..


From: "Robert Cohen" notmilk@e...
Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 11:33 am
Subject: I'm so confused about Soy


ADVERTISEMENT



"I'm so confused about Soy."
That was the subject of Rob's letter to me:

Rob office@r... wrote:

"I don't trust what the media says about Soy.
There are only a few educated people that I
trust on this topic, and you and Dr. Mercola
are two of them, but you and he have opposing
views about soy. If Dr. Mercola is wrong, you
need to address some of the points he makes.
I know for a fact that there are many of your
readers who also subscribe to him. I look
forward to your reply. Thanks."

http://www.mercola.com/2004/dec/4/soy_truth.htm
________________________________________

Dear Rob,

Dr. Mercola would have you drink raw milk in the
name of good health, and that advice is disturbing
to me. He is also a proponent of the Neanderthal
diet and would have you eat raw meat too. Somehow,
he took up with the wrong crowd and displays quite
a bit of ignorance regarding his negative comments
on soy and other unhealthy nutritional advice.

Soymilk detractors (Sally Fallon, Price Pottinger,
Dr. Mercola, Soyonlineservice) would have you believe
that it is better to boil babies in hot oil than
serve them soymilk-based formula. Many people swallow
that unhealthy propaganda from the same folks who
receive financing from dairy famers and promoting
the consumption of raw milk.

A paper in the May 2004 issue of the Journal of
Nutrition (May;134(5):1220S-4S) advises otherwise.

After examining clinical evidence of the mechanisms
of isoflavones and bioflavinoids contained in soymilk,
scientists wrote:

"Soy protein has been used in infant feeding in the West
for nearly 100 years. Soy protein infant formulas have
evolved in this interval to become safe and effective
alternatives for infants whose nutritional needs are not
met with human milk or formulas based on cow's milk.
Modern soy formulas meet all nutritional requirements and
safety standards of the Infant Formula Act of 1980."

Is soy formula safe for your child? The Journal Nutrition
believes so. The article concludes:

"Available evidence from adult human and infant
populations indicates that dietary isoflavones in soy
infant formulas do not adversely affect human growth,
development, or reproduction."

Much of what Dr. Mercola says is based upon rat
research which I totally reject.

Consider this. Half of the cancers that rats get,
mice do not get. Half of the cancers that mice get,
rats do not get. If scientific research from one
tiny four-legged long-tailed furry rodent cannot be
applied to another, how can any man or woman of
science attempt to arbitrarily apply such animal
research to humans? Nutritional rat research can
only be applied to rats, which have different organs
and enzymes from humans, and lack gall bladders.
Rats cannot digest soy proteins. Humans can.

Mercola complains that soy contains isoflavones and
phytoestrogens. Well, Dr. Mercola should know that
brocolli contains isoflavones and phytoestorgens
too.

Are phytoestrogens in soy and broccoli hazardous?

According to Mercola.com and his group of soy-bashers
(soyonlineservice.com, Sally Fallon, and the Price
Pottinger Institute), broccoli is also a deadly poison
and must be avoided. So too, for that matter, should
you never again eat seeds, whole grains, berries, fruit,
vegetables, nuts, or sprouts. Let's explore why.

Despite the fact that phytoestrogens (plant estrogens)
are not steroids like human estrogen, there are those
who would have you induce vomiting, if ever you
swallowed a soy product containing isoflavones. My
advice to you is to not swallow their illogical line
of reasoning.

For each milligram of phytoestrogens that she eats
in soy products, the average American woman will also
consume an additional four milligrams of pytoestrogens
from fruits and vegetables. Advice to abstain from
phytoestrogens is insanity, and Internet hype and
hysteria has infected the good judgement of many
so-called health advocates. This includes many ignorant
physicians, who read one such article and assimilate
just enough information to offer erroneous and dangerous
health advice to their patients.

Phytoestrogens are widely distributed in plants. There
are three categories of phytoestrogens--isoflavones
(which are found in soy), lignans (seeds, fruits
and veggies), and coumestans (broccoli and sprouts).

So, if you take the advice of Internet soy-bashing
ignoramuses and do not drink soymilk because you fear
phytoestrogens, by all means, you must give up fruits,
veggies, nuts, and grains too.

The only reason that phytoestrogens are considered to be
very dangerous is that the name sounds like estrogen,
even though they are not steroid hormones, and even though
their mechanisms of action do not mimic estrogen. Beware
of phytoestrogens, you are told. Like the "boogeyman,"
phytoestrogens in fruit and veggies are gonna get you
while you sleep.

A publication in the February 2004 issue of the American
Journal of Clinical Nutrition (R. Ziegler, 2004;79:183-4)
suggests that women who eat high levels of soy isoflavones
have lower rates of breast cancer than those who consume
low levels of isoflavones.

Dr. Regina Ziegler is a researcher with the National Cancer
Institute. She has taught health and nutrition courses at
Yale and Harvard Universities. Ziegler writes:

"The daily intake of phytoestrogens in white U.S
women has been estimated to be 1 mg, with 80% from
lignans, 20% from isoflavones, and 0.1 from coumestans."

************************************************** ****
In other words, according to Ziegler, an expert in her
field, Americans eat four times the amount of
phytoestrogens in fruit and veggies as they do from
soy products.
************************************************** ****
Ziegler continues:

"Historically, breast cancer rates in the United States
have been 4-7 times those in Asia, whereas isoflavone
intake in the United States is 1% that in Asian
populations."

So should you take Mercola's advice and eliminate soy
and all fruits and vegetables because of phytoestrogens?
Should you also follow his dietary advice by eating
raw milk and dairy products and raw meat? If you follow
Mercola, you will be led into a cave with other
Neanderthals.

You might consider contrary advice. An apple a day
does keep the doctor away because of those magical
phytoestrogens. So too do brown rice and almonds,
broccoli, and fresh sprouts. Go heavy on the soy.

Dead raw flesh and cooked animal parts should not
be served with body fluids from diseased animals.
Every cell in your miraculous body craves life, not
death. Cells and enzymes from carrots and oranges.
Green plants containing chlorophyll, and calcium
with magnesium in a proportion that is efficiently
utilized by the human body. A rose will never become
a dead chicken, even if it is so re-named. Neither
would a phytoestrogen become a steroid hormone, nor
act like one.

Mercola has also criticized soy for the presence of
phytates.

Are Wheaties (with soy milk) Hazardous to Your Health?

Of course not, but Dr. Mercola urges you to believe otherwise.

Wheaties cereal contains phytates.

Dairy producers see soymilk as the new kid on the block, and
they are running scared. Their strategy is to spread rumors
about soy because it contains phytates. Perish the thought,
phytates? Quick, induce vomiting. Call Poison Control.
Where's the stomach pump?

One bowl of cereal (portion size is defined on the side of a
box of Wheaties) is equal to: 3/4 cup of cereal and 1/2 cup
of milk.

If the soy naysayers are correct, and if you enjoy a bowl of
Wheaties for breakfast, that single portion of cereal will
contain more than 2.5 times the amount of phytates as will
the soymilk used to moisten that breakfast of champions.

Dr. Anthony Mercola writes:

"Soybeans are high in phytic acid...It's a substance that
can block the uptake of essential minerals... Scientists are
in general agreement that grain- and legume-based diets high
in phytates contribute to widespread mineral deficiencies in
third world countries. 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."

Sally Fallon director of the Weston Price Foundation echoes
Mercola's lack of wisdom (almost word for word):

"Soybeans are also high in phytic acid or phytates....which
blocks the uptake of essential minerals-calcium, magnesium,
iron and especially zinc-in the intestinal tract. Scientists
are in general agreement that grain and legume based diets
high in phytates contribute to widespread mineral
deficiencies in third world countries. 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 rice based diets prevents their absorption."

A website registered in New Zealand offers similar
disinformation. Soy Online Service (should be re-named Soy
Offline Disservice). In a column titled "SoyToxins," they
write:

"There's plenty yet that you didn't know about soy! Soy
contains several naturally occurring compounds that are
toxic to humans and animals...soy toxins such as phytic
acid...have the ability to target specific organs, cells and
enzyme pathways and their effects can be devastating....As
with any toxin there will be a dose at which negative
effects are not observed. Soy Online Services have examined
the scientific data on the soy toxins and have uncovered
several alarming truths...There is no legislation to protect
consumers from soy toxins in raw soy products...all soy
products, no matter how well treated, contain low to
moderate levels of soy toxins; processing cannot remove them
all of any of them."

