Tragedy and Hope
The Third International Soy Symposium - Part I
by Sally Fallen and Mary G. Enig, PhD, All Rights Reserved, 2000
"Each year, research on the health effects of soy and soybean components seems
to increase exponentially....Furthermore, research is not just expanding in the
primary areas under investigation, such as cancer, heart disease and
osteoporosis; new findings suggest that soy has potential benefits that may be
more extensive than previously thought." So writes Mark Messina, Ph.D, General
Chairperson of the Third International Soy Symposium, held in Washington, DC in
November of 1999.1
For four days, well-funded scientists who had gathered in Washington made
presentations to an admiring press and to their sponsors - United Soybean Board,
American Soybean Association, Monsanto, Protein Technologies International,
Central Soya, Cargill Foods, Personal Products Company, SoyLife,
Whitehall-Robins Healthcare and the soybean councils of Illinois, Indiana,
Kentucky, Michigan,
Minnesota, Nebraska, Ohio and South Dakota.
The symposium marked the apogee of a decade-long marketing campaign to gain
consumer acceptance of tofu, soy milk, soy ice cream, soy cheese, soy sausage
and soy derivatives, particularly soy isoflavones such as genistein and diadzen,
the estrogen-like compounds found in soybeans. It coincided with an FDA
decision, announced October 25, to allow a health claim for products "low in
saturated fat and cholesterol" that contain 6.25 grams of soy protein per
serving. Breakfast cereals, baked goods, convenience food, smoothie mixes and
meat substitutes could now be sold with labels touting
benefits to cardiovascular health as long as these products contained one
heaping teaspoon of soy protein per 100-gram serving
Marketing the Perfect Food
"Just imagine you could grow the perfect food. This food not only would provide
affordable nutrition, but also would be delicious and easy to prepare in a
variety of ways. It would be a healthful food, with no saturated fat. In fact,
you would be growing a virtual fountain of youth on your back forty." The author
is Dean Houghton, writing for The Furrow,2 a magazine published in 12 languages
by the John Deere tractor company. "This ideal food would help prevent, and
perhaps reverse, some of the world's most dreaded diseases. You could grow this
miracle crop in a variety of soils and climates. Its cultivation would build up,
not deplete, the land...this miracle food already exists.... It's called soy."
Just imagine. Farmers have been imagining...and planting more soy. What was once
a minor crop, listed in the 1913 USDA handbook not as a food but as an
industrial product, now covers 72 million acres of American farmland. Much of
this harvest will be used to feed chickens, turkeys, pigs, cows and salmon.
Another large fraction will be squeezed to produce oil for margarine,
shortenings and salad dressings.
Advances in technology make it possible to produce isolated soy protein from
what was once considered a waste product - the defatted, high-protein soy chips
- and then transform something that looks and smells terrible into products that
can be consumed by humans. Flavorings, preservatives, sweeteners, emulsifiers
and synthetic nutrients have turned soy protein isolate, the food processors'
ugly duckling, into a New Age Cinderella.
Lately, this new fairy-tale food has been marketed not so much for her beauty as
for her virtues. Early on, products based on soy protein isolate were sold as
extenders and meat substitutes, a strategy that failed to produce the requisite
consumer demand. The industry changed its approach. "The quickest way to gain
product acceptability in the less affluent society,"3 said an industry
spokesman, "...is to
have the product consumed on its own merit in a more affluent society."" So soy
is now sold to the upscale consumer, not as a cheap poverty food, but as a
miracle substance that will prevent heart disease and cancer, whisk away hot
flashes, build strong bones and keep us forever young. The competition - meat,
milk, cheese, butter and eggs - has been duly demonized by the appropriate
government agencies. Soy serves as meat and milk for a new generation of
politically correct vegetarians.
