases, food additives, that have been used safely
for many years by humans.
Soya
protein has not been given USA GRAS (Generally Recognised As Safe)
status or pre-market approval because of its carcinogenic properties.
It is not even legal to add it to our food.
Soya
protein is also in breech of the World Health Organisation Codex
Standards. Why? Simply because the codex clearly states that, "when
tested by appropriate methods of sampling and examination, the product
shall not contain other poisonous substances which may represent a
hazard to health". And soya protein is known to contain several toxins,
dangerous to health!
Furthermore,
the General Guidelines for the Utilisation of Vegetable Protein
Products (VPP) in Foods state quite categorically that VPP intended for
human consumption should not represent a hazard to health. It goes on
to specify the kind of tests and regulations these products have to
pass. "The raw materials from which VPP are produced may contain
naturally occurring toxic or anti-nutritional factors. Some of these
factors may still be present in VPP after processing. In the light of
the above observations it becomes important that prior to the use as
human food, VPP be subjected to adequate testing to demonstrate safety
and appropriate nutritional quality. A distinct VPP needs to be tested
pursuant to this guideline only once, that is, to obtain a
toxicological and nutritional profile for VPP. Prior history of safe
use may be taken into account in the evaluation of a novel VPP proposed
for general consumption, but this alone is not necessarily sufficient
to preclude adequate pre-clinical testing by currently available, more
objective, laboratory animal feeding studies, and, where applicable,
studies using human volunteers."
The
overwhelming laboratory and clinical evidence about the effects of soya
proteins, of which all of the above is only a small selection, clearly
shows that the product does not and will never meet the WHO/Codex
Guidelines.
The
potential oral hazard of phyto-oestrogens has long been known by food
regulators such as the FDA. During his presentation at the 3rd
International Phyto-oestrogen Conference in 1995, FDA regulator Dr
Michael Bolger made direct reference to the soya isoflavones causing
infertility, uterine hypertrophy and testicular atrophy in rodents,
liver disease and reproductive failure in cheetah and menstrual cycle
effects on women. Rather than improving reproductive health problems,
it clearly aggravates them!
Further
reports can be classified as subacute toxicity (thyroid problems),
chronic toxicity (dementia, nervous disorders), reproductive toxicity
(infertility), teratogenic effects (baby deformities) and mutagenic
effects (DNA damage, stimulates cancer cell growth). Not a very nice
list for a product that is said to improve our health so dramatically
and one that is still daily recommended by our health professionals!
Conclusion
Soya
isoflavones are clearly biologically active - they affect change in
your body. It's no longer acceptable for the industry to see no bad,
hear no bad, and speak no bad. Legitimate concerns need to be studied -
and not studies funded by the industry, conducted by soya
scientists.
But why
wait years, while ignorant armies clash over this and that isoflavone
and studies that say one thing or another? So, why don't you start
making the difference today? If you no longer want to buy their
product, they will soon stop pestering you and stop producing the
product. If there is no market for it, there is no point in producing
it. Change the world through your action; never mind the talking.
If you do
choose to use soya, then the only safe way is the way it's been used by
Asians for thousands of years: fermented, in moderation, and as a
condiment. And that should have been the initial message in the first
place.
August
2003
|
HOME