Since soymilk is the bone of contention, I chose its phytate
content to serve as a baseline for comparison to wheat
products.

Charts contained on pages 30-34 of Food Phytates (edited by
Rukma Reddy and Shridhar Sathe, CRC Press, ISBN # 1-56676-
867-5) reveal:

The percentage of phytates in soymilk is listed as 0.11%.

Wheat has been called the "Staff of Life."

Durham wheat contains 8 times more phytates than soymilk
(0.88%).

Whole wheat bread contains almost 4 times more phytates than
soymilk (0.43%).

Wheaties, contain nearly fourteen times more phytates than
soymilk (1.52%).

Let's use common logic here. If wheat contains more phytates
than soymilk, then wheat should not be eaten either, right?
What a silly claim soymilk detractors make. It is without
merit.

A typical portion of breakfast cereal consists of two
ingredients, cereal & milk. The proportions: three-quarters
of a cup of Wheaties weighs 22.5 grams. One-half cup of
soymilk weighs 122.5 grams. Ergo, the wheaties contain 342
milligrams of phytates. The soymilk contains 135 milligrams
of phytates.

Now, let's get to the point of this. In their introduction
and summary of the scientific substantiation to follow, the
authors of Food Phytates write:

"Recent investigations have focused on the beneficial effect
of food phytates, based upon their strong mineral-chelating
property...The beneficial effects include lowering of serum
cholesterol and triglycerides and protection against certain
diseases such as cardiovascular diseases, renal stone
formation, and certain types of cancers."

So you see, phytates are healthy for you. Phytates represent
a prime example of using food for medicine.

Of course, if you happen to believe all of the negative soy
hype, skip the Wheaties. Skip the soymilk. You can always
have a corn muffin, right? Let's go to the phytate chart.
What percentage of corn bread is phytates? Oh, no. Corn
muffins contain twelve times the percentage of phytates as
soymilk, or 1.36%. An extra-large 6-ounce corn muffin (168
grams) contains 228 milligrams of phytates, midway between
the (3/4 cup) Wheaties and (1/2 cup) soymilk.

So, take your pick. All of this anti-phytate rhetoric is
either A) serious stuff B) ridiculous propaganda.

For health, eat isoflavones and phytoestrogens. In that
regard, no fruit, vegetabhle, grain, or legume is more
blessed with nature's healing chemicals than soy. My best
advice to you would be to reject Mercola's suggestion
to eat raw milk and raw meat. Your body will thank you.

Robert Cohen
http://www.notmilk.com

"Ron" wrote in message
om...
.

of course soy is safe, it makes an excellent feed for dairy cows

Jim Webster

"Ron" wrote in message
om...
.

of course soy is safe, it makes an excellent feed for dairy cows

Jim Webster

After a breakfast of soy flakes and milk, the mother can breast feed and
everyone is happy.

"I'm so confused about Soy."
That was the subject of Rob's letter to me:

Rob office@r... wrote:

"I don't trust what the media says about Soy.
There are only a few educated people that I
trust on this topic, and you and Dr. Mercola
are two of them, but you and he have opposing
views about soy. If Dr. Mercola is wrong, you
need to address some of the points he makes.
I know for a fact that there are many of your
readers who also subscribe to him. I look
forward to your reply. Thanks."

http://www.mercola.com/2004/dec/4/soy_truth.htm
________________________________________

Dear Rob,

Dr. Mercola would have you drink raw milk in the
name of good health, and that advice is disturbing
to me. He is also a proponent of the Neanderthal
diet and would have you eat raw meat too. Somehow,
he took up with the wrong crowd and displays quite
a bit of ignorance regarding his negative comments
on soy and other unhealthy nutritional advice.

Soymilk detractors (Sally Fallon, Price Pottinger,
Dr. Mercola, Soyonlineservice) would have you believe
that it is better to boil babies in hot oil than
serve them soymilk-based formula. Many people swallow
that unhealthy propaganda from the same folks who
receive financing from dairy famers and promoting
the consumption of raw milk.

A paper in the May 2004 issue of the Journal of
Nutrition (May;134(5):1220S-4S) advises otherwise.

After examining clinical evidence of the mechanisms
of isoflavones and bioflavinoids contained in soymilk,
scientists wrote:

"Soy protein has been used in infant feeding in the West
for nearly 100 years. Soy protein infant formulas have
evolved in this interval to become safe and effective
alternatives for infants whose nutritional needs are not
met with human milk or formulas based on cow's milk.
Modern soy formulas meet all nutritional requirements and
safety standards of the Infant Formula Act of 1980."

Is soy formula safe for your child? The Journal Nutrition
believes so. The article concludes:

"Available evidence from adult human and infant
populations indicates that dietary isoflavones in soy
infant formulas do not adversely affect human growth,
development, or reproduction."

Much of what Dr. Mercola says is based upon rat
research which I totally reject.

Consider this. Half of the cancers that rats get,
mice do not get. Half of the cancers that mice get,
rats do not get. If scientific research from one
tiny four-legged long-tailed furry rodent cannot be
applied to another, how can any man or woman of
science attempt to arbitrarily apply such animal
research to humans? Nutritional rat research can
only be applied to rats, which have different organs
and enzymes from humans, and lack gall bladders.
Rats cannot digest soy proteins. Humans can.

Mercola complains that soy contains isoflavones and
phytoestrogens. Well, Dr. Mercola should know that
brocolli contains isoflavones and phytoestorgens
too.

Are phytoestrogens in soy and broccoli hazardous?

According to Mercola.com and his group of soy-bashers
(soyonlineservice.com, Sally Fallon, and the Price
Pottinger Institute), broccoli is also a deadly poison
and must be avoided. So too, for that matter, should
you never again eat seeds, whole grains, berries, fruit,
vegetables, nuts, or sprouts. Let's explore why.

Despite the fact that phytoestrogens (plant estrogens)
are not steroids like human estrogen, there are those
who would have you induce vomiting, if ever you
swallowed a soy product containing isoflavones. My
advice to you is to not swallow their illogical line
of reasoning.

For each milligram of phytoestrogens that she eats
in soy products, the average American woman will also
consume an additional four milligrams of pytoestrogens
from fruits and vegetables. Advice to abstain from
phytoestrogens is insanity, and Internet hype and
hysteria has infected the good judgement of many
so-called health advocates. This includes many ignorant
physicians, who read one such article and assimilate
just enough information to offer erroneous and dangerous
health advice to their patients.

Phytoestrogens are widely distributed in plants. There
are three categories of phytoestrogens--isoflavones
(which are found in soy), lignans (seeds, fruits
and veggies), and coumestans (broccoli and sprouts).

So, if you take the advice of Internet soy-bashing
ignoramuses and do not drink soymilk because you fear
phytoestrogens, by all means, you must give up fruits,
veggies, nuts, and grains too.

The only reason that phytoestrogens are considered to be
very dangerous is that the name sounds like estrogen,
even though they are not steroid hormones, and even though
their mechanisms of action do not mimic estrogen. Beware
of phytoestrogens, you are told. Like the "boogeyman,"
phytoestrogens in fruit and veggies are gonna get you
while you sleep.

A publication in the February 2004 issue of the American
Journal of Clinical Nutrition (R. Ziegler, 2004;79:183-4)
suggests that women who eat high levels of soy isoflavones
have lower rates of breast cancer than those who consume
low levels of isoflavones.

Dr. Regina Ziegler is a researcher with the National Cancer
Institute. She has taught health and nutrition courses at
Yale and Harvard Universities. Ziegler writes:

"The daily intake of phytoestrogens in white U.S
women has been estimated to be 1 mg, with 80% from
lignans, 20% from isoflavones, and 0.1 from coumestans."

************************************************* *****
In other words, according to Ziegler, an expert in her
field, Americans eat four times the amount of
phytoestrogens in fruit and veggies as they do from
soy products.
************************************************* *****
Ziegler continues:

"Historically, breast cancer rates in the United States
have been 4-7 times those in Asia, whereas isoflavone
intake in the United States is 1% that in Asian
populations."

So should you take Mercola's advice and eliminate soy
and all fruits and vegetables because of phytoestrogens?
Should you also follow his dietary advice by eating
raw milk and dairy products and raw meat? If you follow
Mercola, you will be led into a cave with other
Neanderthals.

