Re: soy

[Guest guest]

Francesca,

My feeling is that it is probably not a good idea to rely too heavily on

any single source of nutrients like soy, dairy, etc just in case they are

associated with some future difficulty not yet revealed. Many of the

benefits of soy touted by the soy industry are, in fact, available in many

other beans and vegetables that simply are not the focus of studies because

no funders are interested in profitting from them. The Bio-Sphere

experiment, I think, pointed in this direction.

From what I can see the Soy and Dairy Industries are quite powerful,

fund many competing studies and are basically at war with each other. Last

year the Dairy Council petitioned the FDA to disallow any use of the word

milk not connected to a dairy product!

I drink one cup of fortified soy milk each morning and have modest

amounts of tempeh, tofu or fresh soybeans 3 - 4 times per week. Milk is not

an option for me: I stopped dairy seven years ago to see if what would

happen to my dust/pollen/dander allergies. After four months, I was

astounded at the difference, my sinus returned to " normal " and I stopped

carrying tissue with me all the time. A couple of years ago the Wash Post

reported on research reporting that as much as 30% of Caucasions may have

their immune systems disrupted by dairy resulting in allergies quite apart

from lactose intolerance (which I don't have). I discovered that I was one

of those people.

I raise my cup of soy milk to your skim milk!

S Pollock

Francesca wrote:

As for soymilk, I don't think there's cause for alarm but every now and

then, the main group posts warnings about eating soy. There was one

study (discussed by Walford) where the researchers concluded that soy

caused dementia. However that study has not been repeated. Then Warren

recently cited an article saying soy causes all kinds of

problems (which also was not backed up by any reputable sources; quite

the contrary Dean Ornish seemed to strongly disagree with the article).

Walford has said he is still eating soy (but he is open to changing his

mind, pending further information as it becomes available). So is

Ornish and Dr. Weil still recommending eating soy. So far none

of them has anything bad to say. In fact today, the Washington Post

Health section carried an article citing further new benfits of soy

(lowers cholesterol).

So although soy seems safe (pending any new reliable data), I'm cutting

back some on my previous quite large consumption and have gone back to

(skim) milk. Hope you saw my recent post on what seems like a superior

new milk product with 66% extra calcium.

[Guest guest]

About soy...there are some who say that there are toxins in the form of soy that most of us eat or drink. I detect a slightly aluminum taste when I drink soy. I didn't at first, but when I stopped, ate/drank it slowly, I could taste something off. I am careful with soy as it is a phytoestrogen. Autoimmune disease is thought to be a hormone driven disease. Soy is a big additive now in so many "healthy" and non healthy foods. We are on the verge of eating more soy than those in Asian countries. There are many who already do eat more soy here in the US than they do in Japan etc.

Something to think about.

[Guest guest]

Thanks Rodney, You are right, the issue of soy is one of polarity. It is hard to know, but like you, I lived without it most of my life and I really do not like the taste of it, so I don't eat a lot of it. Unfortunately, if you are on a committed lower carbohydrate plan like I am, it is added to almost everything. Thanks again for your opinion.

Kim

[Guest guest]

My only anecdotal evidence of the ineffectiveness of soy is this. I have 3 bi-racial children. I was told, 25 yrs ago that they, because they were bi-racial, they could not tolerate cow's milk and to put them on soy milk to prevent ear infections etc etc. I did as I was told. They had terrible ear infections, strep, colds anway. Soy milk did not make a difference at all. They were on soy milk from 3 months to 2 yrs.

If soy works for you, that is great. If soy tastes good to you, that is great.

[Guest guest]

Hi Kim:

A couple of years ago I did a fairly thorough internet search for

serious sources (mainly .edu addresses) on soy products.

They seemed to be highly polarized on the issue of the health

consequences. Some appeared to believe it was the perfect food.

Others that it was the next best thing to potassium cyanide.

I was unable to figure out which to believe. So my approach has been

to assume that generally avoiding soy products would be unlikely to

result in irreparable harm. After all, the people who live in

countries that eat a lot of soy products do not live for ever.

Although the japanese are the world's most long lived population I

believe.