Marketing costs money, especially when it needs to be bolstered with "research,"
but there's plenty of funds available. All soybean producers pay a mandatory
assessment of one-half to one percent of the net market price of soybeans. The
total - something like 80 million dollars annually4 - supports United Soybean's
program to "strengthen the position of soybeans in the market place and maintain
and
expand domestic and foreign markets for uses for soybeans and soybean products."
State soybean councils from Maryland, Nebraska, Delaware, Arkansas, Virginia,
North Dakota and Michigan provide another two and one-half million dollars for
"research."5 Private companies like Archer Daniels Midland also contribute their
share. ADM spent $4.7 million for advertising on "Meet the Press" and $4.3
million on Face the Nation" during the course of a year.6 Public relations firms
help convert research projects into newspaper articles and advertising copy; law
firms lobby for favorable government regulations; IMF money funds soy processing
plants in foreign countries; and free trade policies keep soybean abundance
flowing to overseas destinations.
The push for more soy has been relentless and global in its reach. Soy protein
is now found in most supermarket breads. It is being used to transform "the
humble tortilla, Mexico's corn-based staple food, into a protein-fortified
'super-tortilla' that would give a nutritional boost to the nearly 20 million
Mexicans who live in extreme poverty."7 Advertising for a new soy- enriched loaf
from Allied Bakeries in Britain targets menopausal women seeking relief from hot
flashes. Sales are running at a quarter of a million loaves per week.8
The soy industry hired Norman Robert Associates, a public relations firm, to
"get more soy products onto school menus.9 The USDA responded with a proposal to
scrap the 30% limit
for soy in school lunches. The NuMenu program would allow unlimited use of soy
in student meals. With soy added to hamburgers, tacos and lasagna, dieticians
can get the total fat content below 30% of calories, thereby conforming to
government dictates. "With the soy-enhanced food items, students are receiving
better servings of nutrients and less cholesterol and fat."
Soy milk has posted the biggest gains, soaring from $2 million in 1980 to $300
million in the US last year.10 Recent advances in processing have transformed
the gray, thin, bitter, beany- tasting Asian beverage into a product that
western consumers will accept - one that tastes like a milk shake, but without
the guilt.
Processing miracles, good packaging, massive advertising and a marketing
strategy that stresses the products' possible health benefits account for
increasing sales to all age groups. For example, reports that soy helps prevent
prostate cancer have made soy milk acceptable to middle- aged men. "You don't
have to twist the arm of a 55- to 60-year-old guy to get him to try soy milk,"
says Mark Messina. Michael Milken, former junk bond financier, has helped the
industry shed its hippie image with well-publicized efforts to consume 40 grams
of soy protein daily. Now it's OK for stockbrokers to eat soy.
America today, tomorrow the world. Soy milk sales are rising in Canada, even
though soy milk there costs twice as much as cow's milk. Soybean milk processing
plants are sprouting up in places like Kenya.11 Even China, where soy really is
a poverty food and whose people want more meat, not tofu, has opted to build
western-style soy factories, rather than develop western grasslands for grazing
animals.12
Cinderella's Dark Side
The propaganda that has created the soy sales miracle is all the more remarkable
because only a few decades ago the soybean was considered unfit to eat - even in
Asia. During the Chou Dynasty (1134 - 246 BC) the soybean was designated one of
the five sacred grains, along with barley, wheat, millet and rice. However, the
pictograph for the soybean, which dates from earlier times, indicates that it
was not first used as a food; for whereas the pictographs for the other four
grains show the seed and stem structure of the plant, the pictograph for the
soybean emphasizes the root structure. Agricultural literature of the period
speaks frequently of the soybean and its use in crop rotation. Apparently the
soy plant was initially used as a method of fixing nitrogen.13
The soybean did not serve as a food until the discovery of fermentation
techniques, sometime during the Chou Dynasty. The first soy foods were fermented
products like tempeh, natto, miso and soy sauce. At a later date, possibly in
the 2nd century BC, Chinese scientists discovered that a puree of cooked
soybeans could be precipitated with calcium sulfate or magnesium sulfate
(plaster of Paris or Epsom salts) to make a smooth pale curd - tofu or bean
curd. The use of fermented and precipitated soy products soon spread to other
parts of the Orient, notably Japan and Indonesia.