You might consider contrary advice. An apple a day
does keep the doctor away because of those magical
phytoestrogens. So too do brown rice and almonds,
broccoli, and fresh sprouts. Go heavy on the soy.

Dead raw flesh and cooked animal parts should not
be served with body fluids from diseased animals.
Every cell in your miraculous body craves life, not
death. Cells and enzymes from carrots and oranges.
Green plants containing chlorophyll, and calcium
with magnesium in a proportion that is efficiently
utilized by the human body. A rose will never become
a dead chicken, even if it is so re-named. Neither
would a phytoestrogen become a steroid hormone, nor
act like one.

Mercola has also criticized soy for the presence of
phytates.

Are Wheaties (with soy milk) Hazardous to Your Health?

Of course not, but Dr. Mercola urges you to believe otherwise.

Wheaties cereal contains phytates.

Dairy producers see soymilk as the new kid on the block, and
they are running scared. Their strategy is to spread rumors
about soy because it contains phytates. Perish the thought,
phytates? Quick, induce vomiting. Call Poison Control.
Where's the stomach pump?

One bowl of cereal (portion size is defined on the side of a
box of Wheaties) is equal to: 3/4 cup of cereal and 1/2 cup
of milk.

If the soy naysayers are correct, and if you enjoy a bowl of
Wheaties for breakfast, that single portion of cereal will
contain more than 2.5 times the amount of phytates as will
the soymilk used to moisten that breakfast of champions.

Dr. Anthony Mercola writes:

"Soybeans are high in phytic acid...It's a substance that
can block the uptake of essential minerals... Scientists are
in general agreement that grain- and legume-based diets high
in phytates contribute to widespread mineral deficiencies in
third world countries. 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."

Sally Fallon director of the Weston Price Foundation echoes
Mercola's lack of wisdom (almost word for word):

"Soybeans are also high in phytic acid or phytates....which
blocks the uptake of essential minerals-calcium, magnesium,
iron and especially zinc-in the intestinal tract. Scientists
are in general agreement that grain and legume based diets
high in phytates contribute to widespread mineral
deficiencies in third world countries. 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 rice based diets prevents their absorption."

A website registered in New Zealand offers similar
disinformation. Soy Online Service (should be re-named Soy
Offline Disservice). In a column titled "SoyToxins," they
write:

"There's plenty yet that you didn't know about soy! Soy
contains several naturally occurring compounds that are
toxic to humans and animals...soy toxins such as phytic
acid...have the ability to target specific organs, cells and
enzyme pathways and their effects can be devastating....As
with any toxin there will be a dose at which negative
effects are not observed. Soy Online Services have examined
the scientific data on the soy toxins and have uncovered
several alarming truths...There is no legislation to protect
consumers from soy toxins in raw soy products...all soy
products, no matter how well treated, contain low to
moderate levels of soy toxins; processing cannot remove them
all of any of them."

Since soymilk is the bone of contention, I chose its phytate
content to serve as a baseline for comparison to wheat
products.

Charts contained on pages 30-34 of Food Phytates (edited by
Rukma Reddy and Shridhar Sathe, CRC Press, ISBN # 1-56676-
867-5) reveal:

The percentage of phytates in soymilk is listed as 0.11%.

Wheat has been called the "Staff of Life."

Durham wheat contains 8 times more phytates than soymilk
(0.88%).

Whole wheat bread contains almost 4 times more phytates than
soymilk (0.43%).

Wheaties, contain nearly fourteen times more phytates than
soymilk (1.52%).

Let's use common logic here. If wheat contains more phytates
than soymilk, then wheat should not be eaten either, right?
What a silly claim soymilk detractors make. It is without
merit.

A typical portion of breakfast cereal consists of two
ingredients, cereal & milk. The proportions: three-quarters
of a cup of Wheaties weighs 22.5 grams. One-half cup of
soymilk weighs 122.5 grams. Ergo, the wheaties contain 342
milligrams of phytates. The soymilk contains 135 milligrams
of phytates.

Now, let's get to the point of this. In their introduction
and summary of the scientific substantiation to follow, the
authors of Food Phytates write:

"Recent investigations have focused on the beneficial effect
of food phytates, based upon their strong mineral-chelating
property...The beneficial effects include lowering of serum
cholesterol and triglycerides and protection against certain
diseases such as cardiovascular diseases, renal stone
formation, and certain types of cancers."

So you see, phytates are healthy for you. Phytates represent
a prime example of using food for medicine.

Of course, if you happen to believe all of the negative soy
hype, skip the Wheaties. Skip the soymilk. You can always
have a corn muffin, right? Let's go to the phytate chart.
What percentage of corn bread is phytates? Oh, no. Corn
muffins contain twelve times the percentage of phytates as
soymilk, or 1.36%. An extra-large 6-ounce corn muffin (168
grams) contains 228 milligrams of phytates, midway between
the (3/4 cup) Wheaties and (1/2 cup) soymilk.

So, take your pick. All of this anti-phytate rhetoric is
either A) serious stuff B) ridiculous propaganda.

For health, eat isoflavones and phytoestrogens. In that
regard, no fruit, vegetabhle, grain, or legume is more
blessed with nature's healing chemicals than soy. My best
advice to you would be to reject Mercola's suggestion
to eat raw milk and raw meat. Your body will thank you.

Robert Cohen
http://www.notmilk.com

After a breakfast of soy flakes and milk, the mother can breast feed and
everyone is happy.

"I'm so confused about Soy."
That was the subject of Rob's letter to me:

Rob office@r... wrote:

"I don't trust what the media says about Soy.
There are only a few educated people that I
trust on this topic, and you and Dr. Mercola
are two of them, but you and he have opposing
views about soy. If Dr. Mercola is wrong, you
need to address some of the points he makes.
I know for a fact that there are many of your
readers who also subscribe to him. I look
forward to your reply. Thanks."

http://www.mercola.com/2004/dec/4/soy_truth.htm
________________________________________

Dear Rob,

Dr. Mercola would have you drink raw milk in the
name of good health, and that advice is disturbing
to me. He is also a proponent of the Neanderthal
diet and would have you eat raw meat too. Somehow,
he took up with the wrong crowd and displays quite
a bit of ignorance regarding his negative comments
on soy and other unhealthy nutritional advice.

Soymilk detractors (Sally Fallon, Price Pottinger,
Dr. Mercola, Soyonlineservice) would have you believe
that it is better to boil babies in hot oil than
serve them soymilk-based formula. Many people swallow
that unhealthy propaganda from the same folks who
receive financing from dairy famers and promoting
the consumption of raw milk.

A paper in the May 2004 issue of the Journal of
Nutrition (May;134(5):1220S-4S) advises otherwise.

After examining clinical evidence of the mechanisms
of isoflavones and bioflavinoids contained in soymilk,
scientists wrote:

"Soy protein has been used in infant feeding in the West
for nearly 100 years. Soy protein infant formulas have
evolved in this interval to become safe and effective
alternatives for infants whose nutritional needs are not
met with human milk or formulas based on cow's milk.
Modern soy formulas meet all nutritional requirements and
safety standards of the Infant Formula Act of 1980."

Is soy formula safe for your child? The Journal Nutrition
believes so. The article concludes:

"Available evidence from adult human and infant
populations indicates that dietary isoflavones in soy
infant formulas do not adversely affect human growth,
development, or reproduction."

Much of what Dr. Mercola says is based upon rat
research which I totally reject.

Consider this. Half of the cancers that rats get,
mice do not get. Half of the cancers that mice get,
rats do not get. If scientific research from one
tiny four-legged long-tailed furry rodent cannot be
applied to another, how can any man or woman of
science attempt to arbitrarily apply such animal
research to humans? Nutritional rat research can
only be applied to rats, which have different organs
and enzymes from humans, and lack gall bladders.
Rats cannot digest soy proteins. Humans can.

Mercola complains that soy contains isoflavones and
phytoestrogens. Well, Dr. Mercola should know that
brocolli contains isoflavones and phytoestorgens
too.

Are phytoestrogens in soy and broccoli hazardous?

According to Mercola.com and his group of soy-bashers
(soyonlineservice.com, Sally Fallon, and the Price
Pottinger Institute), broccoli is also a deadly poison
and must be avoided. So too, for that matter, should
you never again eat seeds, whole grains, berries, fruit,
vegetables, nuts, or sprouts. Let's explore why.