One source I remember said something to the effect: " no wonder the

japanese only eat soybeans after they have been extensively

processed/fermented " . Presumably this meant that they felt the

dangerous components (whatever they are supposed to be) had, thereby,

been removed.

As you can see I am adamantly neutral on the issue of the healthiness

of soy products!

Rodney.

> About soy...there are some who say that there are toxins in the

form of soy

> that most of us eat or drink. I detect a slightly aluminum taste

when I drink

> soy. I didn't at first, but when I stopped, ate/drank it slowly, I

could taste

> something off. I am careful with soy as it is a phytoestrogen.

Autoimmune

> disease is thought to be a hormone driven disease. Soy is a big

additive now in so

> many " healthy " and non healthy foods. We are on the verge of

eating more

> soy than those in Asian countries. There are many who already do

eat more soy

> here in the US than they do in Japan etc.

> Something to think about.

[Guest guest]

LOL. NOBODY lives forever. Not even the extremist CRONIES!

AFAIK Walford, Ornish, Weil, the guys who actually base their

recommendations on scientific findings (not Dr Mercola,) are still

eating/recommending soy. And until someone on the list points to something

more definitive (sorry Kim, but the fact that " some say soy is bad " just

doesn't cut it) so will I (in moderation). There was the only the one study

pointed to by Walford which was never repeated - and thus is in doubt.

Recently someone mentioned that eating beef and getting mad cow disease is

an unlikely scenario. Well moderate soy eating is probably just as unlikely

afa bad effects. Remember, there are lots of people around (Dr Mercola???)

who have books to sell/money to make.

on 1/19/2004 11:03 AM, Rodney at perspect1111@... wrote:

> I was unable to figure out which to believe. So my approach has been

> to assume that generally avoiding soy products would be unlikely to

> result in irreparable harm. After all, the people who live in

> countries that eat a lot of soy products do not live for ever.

> Although the japanese are the world's most long lived population I

> believe.

[Guest guest]

Kim: Your story is about your children's (non) allergy to cow's milk (which

sometimes can not be tolerated by non-caucasians). No doubt the doctors

must have tried eliminating cow's milk and recommended the soy milk as a

viable substitute, and not as a potential cure-all. Since the infections

continued, they were not allergic to cow's milk.

I have never heard of any claims of soy preventing infections.

on 1/19/2004 2:03 PM, kimlynette@... at kimlynette@... wrote:

> My only anecdotal evidence of the ineffectiveness of soy is this. I have 3

> bi-racial children. I was told, 25 yrs ago that they, because they were

> bi-racial, they could not tolerate cow's milk and to put them on soy milk to

> prevent ear infections etc etc. I did as I was told. They had terrible ear

> infections, strep, colds anway. Soy milk did not make a difference at all.

> They were on soy milk from 3 months to 2 yrs.

> If soy works for you, that is great. If soy tastes good to you, that is great.

[Guest guest]

Hi Francesca:

The following is one example of the type of stuff about soy that can

be found littered all over the internet. Of course much, probably

most, of what is available on the internet is 'unreliable' to put it

tactfully. Yes, that is an understatement!

http://creativehealth.netfirms.com/soy_fda.shtml

I do not know whether the claimed authors of the letter posted at

that link really did write that letter. But if they did then it is

probably worth paying attention to.

But for me, unable to properly assess the importance of this stuff

for myself, it is the reason I have placed soy products on

my 'generally try to avoid' list.

But I remain open minded (either way) if we get some high quality

empirical evidence on the issue. ('Theoretical' stuff, while often

interesting, very often is not confirmed when the serious empirical

studies get done.)

If you want to pursue the matter further you could try doing a Google

search using the words " soy danger " . I have done so. You will find

there are endless people ranting about how bad soy products are. Of

course I recognize the vast majority can be safely ignored. However,

I do not know whether all of them can be.

As for " NOBODY lives for ever " . I would just add a " so far " : ^ )

Rodney.

> LOL. NOBODY lives forever. Not even the extremist CRONIES!

