# Is Soy Healthy?



## DinoSoreArse (Sep 7, 2013)

I thought I'd post this to educate people on the dangers of soy. I hope it helps peopl

This is the link to the website the information was gotten from: http://wellnessmama.com/3684/is-soy-healthy/

Soy is a legume, and as such, has the same harmful components that other beans do. But there is more. Some other harmful properties of soybeans are:

Soybeans contain phytoestrogens, which mimic the body's natural estrogen hormones. For men, this can lead to a testosterone imbalance, infertility, low sperm count, and increased risk of cancers. For women, it can cause estrogen dominance, which has been linked to infertility, menstrual troubles and cancer&#8230;
These phytoestrogens are so strong that a baby consuming only soy formula is consuming the equivalent hormones of 4 birth control pills a day!
The high levels of phytic acid in soy inhibit the body's ability to absorb important minerals, including zinc, calcium, copper, iron and magnesium (which many people are dangerously deficient in already).
Soy also contains protease inhibitors, which can block the enzymes that are necessary for the digestion of certain proteins.
The goitrogens in soy are potent anti-thyroid compounds that can lead to endocrine disruption and thyroid disorders. Infants on soy formula have a much higher risk of autoimmune thyroid disease. (note: cruciferous vegetables like broccoli, cauliflower and cabbage have these properties as well, though they are lessened greatly by cooking. Cooking does not remove these compounds from soy based foods!)
Soy is often promoted as an alternative food for celiac and gluten intolerant people, but its lectins can be harmful to the intestines and prevent healing even when gluten is removed.
Many studies have found even more harmful properties of soy: This link has a summary of many studies done about the harmful effects of soy.
Consumption of soy foods increases the body's need for Vitamin D, Vitamin B-12, calcium and magnesium.
In addition to being harmful to our bodies, soy production is harmful to the planet and to livestock who eat it as well. Almost all soybeans grown today are genetically modified and "Round-up ready." They contain a gene that allows them to be directly sprayed with pesticides without dying. There is some evidence that this gene can mutate and create a pesticide-like toxin in the body.

This mutation means that soybeans can be (and are) sprayed with large amounts of pesticides and herbicides during their cultivation. In addition, soybeans strip the soil of many nutrients, leaving soil depleted. (On a personal note, I live in an area where soybeans are grown, and have witnessed first hand how much the soybeans are sprayed during their growth and how harmful these chemicals are to other plants and vegetation)

Animals who are fed soy can suffer many of the same health consequences as people who consume too much soy, and these harmful properties are then passed on in their meat.

What about Asian Countries Where Soy is Consumed In Large Amounts?

I often get this question when I talk about the negative properties in soy. It is assumed that people in Asian countries consume a lot of soy, and since they are thin, soy must be healthy.

It is important to note that people in these countries do not consume as much soy as we assume they do. In fact, in most places, soy based foods are served as a condiment, not a main course and not as a replacement for animal protein. In addition, these foods are fermented or traditionally prepared, which minimizes the harmful factors.

In many countries, soy based foods are consumed with seaweed containing foods or traditionally made broths, which both have high nutrient concentration and can help mitigate the harmful effects of the soy.

An Inferior Protein Source

Besides the lectin and phytic acid in soybeans, they aren't the complete protein source they are touted to be. Like all beans, they lack the amino acids Methionine and Cystine. While they are often promoted for being able to provide Vitamin B-12 to those eating a vegetarian diet, the Vitamin B-12 in soybeans can not be used by the body and actually cause the body to need more B-12.

As I often say about grains a beans: there are no nutrients in these foods that can't be found in higher amounts in meats, vegetables and healthy fats, so stick to those and avoid the lectins and phytic acid!

A Note on Fermented Soy

If you are going to consume soy, it is least harmful in its fermented state. Foods like Tempeh and Miso have some health promoting properties and many of the harmful anti-nutrients are fermented out. These are fine in moderation. Just look for ones that have been traditionally fermented.

Soy is Everywhere!

If you stay away from tofu and soymilk, you might still be consuming much more soy than you think!

Practically all processed foods contain some form of soy. Even some canned tuna contains a soy protein as part of the broth! Check the foods you buy for these ingredients: Soy lecithin, soy protein concentrate, soy protein isolate, texturized vegetable protein, hydrolyzed vegetable protein or any other phrase containing the word "soy."

Foods containing any of these ingredients contain soy and all the harmful components that go along with it!


----------



## John310 (May 24, 2011)

Seems to be so much conflicting information on Soy. I think the myth that it gives men man-boobs has been squashed (no pun intended)


----------



## Beingofglass (May 5, 2013)

Soy is definately not good, especially for men.


----------



## John310 (May 24, 2011)

Beingofglass said:


> Soy is definately not good, especially for men.


Unless your getting a ton of Soy I thought the effects on men were just rubbish?