Despite the fact that phytoestrogens (plant estrogens)
are not steroids like human estrogen, there are those
who would have you induce vomiting, if ever you
swallowed a soy product containing isoflavones. My
advice to you is to not swallow their illogical line
of reasoning.

For each milligram of phytoestrogens that she eats
in soy products, the average American woman will also
consume an additional four milligrams of pytoestrogens
from fruits and vegetables. Advice to abstain from
phytoestrogens is insanity, and Internet hype and
hysteria has infected the good judgement of many
so-called health advocates. This includes many ignorant
physicians, who read one such article and assimilate
just enough information to offer erroneous and dangerous
health advice to their patients.

Phytoestrogens are widely distributed in plants. There
are three categories of phytoestrogens--isoflavones
(which are found in soy), lignans (seeds, fruits
and veggies), and coumestans (broccoli and sprouts).

So, if you take the advice of Internet soy-bashing
ignoramuses and do not drink soymilk because you fear
phytoestrogens, by all means, you must give up fruits,
veggies, nuts, and grains too.

The only reason that phytoestrogens are considered to be
very dangerous is that the name sounds like estrogen,
even though they are not steroid hormones, and even though
their mechanisms of action do not mimic estrogen. Beware
of phytoestrogens, you are told. Like the "boogeyman,"
phytoestrogens in fruit and veggies are gonna get you
while you sleep.

A publication in the February 2004 issue of the American
Journal of Clinical Nutrition (R. Ziegler, 2004;79:183-4)
suggests that women who eat high levels of soy isoflavones
have lower rates of breast cancer than those who consume
low levels of isoflavones.

Dr. Regina Ziegler is a researcher with the National Cancer
Institute. She has taught health and nutrition courses at
Yale and Harvard Universities. Ziegler writes:

"The daily intake of phytoestrogens in white U.S
women has been estimated to be 1 mg, with 80% from
lignans, 20% from isoflavones, and 0.1 from coumestans."

************************************************* *****
In other words, according to Ziegler, an expert in her
field, Americans eat four times the amount of
phytoestrogens in fruit and veggies as they do from
soy products.
************************************************* *****
Ziegler continues:

"Historically, breast cancer rates in the United States
have been 4-7 times those in Asia, whereas isoflavone
intake in the United States is 1% that in Asian
populations."

So should you take Mercola's advice and eliminate soy
and all fruits and vegetables because of phytoestrogens?
Should you also follow his dietary advice by eating
raw milk and dairy products and raw meat? If you follow
Mercola, you will be led into a cave with other
Neanderthals.

You might consider contrary advice. An apple a day
does keep the doctor away because of those magical
phytoestrogens. So too do brown rice and almonds,
broccoli, and fresh sprouts. Go heavy on the soy.

Dead raw flesh and cooked animal parts should not
be served with body fluids from diseased animals.
Every cell in your miraculous body craves life, not
death. Cells and enzymes from carrots and oranges.
Green plants containing chlorophyll, and calcium
with magnesium in a proportion that is efficiently
utilized by the human body. A rose will never become
a dead chicken, even if it is so re-named. Neither
would a phytoestrogen become a steroid hormone, nor
act like one.

Mercola has also criticized soy for the presence of
phytates.

Are Wheaties (with soy milk) Hazardous to Your Health?

Of course not, but Dr. Mercola urges you to believe otherwise.

Wheaties cereal contains phytates.

Dairy producers see soymilk as the new kid on the block, and
they are running scared. Their strategy is to spread rumors
about soy because it contains phytates. Perish the thought,
phytates? Quick, induce vomiting. Call Poison Control.
Where's the stomach pump?

One bowl of cereal (portion size is defined on the side of a
box of Wheaties) is equal to: 3/4 cup of cereal and 1/2 cup
of milk.

If the soy naysayers are correct, and if you enjoy a bowl of
Wheaties for breakfast, that single portion of cereal will
contain more than 2.5 times the amount of phytates as will
the soymilk used to moisten that breakfast of champions.

Dr. Anthony Mercola writes:

"Soybeans are high in phytic acid...It's a substance that
can block the uptake of essential minerals... Scientists are
in general agreement that grain- and legume-based diets high
in phytates contribute to widespread mineral deficiencies in
third world countries. 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."

Sally Fallon director of the Weston Price Foundation echoes
Mercola's lack of wisdom (almost word for word):

"Soybeans are also high in phytic acid or phytates....which
blocks the uptake of essential minerals-calcium, magnesium,
iron and especially zinc-in the intestinal tract. Scientists
are in general agreement that grain and legume based diets
high in phytates contribute to widespread mineral
deficiencies in third world countries. 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 rice based diets prevents their absorption."

A website registered in New Zealand offers similar
disinformation. Soy Online Service (should be re-named Soy
Offline Disservice). In a column titled "SoyToxins," they
write:

"There's plenty yet that you didn't know about soy! Soy
contains several naturally occurring compounds that are
toxic to humans and animals...soy toxins such as phytic
acid...have the ability to target specific organs, cells and
enzyme pathways and their effects can be devastating....As
with any toxin there will be a dose at which negative
effects are not observed. Soy Online Services have examined
the scientific data on the soy toxins and have uncovered
several alarming truths...There is no legislation to protect
consumers from soy toxins in raw soy products...all soy
products, no matter how well treated, contain low to
moderate levels of soy toxins; processing cannot remove them
all of any of them."

Since soymilk is the bone of contention, I chose its phytate
content to serve as a baseline for comparison to wheat
products.

Charts contained on pages 30-34 of Food Phytates (edited by
Rukma Reddy and Shridhar Sathe, CRC Press, ISBN # 1-56676-
867-5) reveal:

The percentage of phytates in soymilk is listed as 0.11%.

Wheat has been called the "Staff of Life."

Durham wheat contains 8 times more phytates than soymilk
(0.88%).

Whole wheat bread contains almost 4 times more phytates than
soymilk (0.43%).

Wheaties, contain nearly fourteen times more phytates than
soymilk (1.52%).

Let's use common logic here. If wheat contains more phytates
than soymilk, then wheat should not be eaten either, right?
What a silly claim soymilk detractors make. It is without
merit.

A typical portion of breakfast cereal consists of two
ingredients, cereal & milk. The proportions: three-quarters
of a cup of Wheaties weighs 22.5 grams. One-half cup of
soymilk weighs 122.5 grams. Ergo, the wheaties contain 342
milligrams of phytates. The soymilk contains 135 milligrams
of phytates.

Now, let's get to the point of this. In their introduction
and summary of the scientific substantiation to follow, the
authors of Food Phytates write:

"Recent investigations have focused on the beneficial effect
of food phytates, based upon their strong mineral-chelating
property...The beneficial effects include lowering of serum
cholesterol and triglycerides and protection against certain
diseases such as cardiovascular diseases, renal stone
formation, and certain types of cancers."

So you see, phytates are healthy for you. Phytates represent
a prime example of using food for medicine.

Of course, if you happen to believe all of the negative soy
hype, skip the Wheaties. Skip the soymilk. You can always
have a corn muffin, right? Let's go to the phytate chart.
What percentage of corn bread is phytates? Oh, no. Corn
muffins contain twelve times the percentage of phytates as
soymilk, or 1.36%. An extra-large 6-ounce corn muffin (168
grams) contains 228 milligrams of phytates, midway between
the (3/4 cup) Wheaties and (1/2 cup) soymilk.

So, take your pick. All of this anti-phytate rhetoric is
either A) serious stuff B) ridiculous propaganda.

For health, eat isoflavones and phytoestrogens. In that
regard, no fruit, vegetabhle, grain, or legume is more
blessed with nature's healing chemicals than soy. My best
advice to you would be to reject Mercola's suggestion
to eat raw milk and raw meat. Your body will thank you.

Robert Cohen
http://www.notmilk.com

What about claims made that eating tofu increases chances of getting
dementia?
Based on report from Japan.
Ron wrote:
.