The Chinese did not eat unfermented soybeans as they did other legumes such as
lentils because the soybean contains large quantities of natural toxins or
"antinutrients." First among them are potent enzyme inhibitors that block the
action of trypsin and other enzymes needed for protein digestion. These
inhibitors are large, tightly-folded proteins that retain their configuration
even when heated for long periods of time. They can produce serious gastric
distress, reduced protein digestion and chronic deficiencies in amino acid
uptake. In test animals, diets high in trypsin inhibitors cause enlargement and
pathological conditions of the pancreas, including cancer.14 Soybeans also
contain hemagglutinin, a clot-promoting substance that causes red blood cells to
clump together.
Trypsin inhibitors and hemagglutinin are growth inhibitors - weanling rats fed
soy containing these antinutrients fail to grow normally. Growth depressant
compounds are deactivated during the process of fermentation, so once the
Chinese discovered how to ferment the soybean, they began to incorporate small
amounts of soy foods into their diets. In precipitated products, enzyme
inhibitors concentrate in the soaking liquid rather than in the curd. Thus in
tofu and bean curd, growth depressants are reduced in quantity, but not
completely eliminated.
Soy also contains goitrogens, substances that depress thyroid function, a fact
that has been known for at least 50 years. Soybeans are high in phytic acid,
present in the bran or hulls of all seeds, a substance that can block the uptake
of essential minerals - calcium, magnesium, copper, iron and especially zinc -
in the intestinal tract. Although not a household word, phytic acid has been
extensively studied – there are literally hundreds of articles on the effects of
phytic acid in the scientific literature. Researchers are in general agreement
that grain- and legume- based diets high in phytates contribute to widespread
mineral deficiencies in Third World countries.15 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.
The soybean has one of the highest phytate levels of any grain or legume that
has been studied16 and the phytates in soy are highly resistant to normal
phytate-reducing techniques, such as long, slow cooking.17 Only a long period of
fermentation will significantly reduce the phytate content of soybeans. When
precipitated soy products like tofu are consumed with meat, the mineral blocking
effects of the phytates are reduced.18 The Japanese traditionally eat a small
amount of tofu or miso as part of a mineral-rich fish broth, followed by a
serving of meat or fish. Vegetarians who consume tofu and bean curd as a
substitute for meat and dairy products risk severe mineral deficiencies. The
results of calcium, magnesium and iron deficiency are well known, those of zinc
are less so. Zinc is called the intelligence mineral because it is needed for
optimal development and functioning of the brain and nervous system. It plays a
role in protein synthesis and collagen formation; it is involved in the blood
sugar control
mechanism and thus protects against diabetes; it is needed for a healthy
reproductive system. Zinc is a key component in numerous vital enzymes and plays
a role in the immune system. Phytates found in soy products interfere with zinc
absorption more completely than with other minerals.19 Zinc deficiency can cause
a "spacy" feeling that some vegetarians may mistake for the "high" of spiritual
enlightenment.
Milk-drinking is given as the reason second generation Japanese in America grow
taller than their native ancestors. Some investigators postulate that the
reduced phytate content of the American diet - whatever may be its other
deficiencies - is the true explanation, pointing out that both Asian and Western
children who do not get enough meat and fish products to counteract the effects
of a high phytate diet frequently suffer rickets, stunting and other growth
problems.20
Soy Protein Isolate
Soy processors have worked hard to get these antinutrients out of the finished
product, particularly soy protein isolate (SPI), which is the key ingredient in
most soy foods that imitate meat and dairy products, including baby formulas and
some brands of soy milk. SPI is not something you can make in your own kitchen.
Production takes place in industrial factories where a slurry of soy beans is
first mixed with an alkaline solution to remove fiber, then precipitated and
separated using an acid wash and finally neutralized in an alkaline solution.