>

> AFAIK Walford, Ornish, Weil, the guys who actually base their

> recommendations on scientific findings (not Dr Mercola,) are still

> eating/recommending soy. And until someone on the list points to

something

> more definitive (sorry Kim, but the fact that " some say soy is bad "

just

> doesn't cut it) so will I (in moderation). There was the only the

one study

> pointed to by Walford which was never repeated - and thus is in

doubt.

>

> Recently someone mentioned that eating beef and getting mad cow

disease is

> an unlikely scenario. Well moderate soy eating is probably just as

unlikely

> afa bad effects. Remember, there are lots of people around (Dr

Mercola???)

> who have books to sell/money to make.

[Guest guest]

Rodney: are you aware that the page is part of Dr Mercola's website? IMHO

and that of many others, he's a quack at the most and at the very least has

no standing in the scientific community.

I have seen that letter btw. And at least they do reference the Hawaiian

study (the same one mentioned by Walford). If one were to avoid soy, that

study, and not Mercola, should be the reason. But that study has not been

repeated and is suspect.

In the back of my mind, I do wonder if these things that go around the

internet are started by those with money to lose/gain (such as the cattle

industry for example when soy first became popular). They then take on a

life of their own. There's no shortage of people willing to believe

whatever they hear.

Certainly if one doesn't like soy; if it tastes funny to them, etc, that's a

good reason not to eat it. But not because someone like Dr Mercola says so.

I'll take my chances with the scientists of stature such as the ones

mentioned previously. When they start worrying, so will I.

on 1/19/2004 3:04 PM, Rodney at perspect1111@... wrote:

> Hi Francesca:

>

> The following is one example of the type of stuff about soy that can

> be found littered all over the internet. Of course much, probably

> most, of what is available on the internet is 'unreliable' to put it

> tactfully. Yes, that is an understatement!

>

> http://creativehealth.netfirms.com/soy_fda.shtml

>

> I do not know whether the claimed authors of the letter posted at

> that link really did write that letter. But if they did then it is

> probably worth paying attention to.

>

> But for me, unable to properly assess the importance of this stuff

> for myself, it is the reason I have placed soy products on

> my 'generally try to avoid' list.

>

> But I remain open minded (either way) if we get some high quality

> empirical evidence on the issue. ('Theoretical' stuff, while often

> interesting, very often is not confirmed when the serious empirical

> studies get done.)

>

> If you want to pursue the matter further you could try doing a Google

> search using the words " soy danger " . I have done so. You will find

> there are endless people ranting about how bad soy products are. Of

> course I recognize the vast majority can be safely ignored. However,

> I do not know whether all of them can be.

>

> As for " NOBODY lives for ever " . I would just add a " so far " : ^ )

>

> Rodney.

>

>

>

>> LOL. NOBODY lives forever. Not even the extremist CRONIES!

>>

>> AFAIK Walford, Ornish, Weil, the guys who actually base their

>> recommendations on scientific findings (not Dr Mercola,) are still

>> eating/recommending soy. And until someone on the list points to

> something

>> more definitive (sorry Kim, but the fact that " some say soy is bad "

> just

>> doesn't cut it) so will I (in moderation). There was the only the

> one study

>> pointed to by Walford which was never repeated - and thus is in

> doubt.

>>

>> Recently someone mentioned that eating beef and getting mad cow

> disease is

>> an unlikely scenario. Well moderate soy eating is probably just as

> unlikely

>> afa bad effects. Remember, there are lots of people around (Dr

> Mercola???)

>> who have books to sell/money to make.

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Hi Francesca:

No. I had not realized Mercola was involved with that site.

Admittedly that does cast doubt on it.

But before eating a lot of soy I would want to know whether the

supposed authors really did write it, and if so whether they really

do work at the FDA.

Again, for me it all comes down to the fact that I cannot adequately

assess the reliability of any of the stuff I read on soy. Perhaps I

am erring on the side of caution.

Rodney.

> >> LOL. NOBODY lives forever. Not even the extremist CRONIES!

> >>

> >> AFAIK Walford, Ornish, Weil, the guys who actually base their

> >> recommendations on scientific findings (not Dr Mercola,) are

still

> >> eating/recommending soy. And until someone on the list points to

> > something

> >> more definitive (sorry Kim, but the fact that " some say soy is

bad "

> > just

> >> doesn't cut it) so will I (in moderation). There was the only

the

> > one study

> >> pointed to by Walford which was never repeated - and thus is in

> > doubt.