I hear so many differing opinions on Soy


----------



## Beingofglass (May 5, 2013)

I'd rather not take the risk with ingesting any sort of hormones. I'm not even that keen on drinking cow milk because of the excessive cow-growth hormones.


----------



## John310 (May 24, 2011)

I don't eat diary so I agree. Almond milk on my cereals everryyyday


----------



## Noll (Mar 29, 2011)

soy is bad for the environment mostly anyway. if you're vegan i recommend lentils and grain milk instead.

there is NO B12 in anything other than meat or dairy products. i've never heard of B12 in soybeans. but with grain milk and soy milk it usually comes with added (synthetic) B12, which is just as good. 3 glasses of that per day combined with a multivitamin pill per day will be enough. you do not need much B12. if a vegan needs more iron he or she can eat more nuts and/or vegetables like spinach, pumpkin seeds also.

basically that's it and everything else comes automatically as long as you eat a fair bunch of various vegetables and fruit each day. broccoli and avocado are two of the essentials. eat quinoa instead of white rice too.


----------



## Kennnie (Oct 21, 2010)

No


----------



## foe (Oct 10, 2010)

I'm sure it's fine in moderate consumption, just like any other food out there.

Half of the stuff she wrote has no sources, and some of the sources are linked to one of her other articles.


----------



## Noll (Mar 29, 2011)

foe said:


> I'm sure it's fine in moderate consumption, just like any other food out there.
> 
> Half of the stuff she wrote has no sources, and some of the sources are linked to one of her other articles.


yeah, don't believe that crap. soy isn't bad for you, it's bad for the rainforests and such.


----------



## Billius (Aug 7, 2012)




----------



## Sacrieur (Jan 14, 2013)

The concern is from phytoestrogen.

It has an effect in rats; however, this hasn't been shown true for adult males.

The link to cancer has been protective, at least for men. There is greater concern for females, but there is only concern for it if you already have breast cancer. And by that I mean there isn't enough data to be sure one way or the other, and the evidence is mildly conflicting.

Eating soy won't give you cancer though, male or female.


----------



## Dylan2 (Jun 3, 2012)

foe said:


> I'm sure it's fine in moderate consumption, just like any other food out there.
> 
> Half of the stuff she wrote has no sources, and some of the sources are linked to one of her other articles.


It's hard to cite sources when one's scientific background consists of being an "amateur chef, real food crusader, kettlebell junkie, scuba diver and coffee addict who can finally do a pull-up (according to my twitter bio)."

I would cite some sources if I had more of a background in the life sciences. (Thanks for your source, Sacrieur.)


----------



## timidSeal (Jun 6, 2013)

Soy is bad. I will not knowingly consume it.


----------



## Dylan2 (Jun 3, 2012)

Screw it, I'm citing some sources.

In terms of testosterone, the title of this meta-analysis of 32 studies says a lot "clinical studies show no effect of soy protein or isoflavones on reproductive hormones in men: results of a meta-analysis"

Next, soy protected rats from arthritis:

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00296-011-1979-7

Maybe some protection against cancer:

"Of the 26 animal studies of experimental carcinogenesis in which diets containing soy or soybean isoflavones were employed, 17 (65%) reported protective effects. No studies reported soy intake increased tumor development."

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01635589409514310#.UjE24X8RaSo

More possible cancer protection research reviewed here:

"Further, the available epidemiologic and animal data suggest that *early soy intake* reduces breast cancer risk."

(bold emphasis mine)

"Although limited, the available animal and epidemiologic data suggest exposure to isoflavones during childhood and/or adolescence is protective against breast cancer risk. As little as one serving of a traditional soy food daily may reduce risk by as much as 50%. Soybean isoflavones stimulate differentiation of the breast in much the same way that the elevated estrogen levels do during pregnancy. There is need and justification for continued investigation of the early soy intake hypothesis."

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01635580903285015#.UjE3HX8RaSo

Soy may protect rats from obesity-related renal disease:

http://www.nature.com/ki/journal/v61/n1/abs/4492708a.html

Soy may protect against osteoporosis in mice:

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0952327803000607

Not so promising for human bones (but not harmful either):

"Although soy isoflavones do affect markers of bone turnover, the changes observed were of small magnitude and not likely to be clinically relevant. These data do not support the hypothesis that dietary isoflavones _per se_ exert beneficial effects on bone turnover in women. "

http://jcem.endojournals.org/content/85/9/3043


----------



## Noll (Mar 29, 2011)

timidSeal said:


> Soy is bad.


wow so convincing.


----------



## timidSeal (Jun 6, 2013)

Dylan2 said:


> Screw it, I'm citing some sources...