From: "Robert Cohen" notmilk@e...
Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 11:33 am
Subject: I'm so confused about Soy


ADVERTISEMENT



"I'm so confused about Soy."
That was the subject of Rob's letter to me:

Rob office@r... wrote:

"I don't trust what the media says about Soy.
There are only a few educated people that I
trust on this topic, and you and Dr. Mercola
are two of them, but you and he have opposing
views about soy. If Dr. Mercola is wrong, you
need to address some of the points he makes.
I know for a fact that there are many of your
readers who also subscribe to him. I look
forward to your reply. Thanks."

http://www.mercola.com/2004/dec/4/soy_truth.htm
________________________________________

Dear Rob,

Dr. Mercola would have you drink raw milk in the
name of good health, and that advice is disturbing
to me. He is also a proponent of the Neanderthal
diet and would have you eat raw meat too. Somehow,
he took up with the wrong crowd and displays quite
a bit of ignorance regarding his negative comments
on soy and other unhealthy nutritional advice.

Soymilk detractors (Sally Fallon, Price Pottinger,
Dr. Mercola, Soyonlineservice) would have you believe
that it is better to boil babies in hot oil than
serve them soymilk-based formula. Many people swallow
that unhealthy propaganda from the same folks who
receive financing from dairy famers and promoting
the consumption of raw milk.

A paper in the May 2004 issue of the Journal of
Nutrition (May;134(5):1220S-4S) advises otherwise.

After examining clinical evidence of the mechanisms
of isoflavones and bioflavinoids contained in soymilk,
scientists wrote:

"Soy protein has been used in infant feeding in the West
for nearly 100 years. Soy protein infant formulas have
evolved in this interval to become safe and effective
alternatives for infants whose nutritional needs are not
met with human milk or formulas based on cow's milk.
Modern soy formulas meet all nutritional requirements and
safety standards of the Infant Formula Act of 1980."

Is soy formula safe for your child? The Journal Nutrition
believes so. The article concludes:

"Available evidence from adult human and infant
populations indicates that dietary isoflavones in soy
infant formulas do not adversely affect human growth,
development, or reproduction."

Much of what Dr. Mercola says is based upon rat
research which I totally reject.

Consider this. Half of the cancers that rats get,
mice do not get. Half of the cancers that mice get,
rats do not get. If scientific research from one
tiny four-legged long-tailed furry rodent cannot be
applied to another, how can any man or woman of
science attempt to arbitrarily apply such animal
research to humans? Nutritional rat research can
only be applied to rats, which have different organs
and enzymes from humans, and lack gall bladders.
Rats cannot digest soy proteins. Humans can.

Mercola complains that soy contains isoflavones and
phytoestrogens. Well, Dr. Mercola should know that
brocolli contains isoflavones and phytoestorgens
too.

Are phytoestrogens in soy and broccoli hazardous?

According to Mercola.com and his group of soy-bashers
(soyonlineservice.com, Sally Fallon, and the Price
Pottinger Institute), broccoli is also a deadly poison
and must be avoided. So too, for that matter, should
you never again eat seeds, whole grains, berries, fruit,
vegetables, nuts, or sprouts. Let's explore why.

Despite the fact that phytoestrogens (plant estrogens)
are not steroids like human estrogen, there are those
who would have you induce vomiting, if ever you
swallowed a soy product containing isoflavones. My
advice to you is to not swallow their illogical line
of reasoning.

For each milligram of phytoestrogens that she eats
in soy products, the average American woman will also
consume an additional four milligrams of pytoestrogens
from fruits and vegetables. Advice to abstain from
phytoestrogens is insanity, and Internet hype and
hysteria has infected the good judgement of many
so-called health advocates. This includes many ignorant
physicians, who read one such article and assimilate
just enough information to offer erroneous and dangerous
health advice to their patients.

Phytoestrogens are widely distributed in plants. There
are three categories of phytoestrogens--isoflavones
(which are found in soy), lignans (seeds, fruits
and veggies), and coumestans (broccoli and sprouts).

So, if you take the advice of Internet soy-bashing
ignoramuses and do not drink soymilk because you fear
phytoestrogens, by all means, you must give up fruits,
veggies, nuts, and grains too.

The only reason that phytoestrogens are considered to be
very dangerous is that the name sounds like estrogen,
even though they are not steroid hormones, and even though
their mechanisms of action do not mimic estrogen. Beware
of phytoestrogens, you are told. Like the "boogeyman,"
phytoestrogens in fruit and veggies are gonna get you
while you sleep.

A publication in the February 2004 issue of the American
Journal of Clinical Nutrition (R. Ziegler, 2004;79:183-4)
suggests that women who eat high levels of soy isoflavones
have lower rates of breast cancer than those who consume
low levels of isoflavones.

Dr. Regina Ziegler is a researcher with the National Cancer
Institute. She has taught health and nutrition courses at
Yale and Harvard Universities. Ziegler writes:

"The daily intake of phytoestrogens in white U.S
women has been estimated to be 1 mg, with 80% from
lignans, 20% from isoflavones, and 0.1 from coumestans."

************************************************** ****
In other words, according to Ziegler, an expert in her
field, Americans eat four times the amount of
phytoestrogens in fruit and veggies as they do from
soy products.
************************************************** ****
Ziegler continues:

"Historically, breast cancer rates in the United States
have been 4-7 times those in Asia, whereas isoflavone
intake in the United States is 1% that in Asian
populations."

So should you take Mercola's advice and eliminate soy
and all fruits and vegetables because of phytoestrogens?
Should you also follow his dietary advice by eating
raw milk and dairy products and raw meat? If you follow
Mercola, you will be led into a cave with other
Neanderthals.

You might consider contrary advice. An apple a day
does keep the doctor away because of those magical
phytoestrogens. So too do brown rice and almonds,
broccoli, and fresh sprouts. Go heavy on the soy.

Dead raw flesh and cooked animal parts should not
be served with body fluids from diseased animals.
Every cell in your miraculous body craves life, not
death. Cells and enzymes from carrots and oranges.
Green plants containing chlorophyll, and calcium
with magnesium in a proportion that is efficiently
utilized by the human body. A rose will never become
a dead chicken, even if it is so re-named. Neither
would a phytoestrogen become a steroid hormone, nor
act like one.

Mercola has also criticized soy for the presence of
phytates.

Are Wheaties (with soy milk) Hazardous to Your Health?

Of course not, but Dr. Mercola urges you to believe otherwise.

Wheaties cereal contains phytates.

Dairy producers see soymilk as the new kid on the block, and
they are running scared. Their strategy is to spread rumors
about soy because it contains phytates. Perish the thought,
phytates? Quick, induce vomiting. Call Poison Control.
Where's the stomach pump?

One bowl of cereal (portion size is defined on the side of a
box of Wheaties) is equal to: 3/4 cup of cereal and 1/2 cup
of milk.

If the soy naysayers are correct, and if you enjoy a bowl of
Wheaties for breakfast, that single portion of cereal will
contain more than 2.5 times the amount of phytates as will
the soymilk used to moisten that breakfast of champions.

Dr. Anthony Mercola writes:

"Soybeans are high in phytic acid...It's a substance that
can block the uptake of essential minerals... Scientists are
in general agreement that grain- and legume-based diets high
in phytates contribute to widespread mineral deficiencies in
third world countries. 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."

Sally Fallon director of the Weston Price Foundation echoes
Mercola's lack of wisdom (almost word for word):

"Soybeans are also high in phytic acid or phytates....which
blocks the uptake of essential minerals-calcium, magnesium,
iron and especially zinc-in the intestinal tract. Scientists
are in general agreement that grain and legume based diets
high in phytates contribute to widespread mineral
deficiencies in third world countries. 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 rice based diets prevents their absorption."

A website registered in New Zealand offers similar
disinformation. Soy Online Service (should be re-named Soy
Offline Disservice). In a column titled "SoyToxins," they
write:

"There's plenty yet that you didn't know about soy! Soy
contains several naturally occurring compounds that are
toxic to humans and animals...soy toxins such as phytic
acid...have the ability to target specific organs, cells and
enzyme pathways and their effects can be devastating....As
with any toxin there will be a dose at which negative
effects are not observed. Soy Online Services have examined
the scientific data on the soy toxins and have uncovered
several alarming truths...There is no legislation to protect
consumers from soy toxins in raw soy products...all soy
products, no matter how well treated, contain low to
moderate levels of soy toxins; processing cannot remove them
all of any of them."

Since soymilk is the bone of contention, I chose its phytate
content to serve as a baseline for comparison to wheat
products.

Charts contained on pages 30-34 of Food Phytates (edited by
Rukma Reddy and Shridhar Sathe, CRC Press, ISBN # 1-56676-
867-5) reveal:

The percentage of phytates in soymilk is listed as 0.11%.

Wheat has been called the "Staff of Life."