Acid washing in aluminum tanks leaches high levels of aluminum into the final
product. The resultant curds are spray dried at high temperatures to produce a
high protein powder. A final indignity to the original soy bean is
high-temperature, high- pressure extrusion processing of soy protein isolate to
produce textured vegetable protein (TVP). Much of the trypsin inhibitor content
can be removed through high- temperature processing, but not all. Trypsin
inhibitor content of soy protein isolate can vary as much as fivefold.21 (In
rats, even low-level-trypsin-inhibitor SPI feeding results in reduced weight
gain compared to controls.22) But high- temperature processing has the
unfortunate side effect of so denaturing the other proteins in soy that they are
rendered largely ineffective.23 That's why animals on soy feed need lysine
supplements for normal growth. Nitrites, which are potent carcinogens, are
formed during spray drying, and a toxin called lysinoalanine is formed during
alkaline processing.24 Numerous artificial flavorings, particularly MSG, are
added to soy protein isolate and textured vegetable protein products to mask
their strong "beany" taste, and impart the flavor of meat.25
In feeding experiments, use of SPI increased requirements for vitamins E, K, D
and B12 and created deficiency symptoms of calcium, magnesium, manganese,
molybdenum, copper, iron and zinc.26 Phytic acid remaining in these soy products
greatly inhibits zinc and iron absorption; test animals fed SPI develop enlarged
organs, particularly the pancreas and thyroid gland, and increased deposition of
fatty acids in the liver.27 Yet soy protein isolate and textured vegetable
protein are used extensively in school lunch programs, commercial baked goods,
diet beverages and fast food products. They are heavily promoted in Third World
countries and form the basis of many food giveaway programs.
In spite of poor results in animal feeding trials, the soy industry has
sponsored a number of studies designed to show that soy protein products can be
used in human diets as a replacement for traditional foods. An example is
"Nutritional Quality of Soy Bean Protein Isolates: Studies in Children of
Preschool Age" sponsored by the Ralston Purina Company.28 A group of Central
American children suffering from malnutrition was first stabilized and brought
into better health by feeding them native foods, including meat and dairy
products. Then for a two-week period these traditional foods were
replaced by a drink made of soy protein isolate and sugar. All nitrogen taken in
and all nitrogen excreted were measured in truly Orwellian fashion - the
children were weighed naked every morning and
all excrement and vomit were gathered up for analysis. The researchers found
that the children retained nitrogen and that their growth was "adequate," so the
experiment was declared a success. Whether the children were actually healthy on
such a diet, or could remain so over a long period, is another matter.
The researchers noted that the children vomited "occasionally," usually after
finishing a meal; over half suffered from periods of moderate diarrhea; some had
upper respiratory infections; and others suffered from rash and fever. It should
be noted that the researchers did not dare to use soy products to help children
recover from malnutrition, and were obliged to supplement the soy-sugar mixture
with nutrients largely absent in soy products, notably vitamins A, D, B12, iron,
iodine and zinc.
The PDA Health Claim
The best marketing strategy for a product that is inherently unhealthy is, of
course, a health claim. "The road to FDA approval was long and demanding,"
writes a soy apologist, "consisting of a detailed review of human clinical data
collected from more than 40 Scientific studies conducted over the last 20 years.