I only looked at the first few. As the first few were poor defenses for your argument, I stopped. The studies are old or funded by parties who have a stake in finding results supporting soy or foreign studies that may have used soy that is non-Monsanto, non-GMO and non-pesticide laced. For an example: source #3 is a study done in *1993* and quoting from the abstract: "While a definitive statement that soy reduces cancer risk *cannot be made at this time*, there is sufficient evidence of a protective effect to warrant continued investigation." You should find out what current research says in this matter. If you check with Google scholar, your first source has been cited 57 times, your second source has been cited only 7 times, and that 3rd old source, has been cited 1392 times. The 1392 means there has been further research done on this topic. You can look at the recent research to see if it supports or not the 1993 claim. Keep in mind that 1993 soy was also non-GMO. In the meantime, eat all the soy you want!


----------



## timidSeal (Jun 6, 2013)

Noll said:


> wow so convincing.


I'm not doing the legwork on this. If you think soy is good, prove it yourself!


----------



## alenclaud (Mar 31, 2013)

I don't believe there's any harm if consumed in small amounts (moderately), and it may even provide some beneficial effects to your health.

On the other hand, a diet overly high in soy might overtime produce health risks, as with most foods which are over-consumed. Dr.Mercola summarizes the risks quite neatly. He also says which soy foods can be a healthier choice. (I haven't read all the cited studies yet, btw)


----------



## Sacrieur (Jan 14, 2013)

timidSeal said:


> I only looked at the first few. As the first few were poor defenses for your argument, I stopped. The studies are old or funded by parties who have a stake in finding results supporting soy or foreign studies that may have used soy that is non-Monsanto, non-GMO and non-pesticide laced.


Speaking of poor arguments, you're committing a logical fallacy called circumstantial ad hominem.

The name isn't important, but what is important is that your conclusions are unsound.


----------



## Parsnip (Sep 5, 2013)

The problem with research articles (and it's not so much a problem as a fact of life) is that depending on what is being researched, who is funding it, what the researchers want to find and the methods they are using then the results are only as good as your understanding of the subject itself. Rarely is any article truly unbiased, when you read the results and the interpretations the author has made you usually sit there going "but your results clearly did not indicate anything of the sort, at best they indicated that the effects were neutral and that they must be taken with extreme caution because it was a test made on a non-human life form and no life long trials into the effects on humans have been made at this moment in time".

It's also helpful to remember that what often happens is that researchers will find something, make an assumption they then expect others to understand through the eyes of a researcher (namely that while a link may have been found it does not necessarily indicate that it is causal and so must be treated with caution, long-term studies and never at all soundly proclaimed to have a causal link) and then someone, somewhere will take this and scream "THIS THING CURES CANCER Y'ALL" and then everyone is running around saying there are all these wonderful benefits when the original researchers are quietly mumbling that they found a link, not a causal link, just a link, and it has not been sufficiently tested for anyone to be saying such things.

You'll also notice that there are trends within research, and if a paper goes against those trends they can be buried and discredited even if they are methodologically sound. The best articles will acknowledge the positive and negative aspects of their research subject, but from a quick overview of the papers regarding soy the majority seem to be about singing its praises and shuffling the negatives into a little read corner of the discussion.

There are assumed benefits linked to the consumption of soy, and there are assumed detrimental effects. Most studies that I am aware of have not been conducted in such a manner that they can be said to be used as conclusive evidence to dismiss the views of those who wish to promote the consumption of soy and those who do not. Excluding of course environmental impacts, but most people tend to push those issues away since their big concern is their life not that of the world they live in.

Anyway, a 2012 review paper.

*"...While consumption of soy food or phytoestrogen supplements has been frequently associated with beneficial health effects, the potentially adverse effects on development, fertility, and the reproductive and endocrine systems are likely underappreciated."*
Cederroth, C.R., Zimmermann, C., and Nef, S. (2012) Soy, phytoestrogens, and their impact on reproductive health. Molecular and Cellular Endocrinology 355 (2): 192-200
(link)

Key point: the lack of human trials, particularly long-term human trials, means that the detrimental/positive effects of soy consumption have not been accurately documented. Indeed a point that is made rather clear is that many individuals take an absence of evidence as absence of risk, and that simply is not the case. If people do not receive the funding to undertake the research, or it is not in the financial interests of the institution to undertake such research, it will not be undertaken.

There have been rare studies indicating that women who were fed a soy-based diet in infancy may develop extended menstrual cycles with higher levels of discomfort and benign uterine tumours but, as with anything else, more robust trials need to be undertaken. This includes studies into the positive effects of soy, while they exist there is a risk that many of them suffer from a lack of objective discussion on the detrimental/positive effects of soy. It's also important to note that the benefits/detriments of soy may be dependent on the individuals ability to metabolise a particular component of soy isoflavones. In addition it is noted that a soy based Asian diet generally has lower levels of isoflavones than a soy based Western diet. Combined with the lack of research into the effect of metabolisation on the benefits/detriments of soy and you have a whole area waiting to be explored. That does not discount the recorded benefits of soy, or indeed the potential for detrimental effects, and I'd never say it was wholly bad/good, but it does indicate that it would be incredibly beneficial to do a little more research.

