Oz wrote:
> Jim Webster > writes
>
>>Invoke the precautionary principle. I suggest that we keep on feeding soya
>>to animals as part of an animal testing programme to see if it is actually
>>safe for humans to eat
>
>
> Soya in pig rations (at least) has a phantom 'extra growth effect' not
> related to its nutritional value. Cynics might point out that this
> matches the phytoestrogen levels quite well.
>
A diet, made up mainly of soybean also called poverty pea over
here, corn, rice, or many other single sources of of food will
cause disease with out some verity, Corn and legumes alone case
pelegra a serious problem in the USA less 100 years ago. Cattle
and other ruminates are better adapted to eat feeds like this
than people.

In cattle and hog alfalfa hay is another magic ingredient that
has more efficient that be accounted for. I seems any ration can
be improved by adding good alfalfa hay for an equal percentage
or the fiber, and ruminants is supplies. I have eaten alfalfa
cooked as greens by very smooth seller of pots and pans and it
is not bad cooked a greens but you don't see it the human diet
at all.

I am surprised that soybean meal has paradoxical effect on
humans and hogs. I wonder how many other such effect there are
between hogs, rats and humans because almost all human
nutritional studies are done on rats or hogs. Only Dr. Joesph
Mengla preformed double blind experiments on humans and tested
at death of the subjects to get the results and that was not
done with an impartial section of subjects and were not conduct
in realistic environments so only the ones on hypothermia were
of any use. They didn't pay for much the cost of the experiment
like you can do buy doing the research on hogs.


Gordon Couger
Stillwater, OK
www.TakeThisOUTcouger.com/gcouger