> >>

> >> Recently someone mentioned that eating beef and getting mad cow

> > disease is

> >> an unlikely scenario. Well moderate soy eating is probably just

as

> > unlikely

> >> afa bad effects. Remember, there are lots of people around (Dr

> > Mercola???)

> >> who have books to sell/money to make.

> >

> >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

Try pubmed: searching "soy and dementia"

Epidemiol Prev. 2002 May-Jun; 26(3): 107-15.

[Western diet and Alzheimer's disease]Berrino F.Unita di epidemiologia, Istituto nazionale per lo studio e la cura dei tumori, via Venezian 1, 20133 Milano. berrino@...Alzheimer Disease, characterised by a global impairment of cognitive functions, is more and more common in Western societies, both because of longer life expectancy and, probably, because of increasing incidence. Several hints suggest that this degenerative disease is linked to western diet, characterised by excessive dietary intake of sugar, refined carbohydrates (with high glycaemic index), and animal product (with high content of saturated fats), and decreased intake of unrefined seeds--cereals, legumes, and oleaginous seeds--and other vegetables (with high content of fibres, vitamins, polyphenols and other antioxidant substances, phytoestrogens) and, in several populations, of sea food (rich in n-3 fatty acids). It has been hypothesised, in fact, that AD, may be promoted by insulin resistance, decreased endothelial production of nitric oxide, free radical excess, inflammatory metabolites, homocysteine, and oestrogen deficiency. AD, therefore, could theoretically be prevented (or delayed) by relatively simple dietary measures aimed at increasing insulin sensitivity (trough reduction of refined sugars and saturated fats from meat and dairy products), the ratio between n-3 and n-6 fatty acids (e.g. from fish and respectively seed oils), antioxidant vitamins, folic acid, vitamin B6, phytoestrogens (vegetables, whole cereals, and legumes, including soy products), vitamin B12 (bivalve molluscs, liver), and Cr, K, Mg, and Si salts. This comprehensive improvement of diet would fit with all the mechanistic hypotheses cited above. Several studies, on the contrary, are presently exploring monofactorial preventive strategies with specific vitamin supplementation or hormonal drugs, without, however, appreciable results. PMID: 12197047

Phytoestrogens and healthy aging: gaps in knowledge. A workshop report.Lu LJ, Tice JA, Bellino FL.Department of Preventive Medicine and Community Health, The University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston 77555-1109, USA.There is an increasing public interest in foods and dietary supplements containing phytoestrogens for the maintenance of health. A workshop was convened to assess evidence for the potential benefits of phytoestrogen-containing foods or supplements on diseases or conditions affecting older populations. Preclinical, clinical, and epidemiologic data on the cardiovascular system, various cancers, bone diseases, and menopausal symptoms were the focus of the discussions. Research on the basis of consumer food choices as well as a presentation from the FDA regarding approval of the use of soy foods to reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease were also presented. Based on the information presented, isoflavone-containing soy foods may have favorable effects on the cardiovascular system, but major knowledge gaps still exist regarding effects ofphytoestrogen supplements on bone diseases, various cancers, menopausal symptoms, and cognitive function. PMID: 11355037

Attenuation of neurodegeneration-relevant modifications of brain proteins by dietary soy.Kim H, Xia H, Li L, Gewin J.Department of Pharmacology & Toxicology and the UAB Center for Aging, University of Alabama at Birmingham, 35294-0019, USA. helenkim@...Epidemiological studies show that postmenopausal women who undertake estrogen-replacement therapy have significantly lower risk for the onset of Alzheimer's disease (AD) than women who do not. Animal behavior studies have shown that ovariectomy results in the development of cognitive dysfunction that is prevented by estrogen-replacement, suggesting that normal mammalian cognitive function is impaired by estrogen reduction. Soy isoflavones in particular genistein have been demonstrated to have weak and selective estrogenic actions in various models of human chronic diseases. A hallmark of several human dementias including AD and fronto temporal dementia with Parkinsonism on chromosome 17 (FTDP-17) is the hyperphosphorylation of the microtubule-associated protein tau. Preliminary experiments are discussed here which show that isoflavones delivered in a soy protein matrix attenuated selected AD-relevant tau phosphorylations in a primate model of menopause. The rationale is discussed for the use of soy-based foods for protection against postmenopausal neurodegeneration.PMID: 11216492