Soy protein was found to be one of the rare foods that had sufficient scientific
evidence not only to
qualify for an FDA health claim proposal but to ultimately pass the rigorous
approval process." 29 The "long and demanding" road to FDA approval actually
took a few unexpected turns. The original petition, submitted by Protein
Technologies International (a division of Dupont), requested a health claim for
isoflavones, the estrogen-like compounds found plentifully in soybeans, based on
assertions that "only soy protein that has been processed in a manner in which
isoflavones are retained will result in cholesterol- lowering.” In 1998, the FDA
made the unprecedented move of rewriting PTI's petition, removing any reference
to the phytoestrogens and substituting a claim for soy protein, a move that was
in direct contradiction to the agency's regulations. The FDA is authorized to
make rulings only on substances presented by petition. The abrupt change in
direction was no doubt due to the fact that a number of researchers, including
scientists employed by the US government, submitted documents indicating that
isoflavones are toxic. The FDA had also received, early in 1998, the final
British government report on phytoestrogens, which failed to find much evidence
of benefit and warned against potential adverse effects.30 Even with the change
to soy protein isolate, FDA bureaucrats engaged in the "rigorous approval
process" were forced to deal nimbly with concerns about mineral blocking
effects, enzyme inhibitors, goitrogenicity, endocrine disruption, reproductive
problems and increased allergic reactions from consumption of soy products.31
One of the strongest letters of protest came from Dr. Dan Sheehan and Dr. Daniel
Doerge, government researchers at the National Center for Toxicological
Research.32 Their pleas for warning labels were dismissed as unwarranted.
"Sufficient scientific evidence" of soy's cholesterol-lowering properties is
drawn largely from a 1995 meta-analysis by Dr. James Anderson, sponsored by
Protein Technologies International and published in the New England Journal of
Medicine.33 A meta-analysis is a review and summary of the results of many
clinical studies on the same subject. Use of meta-analyses to draw general
conclusions has come under sharp criticism by members of the scientific
community. "Researchers substituting meta-analysis for more rigorous trials risk
making faulty assumptions and indulging in creative accounting," says Sir John
Scott, President of the Royal Society of New Zealand. "Like is not being lumped
with like. Little lumps and big lumps of data are being gathered together by
various groups.” 34There is the added temptation for researchers, particularly
researchers funded by a company like Protein Technologies International, to
leave out studies that would prevent the desired conclusions. Dr. Anderson
discarded eight studies for various reasons, leaving a remainder of 29. The
published report suggested that individuals with cholesterol levels over 250
mg/dl would experience a "significant" reduction of seven to 20% in levels of
serum cholesterol if they substituted soy protein for animal protein.
Cholesterol reduction was insignificant for individuals whose cholesterol was
lower than 250 mg/dl. In other words, for most of us, giving up steak and eating
vegeburgers instead will not bring blood cholesterol levels down. The health
claim that the FDA approved "after detailed review of human clinical data" fails
to inform the consumer about these important details.
Research that ties soy to positive effects on cholesterol levels is "incredibly
immature," said Ronald M. Krauss, MD, head of the Molecular Medical Research
Program and Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.35 He might have added that
studies in which cholesterol levels were lowered either through diet or drugs
have consistently resulted in a greater number of deaths in the treatment groups
than in controls, deaths from stroke, cancer, intestinal disorders, accidents
and suicide. 36 Cholesterol lowering measures in the US have fueled a
sixty-billion-dollar-a-year cholesterol-lowering industry but have not saved us
from the ravages of heart disease.
Soy and Cancer
The new PDA ruling does not allow any claims about cancer prevention on food
packages, but that has not restrained the industry and its marketeers from
making them in their promotional literature. "In addition to protecting the
heart," says a vitamin company brochure, "soy has demonstrated powerful
anticancer benefits...the Japanese, who eat 30times as much soy as North
Americans, have a lower incidence of cancers of the breast, uterus and
prostate.37
Indeed they do. But the Japanese, and Asians in general, have much higher rates
of other types of cancer, particularly cancer of the esophagus, stomach,
pancreas and liver.38 Asians throughout the world also have high rates of
thyroid cancer.39 The logic that links low rates of reproductive cancers to soy
consumption requires attribution of high rates of thyroid and digestive cancers
to the same foods, particularly as soy causes these types of cancers in
laboratory rats.
Just how much soy do Asians eat? A 1998 survey found that the average daily
amount of soy consumed in Japan was about 8 grams for men and 7 for women - less
than two teaspoons.40 The famous Cornell China Study, conducted by Colin T.