Durham wheat contains 8 times more phytates than soymilk
(0.88%).

Whole wheat bread contains almost 4 times more phytates than
soymilk (0.43%).

Wheaties, contain nearly fourteen times more phytates than
soymilk (1.52%).

Let's use common logic here. If wheat contains more phytates
than soymilk, then wheat should not be eaten either, right?
What a silly claim soymilk detractors make. It is without
merit.

A typical portion of breakfast cereal consists of two
ingredients, cereal & milk. The proportions: three-quarters
of a cup of Wheaties weighs 22.5 grams. One-half cup of
soymilk weighs 122.5 grams. Ergo, the wheaties contain 342
milligrams of phytates. The soymilk contains 135 milligrams
of phytates.

Now, let's get to the point of this. In their introduction
and summary of the scientific substantiation to follow, the
authors of Food Phytates write:

"Recent investigations have focused on the beneficial effect
of food phytates, based upon their strong mineral-chelating
property...The beneficial effects include lowering of serum
cholesterol and triglycerides and protection against certain
diseases such as cardiovascular diseases, renal stone
formation, and certain types of cancers."

So you see, phytates are healthy for you. Phytates represent
a prime example of using food for medicine.

Of course, if you happen to believe all of the negative soy
hype, skip the Wheaties. Skip the soymilk. You can always
have a corn muffin, right? Let's go to the phytate chart.
What percentage of corn bread is phytates? Oh, no. Corn
muffins contain twelve times the percentage of phytates as
soymilk, or 1.36%. An extra-large 6-ounce corn muffin (168
grams) contains 228 milligrams of phytates, midway between
the (3/4 cup) Wheaties and (1/2 cup) soymilk.

So, take your pick. All of this anti-phytate rhetoric is
either A) serious stuff B) ridiculous propaganda.

For health, eat isoflavones and phytoestrogens. In that
regard, no fruit, vegetabhle, grain, or legume is more
blessed with nature's healing chemicals than soy. My best
advice to you would be to reject Mercola's suggestion
to eat raw milk and raw meat. Your body will thank you.

Robert Cohen
http://www.notmilk.com

I repeat, there have been concentrated rat studies. There is no human
evidence of any problem with Soy. There is plenty of human evidence of
cardio vascular problems from eating animals.

wrote:
What about claims made that eating tofu increases chances of getting
dementia?
Based on report from Japan.
Ron wrote:

.


From: "Robert Cohen" notmilk@e...
Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 11:33 am
Subject: I'm so confused about Soy


ADVERTISEMENT



"I'm so confused about Soy."
That was the subject of Rob's letter to me:

Rob office@r... wrote:

"I don't trust what the media says about Soy.
There are only a few educated people that I
trust on this topic, and you and Dr. Mercola
are two of them, but you and he have opposing
views about soy. If Dr. Mercola is wrong, you
need to address some of the points he makes.
I know for a fact that there are many of your
readers who also subscribe to him. I look
forward to your reply. Thanks."

http://www.mercola.com/2004/dec/4/soy_truth.htm
________________________________________

Dear Rob,

Dr. Mercola would have you drink raw milk in the
name of good health, and that advice is disturbing
to me. He is also a proponent of the Neanderthal
diet and would have you eat raw meat too. Somehow,
he took up with the wrong crowd and displays quite
a bit of ignorance regarding his negative comments
on soy and other unhealthy nutritional advice.

Soymilk detractors (Sally Fallon, Price Pottinger,
Dr. Mercola, Soyonlineservice) would have you believe
that it is better to boil babies in hot oil than
serve them soymilk-based formula. Many people swallow
that unhealthy propaganda from the same folks who
receive financing from dairy famers and promoting
the consumption of raw milk.

A paper in the May 2004 issue of the Journal of
Nutrition (May;134(5):1220S-4S) advises otherwise.

After examining clinical evidence of the mechanisms
of isoflavones and bioflavinoids contained in soymilk,
scientists wrote:

"Soy protein has been used in infant feeding in the West
for nearly 100 years. Soy protein infant formulas have
evolved in this interval to become safe and effective
alternatives for infants whose nutritional needs are not
met with human milk or formulas based on cow's milk.
Modern soy formulas meet all nutritional requirements and
safety standards of the Infant Formula Act of 1980."

Is soy formula safe for your child? The Journal Nutrition
believes so. The article concludes:

"Available evidence from adult human and infant
populations indicates that dietary isoflavones in soy
infant formulas do not adversely affect human growth,
development, or reproduction."

Much of what Dr. Mercola says is based upon rat
research which I totally reject.

Consider this. Half of the cancers that rats get,
mice do not get. Half of the cancers that mice get,
rats do not get. If scientific research from one
tiny four-legged long-tailed furry rodent cannot be
applied to another, how can any man or woman of
science attempt to arbitrarily apply such animal
research to humans? Nutritional rat research can
only be applied to rats, which have different organs
and enzymes from humans, and lack gall bladders.
Rats cannot digest soy proteins. Humans can.

Mercola complains that soy contains isoflavones and
phytoestrogens. Well, Dr. Mercola should know that
brocolli contains isoflavones and phytoestorgens
too.

Are phytoestrogens in soy and broccoli hazardous?

According to Mercola.com and his group of soy-bashers
(soyonlineservice.com, Sally Fallon, and the Price
Pottinger Institute), broccoli is also a deadly poison
and must be avoided. So too, for that matter, should
you never again eat seeds, whole grains, berries, fruit,
vegetables, nuts, or sprouts. Let's explore why.

Despite the fact that phytoestrogens (plant estrogens)
are not steroids like human estrogen, there are those
who would have you induce vomiting, if ever you
swallowed a soy product containing isoflavones. My
advice to you is to not swallow their illogical line
of reasoning.

For each milligram of phytoestrogens that she eats
in soy products, the average American woman will also
consume an additional four milligrams of pytoestrogens
from fruits and vegetables. Advice to abstain from
phytoestrogens is insanity, and Internet hype and
hysteria has infected the good judgement of many
so-called health advocates. This includes many ignorant
physicians, who read one such article and assimilate
just enough information to offer erroneous and dangerous
health advice to their patients.

Phytoestrogens are widely distributed in plants. There
are three categories of phytoestrogens--isoflavones
(which are found in soy), lignans (seeds, fruits
and veggies), and coumestans (broccoli and sprouts).

So, if you take the advice of Internet soy-bashing
ignoramuses and do not drink soymilk because you fear
phytoestrogens, by all means, you must give up fruits,
veggies, nuts, and grains too.

The only reason that phytoestrogens are considered to be
very dangerous is that the name sounds like estrogen,
even though they are not steroid hormones, and even though
their mechanisms of action do not mimic estrogen. Beware
of phytoestrogens, you are told. Like the "boogeyman,"
phytoestrogens in fruit and veggies are gonna get you
while you sleep.

A publication in the February 2004 issue of the American
Journal of Clinical Nutrition (R. Ziegler, 2004;79:183-4)
suggests that women who eat high levels of soy isoflavones
have lower rates of breast cancer than those who consume
low levels of isoflavones.

Dr. Regina Ziegler is a researcher with the National Cancer
Institute. She has taught health and nutrition courses at
Yale and Harvard Universities. Ziegler writes:

"The daily intake of phytoestrogens in white U.S
women has been estimated to be 1 mg, with 80% from
lignans, 20% from isoflavones, and 0.1 from coumestans."

************************************************ ******
In other words, according to Ziegler, an expert in her
field, Americans eat four times the amount of
phytoestrogens in fruit and veggies as they do from
soy products.
************************************************ ******
Ziegler continues:

"Historically, breast cancer rates in the United States
have been 4-7 times those in Asia, whereas isoflavone
intake in the United States is 1% that in Asian
populations."

So should you take Mercola's advice and eliminate soy
and all fruits and vegetables because of phytoestrogens?
Should you also follow his dietary advice by eating
raw milk and dairy products and raw meat? If you follow
Mercola, you will be led into a cave with other
Neanderthals.

You might consider contrary advice. An apple a day
does keep the doctor away because of those magical
phytoestrogens. So too do brown rice and almonds,
broccoli, and fresh sprouts. Go heavy on the soy.

Dead raw flesh and cooked animal parts should not
be served with body fluids from diseased animals.
Every cell in your miraculous body craves life, not
death. Cells and enzymes from carrots and oranges.
Green plants containing chlorophyll, and calcium
with magnesium in a proportion that is efficiently
utilized by the human body. A rose will never become
a dead chicken, even if it is so re-named. Neither
would a phytoestrogen become a steroid hormone, nor
act like one.