----- Original Message -----

From: Rodney

Sent: Monday, January 19, 2004 2:04 PM

Subject: [ ] Re: soy

[Guest guest]

interesting, Barbara, as, IIRC, the dementia reported with tofu intake was

apparently restricted to males, while women appear, in some studies, to

benefit mentally from soy.

Perhaps you have a male brain?

>From: Barbara Pokras <strombolis@...>

>Reply-

>< >

>Subject: [ ] Soy

>Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2004 10:18:35 -0500

>

>I have a bit of an addictive personality. When I hear something is good

>for you I get a bit carried away. That is what happened when I hear soy

>was

>good. I started to have soy everything. including soy concentrates, soy

>isoflavones. After a couple of months i started to notice that i had

>something like cob webs on the brain. Having heard nothing bad about soy

>at

>this time i loooked on the web and found some information that excess soy

>could have mental like demetia symptons. I cut out the excess and the cob

>webs seem to disappear. just one persons story.

>

>Bob: strombolis@...

>

[Guest guest]

Walford sums up the controversy about soy on pg 177 of " Beyond " . The book

if you don't have it is available in most public libraries and is a " must

read " if you are practising CR.

on 8/5/2004 4:25 PM, ZenOfNothingness@... at ZenOfNothingness@...

wrote:

> I eat a lot of soy products, but I am not sure if they are complimentary to

> the practice of CR. Does anyone have useful information about soy products?

>

> Sky

>

[Guest guest]

Except libraries in Ukraine. Is there an electronic or e-book version that

can be downloaded?

(|-|ri5

>

> Walford sums up the controversy about soy on pg 177 of " Beyond " .

> The book

> if you don't have it is available in most public libraries and is a " must

> read " if you are practising CR.

>

> >

[Guest guest]

You can search the text at Amazon.com.

>From: " chris " <motjuste@...>

>Reply-

>< >

>Subject: RE: [ ] Soy

>Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 01:08:47 +0300

>

>

>Except libraries in Ukraine. Is there an electronic or e-book version that

>can be downloaded?

>

> (|-|ri5

>

> >

> > Walford sums up the controversy about soy on pg 177 of " Beyond " .

> > The book

> > if you don't have it is available in most public libraries and is a

> " must

> > read " if you are practising CR.

> >

> > >

>

[Guest guest]

Or buy it used (which means very cheap) at one of the used book sites (JW

is an expert on these sites and can probably help you). It's a good

reference book to have on hand.

on 8/5/2004 6:22 PM, Dowling at dowlic@... wrote:

> You can search the text at Amazon.com.

>

>

>> From: " chris " <motjuste@...>

>> Reply-

>> < >

>> Subject: RE: [ ] Soy

>> Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 01:08:47 +0300

>>

>>

>> Except libraries in Ukraine. Is there an electronic or e-book version that

>> can be downloaded?

>>

>> (|-|ri5

>>

>>>

>>> Walford sums up the controversy about soy on pg 177 of " Beyond " .

>>> The book

>>> if you don't have it is available in most public libraries and is a

>> " must

>>> read " if you are practising CR.

>>>

[Guest guest]

Hi Sky:

A few things I think you might want to know about soybeans are:

1. Apparently serious nutrition sources are in enormous disagreement

as to whether soy is miracle food, on the one hand, or poison on the

other. I do not have a firm opinion.

2. Between 40% and 50% of the calories in soybeans are derived from

fat. And sixty-something percent in the case of tofu are from fat.

3. Of that fat, a remarkably large proportion is alpha-linolenic

acid (ALA). There are now quite a lot of studies, some from

unimpeachable sources, which show that men who consume the most ALA,

especially if they get it from plant sources, have more than double

the rate of prostate cancer. Prostate cancer is a VERY common form

of cancer in males.

