General fitness, health and nutrition · Public discussion

The 12th Annual Soy Symposium

Started by Email address hidden · · Last activity · 1 post · 276 views

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
General fitness, health and nutrition
Published
6 May 2005
Last activity
6 May 2005
Original author
Email address hidden
Posts
1
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
276
Views / 30 days
5

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–1 of 1
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. http://www.westonaprice.org/soy/soy_symposium_12.html

    The 12th Annual Soy Symposium
    By Bill Sanda, MA, Director of Public Affairs

    "Soy products: The scientific community is divided. Some say the
    stuff is dangerous; some say it isn't," stated Dr. Harold Seifried
    of the National Cancer Institute, who presented this conclusion to his
    lecture as a poignant cartoon. The scientific community is truly
    divided over the health efficacy of consuming soy-based products. Yet,
    in spite of contradictory research results, the industry continues to
    claim that soy is a wonder food.

    Dr. Seifried was one of twelve speakers at the 12th Annual Soy
    Symposium held in Washington DC on October 14, 2004, sponsored by the
    United Soybean Board and Soyfoods Association of North America. The
    theme was "Creating a Healthier America: The Role of Soy." The
    symposium presented the case for soy from a farmer, producer, marketer
    and scientific point of view, but did not represent much of any
    opposing view. Still, the atmosphere was more restrained and sober than
    at soy conferences in previous years. No scientist can honestly portray
    the unbridled optimism for soy characteristic of past conferences.

    INCONCLUSIVE
    According to Dr. Seifried, the results of clinical trials and animal
    research on soy and cancer are inconclusive. Some show a very favorable
    response while some show little to no effect. In fact, some even show
    an increased risk for cancer.
    Referring to epidemiological data, Dr. Seifried also hedged his bets,
    noting that "studies at the 'population' level may not hold for
    particular individuals. Some individuals seem to respond to soy; others
    have negative sequelae [results]." He noted that it was the job of
    scientists to present the data and the findings. What is done with the
    data is "best left to others."

    Seifried repeated the assertion, which has surfaced recently, that for
    women to receive maximum benefit from soy-based products in terms of
    inhibiting the risk of breast cancer, they must consume soy-based
    products starting early in life (before the age of twenty) and continue
    throughout their lives. He also mentioned that postmenopausal breast
    cancer patients may not benefit from soy, but that it may help younger
    women. (It's not hard to imagine what the marketeers will do with
    these statements.)

    Seigfried's summation: The results of consuming soy to help prevent
    cancer are inconsistent and inconclusive.Yet Solae Corporation, a joint
    venture of DuPont and Bunge, filed a petition with the FDA in April
    2004 to secure a health claim for soy protein isolate and cancer. (See
    our rebuttal at http://www.westonaprice.org/soy/solae_comments.pdf. The
    FDA must respond by the end of November.) Organizers of the conference
    expressed confidence that Solae will receive their health claim in
    spite of the inconsistent data.

    EXAGGERATED
    One of the most telling comments at the conference, again reflecting a
    moderation in enthusiasm for soy, came from Mark Messina, PhD, of Loma
    Linda University, probably the industry's most well-known
    spokesperson. Mesina stated that the cholesterol-lowering benefits of
    soy touted in the late 1990s and used to secure a health claim for soy
    and cardiovascular disease were exaggerated. More recent research shows
    that soy has a much lower impact on reducing CHD risk than originally
    stated. Yet, the health claim for soy and CHD remains in place.

    Dr. Messina chose his words carefully when he acknowledged that hype
    for soy often does not reflect the the actual data. He referred to the
    recent claim that hair growth can be restored by soy. He was also not
    convinced that soy protein isolates have any beneficial impacts on
    reducing obesity.

    Like Dr. Seifried, Dr. Messina concluded that the research results are
    inconsistent. For instance, he cited contradictory data from studies on
    menopause and hot flash reduction. He lamented the broad variability in
    the soy products used for research purposes, which can lead to the
    variability in results.
    Dr. Messina cited a recent Dutch study on postmenopausal women showing
    that cognition, bone density and cholesterol reduction were not
    impacted by the consumption of soy-based products. His explained away
    these negative results
    -which contradicted earlier studies-by stating that the women
    studied were too old (over 60 years of age) to be able to receive any
    benefit. Like Dr. Seifried, he claims that soy must be consumed at an
    earlier age to provide protection against disease.