Mercola has also criticized soy for the presence of
phytates.

Are Wheaties (with soy milk) Hazardous to Your Health?

Of course not, but Dr. Mercola urges you to believe otherwise.

Wheaties cereal contains phytates.

Dairy producers see soymilk as the new kid on the block, and
they are running scared. Their strategy is to spread rumors
about soy because it contains phytates. Perish the thought,
phytates? Quick, induce vomiting. Call Poison Control.
Where's the stomach pump?

One bowl of cereal (portion size is defined on the side of a
box of Wheaties) is equal to: 3/4 cup of cereal and 1/2 cup
of milk.

If the soy naysayers are correct, and if you enjoy a bowl of
Wheaties for breakfast, that single portion of cereal will
contain more than 2.5 times the amount of phytates as will
the soymilk used to moisten that breakfast of champions.

Dr. Anthony Mercola writes:

"Soybeans are high in phytic acid...It's a substance that
can block the uptake of essential minerals... Scientists are
in general agreement that grain- and legume-based diets high
in phytates contribute to widespread mineral deficiencies in
third world countries. 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."

Sally Fallon director of the Weston Price Foundation echoes
Mercola's lack of wisdom (almost word for word):

"Soybeans are also high in phytic acid or phytates....which
blocks the uptake of essential minerals-calcium, magnesium,
iron and especially zinc-in the intestinal tract. Scientists
are in general agreement that grain and legume based diets
high in phytates contribute to widespread mineral
deficiencies in third world countries. 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 rice based diets prevents their absorption."

A website registered in New Zealand offers similar
disinformation. Soy Online Service (should be re-named Soy
Offline Disservice). In a column titled "SoyToxins," they
write:

"There's plenty yet that you didn't know about soy! Soy
contains several naturally occurring compounds that are
toxic to humans and animals...soy toxins such as phytic
acid...have the ability to target specific organs, cells and
enzyme pathways and their effects can be devastating....As
with any toxin there will be a dose at which negative
effects are not observed. Soy Online Services have examined
the scientific data on the soy toxins and have uncovered
several alarming truths...There is no legislation to protect
consumers from soy toxins in raw soy products...all soy
products, no matter how well treated, contain low to
moderate levels of soy toxins; processing cannot remove them
all of any of them."

Since soymilk is the bone of contention, I chose its phytate
content to serve as a baseline for comparison to wheat
products.

Charts contained on pages 30-34 of Food Phytates (edited by
Rukma Reddy and Shridhar Sathe, CRC Press, ISBN # 1-56676-
867-5) reveal:

The percentage of phytates in soymilk is listed as 0.11%.

Wheat has been called the "Staff of Life."

Durham wheat contains 8 times more phytates than soymilk
(0.88%).

Whole wheat bread contains almost 4 times more phytates than
soymilk (0.43%).

Wheaties, contain nearly fourteen times more phytates than
soymilk (1.52%).

Let's use common logic here. If wheat contains more phytates
than soymilk, then wheat should not be eaten either, right?
What a silly claim soymilk detractors make. It is without
merit.

A typical portion of breakfast cereal consists of two
ingredients, cereal & milk. The proportions: three-quarters
of a cup of Wheaties weighs 22.5 grams. One-half cup of
soymilk weighs 122.5 grams. Ergo, the wheaties contain 342
milligrams of phytates. The soymilk contains 135 milligrams
of phytates.

Now, let's get to the point of this. In their introduction
and summary of the scientific substantiation to follow, the
authors of Food Phytates write:

"Recent investigations have focused on the beneficial effect
of food phytates, based upon their strong mineral-chelating
property...The beneficial effects include lowering of serum
cholesterol and triglycerides and protection against certain
diseases such as cardiovascular diseases, renal stone
formation, and certain types of cancers."

So you see, phytates are healthy for you. Phytates represent
a prime example of using food for medicine.

Of course, if you happen to believe all of the negative soy
hype, skip the Wheaties. Skip the soymilk. You can always
have a corn muffin, right? Let's go to the phytate chart.
What percentage of corn bread is phytates? Oh, no. Corn
muffins contain twelve times the percentage of phytates as
soymilk, or 1.36%. An extra-large 6-ounce corn muffin (168
grams) contains 228 milligrams of phytates, midway between
the (3/4 cup) Wheaties and (1/2 cup) soymilk.

So, take your pick. All of this anti-phytate rhetoric is
either A) serious stuff B) ridiculous propaganda.

For health, eat isoflavones and phytoestrogens. In that
regard, no fruit, vegetabhle, grain, or legume is more
blessed with nature's healing chemicals than soy. My best
advice to you would be to reject Mercola's suggestion
to eat raw milk and raw meat. Your body will thank you.

Robert Cohen
http://www.notmilk.com

I repeat, there have been concentrated rat studies. There is no human
evidence of any problem with Soy. There is plenty of human evidence of
cardio vascular problems from eating animals.

wrote:
What about claims made that eating tofu increases chances of getting
dementia?
Based on report from Japan.
Ron wrote:

.


From: "Robert Cohen" notmilk@e...
Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 11:33 am
Subject: I'm so confused about Soy


ADVERTISEMENT



"I'm so confused about Soy."
That was the subject of Rob's letter to me:

Rob office@r... wrote:

"I don't trust what the media says about Soy.
There are only a few educated people that I
trust on this topic, and you and Dr. Mercola
are two of them, but you and he have opposing
views about soy. If Dr. Mercola is wrong, you
need to address some of the points he makes.
I know for a fact that there are many of your
readers who also subscribe to him. I look
forward to your reply. Thanks."

http://www.mercola.com/2004/dec/4/soy_truth.htm
________________________________________

Dear Rob,

Dr. Mercola would have you drink raw milk in the
name of good health, and that advice is disturbing
to me. He is also a proponent of the Neanderthal
diet and would have you eat raw meat too. Somehow,
he took up with the wrong crowd and displays quite
a bit of ignorance regarding his negative comments
on soy and other unhealthy nutritional advice.

Soymilk detractors (Sally Fallon, Price Pottinger,
Dr. Mercola, Soyonlineservice) would have you believe
that it is better to boil babies in hot oil than
serve them soymilk-based formula. Many people swallow
that unhealthy propaganda from the same folks who
receive financing from dairy famers and promoting
the consumption of raw milk.

A paper in the May 2004 issue of the Journal of
Nutrition (May;134(5):1220S-4S) advises otherwise.

After examining clinical evidence of the mechanisms
of isoflavones and bioflavinoids contained in soymilk,
scientists wrote:

"Soy protein has been used in infant feeding in the West
for nearly 100 years. Soy protein infant formulas have
evolved in this interval to become safe and effective
alternatives for infants whose nutritional needs are not
met with human milk or formulas based on cow's milk.
Modern soy formulas meet all nutritional requirements and
safety standards of the Infant Formula Act of 1980."

Is soy formula safe for your child? The Journal Nutrition
believes so. The article concludes:

"Available evidence from adult human and infant
populations indicates that dietary isoflavones in soy
infant formulas do not adversely affect human growth,
development, or reproduction."

Much of what Dr. Mercola says is based upon rat
research which I totally reject.

Consider this. Half of the cancers that rats get,
mice do not get. Half of the cancers that mice get,
rats do not get. If scientific research from one
tiny four-legged long-tailed furry rodent cannot be
applied to another, how can any man or woman of
science attempt to arbitrarily apply such animal
research to humans? Nutritional rat research can
only be applied to rats, which have different organs
and enzymes from humans, and lack gall bladders.
Rats cannot digest soy proteins. Humans can.

Mercola complains that soy contains isoflavones and
phytoestrogens. Well, Dr. Mercola should know that
brocolli contains isoflavones and phytoestorgens
too.

Are phytoestrogens in soy and broccoli hazardous?

According to Mercola.com and his group of soy-bashers
(soyonlineservice.com, Sally Fallon, and the Price
Pottinger Institute), broccoli is also a deadly poison
and must be avoided. So too, for that matter, should
you never again eat seeds, whole grains, berries, fruit,
vegetables, nuts, or sprouts. Let's explore why.