4. Soy PROTEIN does not contain much of the fat component of the

beans.

Rodney.

PS: I am not trying to start an argument. Just stating a few things

I believe to be true about soy products.

> I eat a lot of soy products, but I am not sure if they are

complimentary to

> the practice of CR. Does anyone have useful information about soy

products?

>

> Sky

[Guest guest]

Thank you, Rodney. This is the kind of information I'm after!

Although I respect Dr. Walford's work (I've bought his book, but I don't have it on hand) I want to rely on current information from researchers AND those who are practicing CR. CR makes a lot of sense to me, but I am also aware that I am self-experimenting, risking my health on theories not yet proven (or which can be destructive. Dr. Walford's death gave me great pause.) (BTW, I know the details of his condition. I am NOT trying to launch a debate or argument - I just want as much good and current information as I can get!)

Sky

[Guest guest]

Eating " a lot " of any one thing like soy should be tempered with putting

variety into your eating, even if there were no controversy about soy. Eat

less soy and add other proteins just for variety's sake if for no other

reason.

on 8/5/2004 8:43 PM, Rodney at perspect1111@... wrote:

> Hi Sky:

>

> A few things I think you might want to know about soybeans are:

>

> 1. Apparently serious nutrition sources are in enormous disagreement

> as to whether soy is miracle food, on the one hand, or poison on the

> other. I do not have a firm opinion.

>

> 2. Between 40% and 50% of the calories in soybeans are derived from

> fat. And sixty-something percent in the case of tofu are from fat.

>

> 3. Of that fat, a remarkably large proportion is alpha-linolenic

> acid (ALA). There are now quite a lot of studies, some from

> unimpeachable sources, which show that men who consume the most ALA,

> especially if they get it from plant sources, have more than double

> the rate of prostate cancer. Prostate cancer is a VERY common form

> of cancer in males.

>

> 4. Soy PROTEIN does not contain much of the fat component of the

> beans.

>

> Rodney.

>

> PS: I am not trying to start an argument. Just stating a few things

> I believe to be true about soy products.

>

>

>> I eat a lot of soy products, but I am not sure if they are

> complimentary to

>> the practice of CR. Does anyone have useful information about soy

> products?

>>

>> Sky

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

One thing though is that while Americans have a high rate of PCa, the men don't eat a lot of soy.

And I question if food animals make ALA. I think they get it from plants. I think you(or someone) is saying/implying that ALA from animals is diff from ALA from plants, but maybe you mean omega-3's in fish?

Also I wouldn't call 6.8 gms per 100 gms, loaded with ALA although soy oil is a large supplier of ALA. It has 8 times as much linoleic, and 3 times as much monosat.

Now I wonder HOW did they establish a relationship with just ALA? Maybe the tests were done with flax?

Regards.

----- Original Message -----

From: Rodney

Sent: Thursday, August 05, 2004 7:43 PM

Subject: [ ] Re: Soy

Hi Sky:A few things I think you might want to know about soybeans are:1. Apparently serious nutrition sources are in enormous disagreement as to whether soy is miracle food, on the one hand, or poison on the other. I do not have a firm opinion.2. Between 40% and 50% of the calories in soybeans are derived from fat. And sixty-something percent in the case of tofu are from fat.3. Of that fat, a remarkably large proportion is alpha-linolenic acid (ALA). There are now quite a lot of studies, some from unimpeachable sources, which show that men who consume the most ALA, especially if they get it from plant sources, have more than double the rate of prostate cancer. Prostate cancer is a VERY common form of cancer in males.4. Soy PROTEIN does not contain much of the fat component of the beans.Rodney.PS: I am not trying to start an argument. Just stating a few things I believe to be true about soy products.

[Guest guest]

Rodney wrote:

3. Of that fat, a remarkably large proportion is alpha-linolenic

acid (ALA). There are now quite a lot of studies, some from

unimpeachable sources, which show that men who consume the most ALA,

especially if they get it from plant sources, have more than double

the rate of prostate cancer. Prostate cancer is a VERY common form

of cancer in males.