Basically there's been an awful lot of funded research stating soy MAY be beneficial, and a whole load of people taking snippets from research articles and spinning them into articles for the general public, but the research into long-term positive AND negative effects of a soy based diet are relatively sparse.

As consuming more than minimal amounts of soy tends to send my body a bit whoozy and leads to me feeling rather unwell I'll stick to living a diet as free from intentional soy consumption as possible. Other than that I eagerly await new research, it's always fun to see how people interpret their results and the subsequent flinging of articles in a never ending they said, we said, our opinions are sounder than yours argument.


----------



## Dylan2 (Jun 3, 2012)

timidSeal said:


> I only looked at the first few. As the first few were poor defenses for your argument, I stopped. The studies are old or funded by parties who have a stake in finding results supporting soy or foreign studies that may have used soy that is non-Monsanto, non-GMO and non-pesticide laced. For an example: source #3 is a study done in *1993* and quoting from the abstract: "While a definitive statement that soy reduces cancer risk *cannot be made at this time*, there is sufficient evidence of a protective effect to warrant continued investigation." You should find out what current research says in this matter. If you check with Google scholar, your first source has been cited 57 times, your second source has been cited only 7 times, and that 3rd old source, has been cited 1392 times. The 1392 means there has been further research done on this topic. You can look at the recent research to see if it supports or not the 1993 claim. Keep in mind that 1993 soy was also non-GMO. In the meantime, eat all the soy you want!


Yes, I did look at more recent research. Source #4 makes similar claims and was published in 2009.

You claim the studies were funded by parties with a stake in supporting soy. I assume you're referring to #1. It was a meta-analysis so I'm not sure that it even received special funding. What you must've picked up on is the declaration made by 3 of the 6 authors that they had consulted for or previously received funding from the soy industry. While this is not ideal, it's perfectly normal. Even the ultra-selective New England Journal of Medicine had to ease up on its conflict of interest rules a decade ago in order to get enough high quality review articles.


----------



## belle102 (Jul 7, 2013)

I've thought about this before and Im still not sure. Japanese people consume lots of soy everyday but they have low breast cancer rate and they are so much more healthier than americans. I think as long as your not taking soy in supplements and eat them in moderation, you will be fine.


----------



## Lize4 (Sep 23, 2013)

I just read a study today that yogurt, including soy yogurt, can help ease anxiety by increasing healthy gut bacteria.


----------



## belle102 (Jul 7, 2013)

Lize4 said:


> I just read a study today that yogurt, including soy yogurt, can help ease anxiety by increasing healthy gut bacteria.


That is very interesting. I try to incorporate lots of fermented foods in my diet.


----------



## Zack (Apr 20, 2013)

Soy-tainly it is!


----------



## emptybottle2 (Jan 18, 2009)

Stay away from soy if you have acne-prone skin and eating dairy or a lot of sweets makes you break out.


----------



## Banzai (Jun 4, 2009)

Wow, this is the first time I have heard bad stuff said about soy. I always thought it was better than dairy stuff (low fat? Better for environment?).


----------



## belle102 (Jul 7, 2013)

Banzai said:


> Wow, this is the first time I have heard bad stuff said about soy. I always thought it was better than dairy stuff (low fat? Better for environment?).


as long as your not allergic to it, everything is moderation will be ok  I wouldn't worry about it too much:yes


----------



## joseph17 (Oct 1, 2013)

As far as soy messing with your hormones, I can say that from my personal experience it doesn't. I was suffering from low testosterone on a vegetarian diet that was low in soy. Now I have pretty much a vegan diet with moderate amounts of soy and my testosterone level is now normal. I don't have my estrogen numbers, but my doctor said that is normal as well. I believe that lifestyle changes are what caused my testosterone to increase not diet changes.


----------



## Donnie in the Dark (Mar 15, 2011)

John310 said:


> I don't eat diary so I agree. Almond milk on my cereals everryyyday


 Almond milk is incredible. if it was cheaper I'd have it all the time.


----------



## Sacrieur (Jan 14, 2013)

Banzai said:


> Wow, this is the first time I have heard bad stuff said about soy. I always thought it was better than dairy stuff (low fat? Better for environment?).


A lot of people have problems with dairy (lactose intolerance, milk allergy). But if you can handle it nothing is better than milk nutritionally, except perhaps eggs.


----------



## komorikun (Jan 11, 2009)

John310 said:


> Unless your getting a ton of Soy I thought the effects on men were just rubbish?
> 
> I hear so many differing opinions on Soy


Yeah. You'd have to have to drink gallons of soy milk a day to get some sort of hormonal change.


----------