Despite the fact that phytoestrogens (plant estrogens)
are not steroids like human estrogen, there are those
who would have you induce vomiting, if ever you
swallowed a soy product containing isoflavones. My
advice to you is to not swallow their illogical line
of reasoning.

For each milligram of phytoestrogens that she eats
in soy products, the average American woman will also
consume an additional four milligrams of pytoestrogens
from fruits and vegetables. Advice to abstain from
phytoestrogens is insanity, and Internet hype and
hysteria has infected the good judgement of many
so-called health advocates. This includes many ignorant
physicians, who read one such article and assimilate
just enough information to offer erroneous and dangerous
health advice to their patients.

Phytoestrogens are widely distributed in plants. There
are three categories of phytoestrogens--isoflavones
(which are found in soy), lignans (seeds, fruits
and veggies), and coumestans (broccoli and sprouts).

So, if you take the advice of Internet soy-bashing
ignoramuses and do not drink soymilk because you fear
phytoestrogens, by all means, you must give up fruits,
veggies, nuts, and grains too.

The only reason that phytoestrogens are considered to be
very dangerous is that the name sounds like estrogen,
even though they are not steroid hormones, and even though
their mechanisms of action do not mimic estrogen. Beware
of phytoestrogens, you are told. Like the "boogeyman,"
phytoestrogens in fruit and veggies are gonna get you
while you sleep.

A publication in the February 2004 issue of the American
Journal of Clinical Nutrition (R. Ziegler, 2004;79:183-4)
suggests that women who eat high levels of soy isoflavones
have lower rates of breast cancer than those who consume
low levels of isoflavones.

Dr. Regina Ziegler is a researcher with the National Cancer
Institute. She has taught health and nutrition courses at
Yale and Harvard Universities. Ziegler writes:

"The daily intake of phytoestrogens in white U.S
women has been estimated to be 1 mg, with 80% from
lignans, 20% from isoflavones, and 0.1 from coumestans."

************************************************ ******
In other words, according to Ziegler, an expert in her
field, Americans eat four times the amount of
phytoestrogens in fruit and veggies as they do from
soy products.
************************************************ ******
Ziegler continues:

"Historically, breast cancer rates in the United States
have been 4-7 times those in Asia, whereas isoflavone
intake in the United States is 1% that in Asian
populations."

So should you take Mercola's advice and eliminate soy
and all fruits and vegetables because of phytoestrogens?
Should you also follow his dietary advice by eating
raw milk and dairy products and raw meat? If you follow
Mercola, you will be led into a cave with other
Neanderthals.

You might consider contrary advice. An apple a day
does keep the doctor away because of those magical
phytoestrogens. So too do brown rice and almonds,
broccoli, and fresh sprouts. Go heavy on the soy.

Dead raw flesh and cooked animal parts should not
be served with body fluids from diseased animals.
Every cell in your miraculous body craves life, not
death. Cells and enzymes from carrots and oranges.
Green plants containing chlorophyll, and calcium
with magnesium in a proportion that is efficiently
utilized by the human body. A rose will never become
a dead chicken, even if it is so re-named. Neither
would a phytoestrogen become a steroid hormone, nor
act like one.

Mercola has also criticized soy for the presence of
phytates.

Are Wheaties (with soy milk) Hazardous to Your Health?

Of course not, but Dr. Mercola urges you to believe otherwise.

Wheaties cereal contains phytates.

Dairy producers see soymilk as the new kid on the block, and
they are running scared. Their strategy is to spread rumors
about soy because it contains phytates. Perish the thought,
phytates? Quick, induce vomiting. Call Poison Control.
Where's the stomach pump?

One bowl of cereal (portion size is defined on the side of a
box of Wheaties) is equal to: 3/4 cup of cereal and 1/2 cup
of milk.

If the soy naysayers are correct, and if you enjoy a bowl of
Wheaties for breakfast, that single portion of cereal will
contain more than 2.5 times the amount of phytates as will
the soymilk used to moisten that breakfast of champions.

Dr. Anthony Mercola writes:

"Soybeans are high in phytic acid...It's a substance that
can block the uptake of essential minerals... Scientists are
in general agreement that grain- and legume-based diets high
in phytates contribute to widespread mineral deficiencies in
third world countries. 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."

Sally Fallon director of the Weston Price Foundation echoes
Mercola's lack of wisdom (almost word for word):

"Soybeans are also high in phytic acid or phytates....which
blocks the uptake of essential minerals-calcium, magnesium,
iron and especially zinc-in the intestinal tract. Scientists
are in general agreement that grain and legume based diets
high in phytates contribute to widespread mineral
deficiencies in third world countries. 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 rice based diets prevents their absorption."

A website registered in New Zealand offers similar
disinformation. Soy Online Service (should be re-named Soy
Offline Disservice). In a column titled "SoyToxins," they
write:

"There's plenty yet that you didn't know about soy! Soy
contains several naturally occurring compounds that are
toxic to humans and animals...soy toxins such as phytic
acid...have the ability to target specific organs, cells and
enzyme pathways and their effects can be devastating....As
with any toxin there will be a dose at which negative
effects are not observed. Soy Online Services have examined
the scientific data on the soy toxins and have uncovered
several alarming truths...There is no legislation to protect
consumers from soy toxins in raw soy products...all soy
products, no matter how well treated, contain low to
moderate levels of soy toxins; processing cannot remove them
all of any of them."

Since soymilk is the bone of contention, I chose its phytate
content to serve as a baseline for comparison to wheat
products.

Charts contained on pages 30-34 of Food Phytates (edited by
Rukma Reddy and Shridhar Sathe, CRC Press, ISBN # 1-56676-
867-5) reveal:

The percentage of phytates in soymilk is listed as 0.11%.

Wheat has been called the "Staff of Life."

Durham wheat contains 8 times more phytates than soymilk
(0.88%).

Whole wheat bread contains almost 4 times more phytates than
soymilk (0.43%).

Wheaties, contain nearly fourteen times more phytates than
soymilk (1.52%).

Let's use common logic here. If wheat contains more phytates
than soymilk, then wheat should not be eaten either, right?
What a silly claim soymilk detractors make. It is without
merit.

A typical portion of breakfast cereal consists of two
ingredients, cereal & milk. The proportions: three-quarters
of a cup of Wheaties weighs 22.5 grams. One-half cup of
soymilk weighs 122.5 grams. Ergo, the wheaties contain 342
milligrams of phytates. The soymilk contains 135 milligrams
of phytates.

Now, let's get to the point of this. In their introduction
and summary of the scientific substantiation to follow, the
authors of Food Phytates write:

"Recent investigations have focused on the beneficial effect
of food phytates, based upon their strong mineral-chelating
property...The beneficial effects include lowering of serum
cholesterol and triglycerides and protection against certain
diseases such as cardiovascular diseases, renal stone
formation, and certain types of cancers."

So you see, phytates are healthy for you. Phytates represent
a prime example of using food for medicine.

Of course, if you happen to believe all of the negative soy
hype, skip the Wheaties. Skip the soymilk. You can always
have a corn muffin, right? Let's go to the phytate chart.
What percentage of corn bread is phytates? Oh, no. Corn
muffins contain twelve times the percentage of phytates as
soymilk, or 1.36%. An extra-large 6-ounce corn muffin (168
grams) contains 228 milligrams of phytates, midway between
the (3/4 cup) Wheaties and (1/2 cup) soymilk.

So, take your pick. All of this anti-phytate rhetoric is
either A) serious stuff B) ridiculous propaganda.

For health, eat isoflavones and phytoestrogens. In that
regard, no fruit, vegetabhle, grain, or legume is more
blessed with nature's healing chemicals than soy. My best
advice to you would be to reject Mercola's suggestion
to eat raw milk and raw meat. Your body will thank you.

Robert Cohen
http://www.notmilk.com

I repeat, there have been concentrated rat studies. There is no human
evidence of any problem with Soy. There is plenty of human evidence of
cardio vascular problems from eating animals.

wrote:
What about claims made that eating tofu increases chances of getting
dementia?
Based on report from Japan.
Ron wrote:

.


From: "Robert Cohen" notmilk@e...
Date: Sun Dec 12, 2004 11:33 am
Subject: I'm so confused about Soy


ADVERTISEMENT



"I'm so confused about Soy."
That was the subject of Rob's letter to me:

Rob office@r... wrote:

"I don't trust what the media says about Soy.
There are only a few educated people that I
trust on this topic, and you and Dr. Mer