While I do not doubt these studies the results are counterintuitive (sic).

Those populations with the highest usage of soy have the lowest prostate

cancer.

As Wolford pointed out there may not be a direct relationship between

those two facts.

positive Dennis

[Guest guest]

It occurred to me a while back, that those countries also maybe don't have the number reaching PCa age.

many die from contagious diseases.

SPI >11 gms/d, makes me stiff and sore - as does too many peanuts.

Regards.

----- Original Message -----

From: Dennis De Jarnette

Sent: Friday, August 06, 2004 11:32 AM

Subject: Re: [ ] Re: Soy

Those populations with the highest usage of soy have the lowest prostate cancer.As Wolford pointed out there may not be a direct relationship between those two facts.positive Dennis

[Guest guest]

Life expectancy in the major soy eating countries is actually pretty good:

http://www.overpopulation.com/faq/Health/mortality/life_expectancy/asia.html

>From: " jwwright " <jwwright@...>

>Reply-

>< >

>Subject: Re: [ ] Re: Soy

>Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 11:52:48 -0500

>

>It occurred to me a while back, that those countries also maybe don't have

>the number reaching PCa age.

>many die from contagious diseases.

>SPI >11 gms/d, makes me stiff and sore - as does too many peanuts.

>

>Regards.

>

> ----- Original Message -----

> From: Dennis De Jarnette

>

> Sent: Friday, August 06, 2004 11:32 AM

> Subject: Re: [ ] Re: Soy

>

>

>

>

>

> Those populations with the highest usage of soy have the lowest prostate

> cancer.

>

> As Wolford pointed out there may not be a direct relationship between

> those two facts.

>

> positive Dennis

[Guest guest]

Hi Dennis:

No question the jury is still out regarding the full story of the

effects of soybeans.

However there are multitudes of differences between the north

american diet and that of the japanese. It may be, for example,

that there is some component of the japanese diet (which is not

consumed in north america) that is highly protective against prostate

cancer.

The study I mentioned was done in north america on americans who were

eating a north american diet. If you are japanese, live in japan and

eat the average japanese diet I wouldn't be overly worried about

prostate cancer. But for americans who live in north america and eat

foods generally similar to the rest of us .........

Rodney.

> 3. Of that fat, a remarkably large proportion is alpha-linolenic

> acid (ALA). There are now quite a lot of studies, some from

> unimpeachable sources, which show that men who consume the most ALA,

> especially if they get it from plant sources, have more than double

> the rate of prostate cancer. Prostate cancer is a VERY common form

> of cancer in males.

>

> While I do not doubt these studies the results are counterintuitive

(sic).

>

> Those populations with the highest usage of soy have the lowest

prostate

> cancer.

>

> As Wolford pointed out there may not be a direct relationship

between

> those two facts.

>

> positive Dennis

[Guest guest]

Thanks for that,

It looks the average is about 63 yo for men. That's up from 56 just a few years back. PCa is an old man's disease mostly so how do we equate the possible benefits of soy to our country's 69 yo lifespan in 1960?. Our PCa rate is actually higher than 1950 even though it's dropped in recent years, meaning treatment has gotten better.

Another thing, since PCa is usually slow growing, I'm not sure eating soy now slows it's rate. I'm sure it does nothing for BPH (for me).

For me, chances are 1 in 6 (or 9), while other ethnics are higher, and those at higher latitudes are higher.

It was enough for me when Dr. , NY, said substitute soy for meat, so I eat a little SPI and very little meats.

Regards.

----- Original Message -----

From: Dowling

Sent: Friday, August 06, 2004 12:04 PM

Subject: Re: [ ] Re: Soy

Life expectancy in the major soy eating countries is actually pretty good:http://www.overpopulation.com/faq/Health/mortality/life_expectancy/asia.html>From: "jwwright" <jwwright@...>>Reply- >< >>Subject: Re: [ ] Re: Soy>Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2004 11:52:48 -0500>>It occurred to me a while back, that those countries also maybe don't have >the number reaching PCa age.>many die from contagious diseases.>SPI >11 gms/d, makes me stiff and sore - as does too many peanuts.>>Regards.