    Messina also evoked genetics to explain away inconsistent findings. The
    gene pool is different for Asians and Americans, he noted, so it is
    inappropriate to apply the results of studies carried out in Asia to an
    American population.
    Yet in spite of the doubts he expressed to his scientific colleagues,
    Dr. Messina dismissed any concerns about the marketing of soy on the
    basis of health claims.

    PROTEINS AND FATS
    Bill Lampert of Cargill, Inc. claimed that the quality of soy protein
    is equal to that in milk, eggs, and meat and that soy provides all the
    essential amino acids needed for good nutrition. This claim has
    absolutely no basis in fact. Like all legumes, the soybean lacks vital
    sulfur-containing amino acids cystine and methionine, and processing
    compromises existing ones, like lysine.

    He also claimed that soy oil is healthy because it contains
    polyunsaturated fatty acids, especially those of the omega-3 type.
    Interestingly, efforts are now underway by the soybean industry to
    reduce the amount of omega-3 EFA in soybeans in order to create a new
    line of low-linolenic (omega 3) margarines and shortenings. Such oils
    would not need deodorizing and so, theoretically, would contain no
    trans fats but still have a long shelf life. Omega-3 fatty acids do
    indeed play important roles in the body chemistry but they pose
    enormous problems for the oil processing industry.

    Both Monsanto and Dupont/Bunge recently announced that they have
    produced a new line of GMO soybean that has reduced amounts of omega-3
    EFAs for this purpose. Monsanto's line is called VISTIVE™, while
    that of DuPont/Bunge is marketed as NUTRIUM™ Low Lin Soybean Oil.
    These will be marketed to food producers.

    We were interested to hear Mr. Lambert's list of soy protein
    isolate's functional properties, so useful to the processing
    industry: gelling, emulsifying, fat absorption, water holding,
    elasticity, solubility, viscosity, foaming, color control,
    cohesion-adhesion and flavor-binding. Soy is now being used as an egg
    replacement in baked goods to save on manufacturing costs.

    NEW ALLERGEN LABELING
    Lester Crawford, acting director of the FDA, spoke about allergen
    labeling, mandated to begin in 2005. Soy is one of eight major
    allergens, along with milk, eggs, peanuts, tree nuts, wheat, shellfish
    and fin fish, whose presence in a product must be noted by special
    labeling. The industry is not happy about this development because the
    new labeling laws will indicate just how pervasive soy is in our food
    supply-products containing "hydrolyzed protein," for example,
    will require a label indicating the presence of soy.

    Several participants argued that allergies to milk were more widespread
    and more severe and that it was unfair to include soy in the list of
    ingredients to be singled out by allergy labeling, an argument for
    which Crawford showed little sympathy.

    CONSUMER PERCEPTIONS
    Consumer research presented by the organizers stated that 66 percent of
    the American population believes that trans fats are unhealthy, up from
    13 percent last year. However, 86 percent still view saturated fats as
    unhealthy, thanks to industry propaganda.
    It is clear that soybean growers and manufacturers are pressing on
    relentlessly to increase market share of their products. Yet it is
    equally clear that this increase is becoming more difficult to sustain.
    A representative of Revival, manufacturer of soy-based meal
    replacements, complained that "negative perceptions" about soy had
    cost the company at least one million dollars in sales last year,
    perhaps an early glimpse of a less-than-rosy future for soy.

    Editor's Note: While soy promoters are now flirting with the
    recommendation to begin soy feeding at a young age in order to prevent
    breast cancer, a study published in January, 2004, found that rats
    exposed to the soy isoflavone genistein just after birth showed
    "profound morphological changes in the mammary glands" at maturity
    (Toxicol Sci 2004 Jan;77(1):91-100).

    ------

    TC

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.