Campbell, found that legume consumption in China varied from 0 to58 grams per
day, with a mean of about12.41 Assuming that two-thirds of legume consumption is
soy, then the maximum consumption is about 40grams or less than 3 tablespoons
per day, with an average consumption of about9 grams, less than two teaspoons. A
survey conducted in the 1930s found that soy foods accounted for only 1.5%of
calories in the Chinese diet, compared with 65% of calories for pork.42 (Asians
traditionally cooked in lard, not vegetable oil!)
Traditionally fermented soy products make a delicious, natural seasoning that
may supply important nutritional factors in the Asian diet. But except in times
of famine, Asians consume soy products only in small amounts as condiments, and
not as are placement for animal foods - with one exception. Celibate monks
living in monasteries and leading a vegetarian lifestyle find soy foods quite
helpful because they dampen libido.
It was a 1994 meta-analysis by Mark Messina, published in Nutrition and Cancer,
that fueled speculation on soy's anticarcinogenic properties.43 Messina noted
that in 26 animal studies,65% reported protective effects from soy. He
conveniently neglected to include at least one study in which soy feeding caused
pancreatic cancer, the 1985 study by Rackis.44 In the human studies he listed,
the results were mixed. A few showed some protective effect but most showed no
correlation at all between soy consumption and cancer rates."
.. .the data in this review cannot be used as a basis for claiming that soy
intake decreases cancer risk," he concluded. Yet in his subsequent book, The
Simple Soybean and Your Health, Messina makes just such a claim, recommending I
cup or 230 grams of soy products per day in his "optimal" diet as a way to
prevent cancer.
Thousands of women are now consuming soy in the belief that it protects them
against breast cancer. Yet in 1996 researchers found that women consuming soy
protein isolate had an increased incidence of epithelial hyperplasia, a
condition that presages malignancies.45 A year later, dietary genistein was
found to stimulate breast cells to enter the cell cycle, a discovery that led
the study authors to conclude that women should not consume soy products to
prevent breast cancer.46
Next Month: Part II Phytoestrogens - Panacea or Poison?
Sally Fallen is the author of Nourishing Traditions: The Cookbook that
Challenges Politically Correct Nutrition and the Diet Dictocrats, Second Edition
1999 (New Trends Publishing 877-707-1776 or 219-268-2601) and President of the
Weston A. Price Foundation, Washington, DC, www.WestonAPrice.org. Mary G. Enig,
Ph.D is the author of Know Your Fats: The Complete Primer for Understanding the
Nutrition of Fats, Oils and Cholesterol 2000(www.BethesdaPress.com), President
of the Maryland Nutritionists Association and Vice President of the Weston A.
Price Foundation, Washington, DC.
References
1. Program for the Third International Symposium on the Role of Soy in
Preventing and Treating Chronic Disease, Sunday October 31 through Wednesday,
November 3, 1999, Omni Shoreham Hotel,
Washington, DC
2. Dean Houghton, Healthful Harvest, The Furrow, January- 2000, pages 10-13
3. Richard J Coleman Vegetable Protein: A Delayed Birth? Journal of the American
Oil Chemists' Society, April 1975,52:238A
4. See http://www/unitedsoybean.org
5. These are listed in www.soyonlineservice.co.nz
6. Wall Street Journal, October 27, 1995
7. James F Smith, Healthier tortillas could lead to healthier Mexico, The Denver
Post, August 22, 1999, page 26A
8. Bakery says new loaf can help reduce hot flushes, Reuters, September 15,1997
9. Beefing Up Burgers with Soy Products at School, Nutrition Week, Community
Nutrition Institute,
Washington, DC June 5, 1998, page 2
10. John Urquhart, A Health Food Hits Big Time, Wall Street Journal, August 3,
1999, page Bl
11. Soya bean Milk Plant in Kenya, Africa News Service, September 1998
12. Frederick J Simoons, Food in China: A Cultural and Historical Inquiry, CRC
Press, BocaRaton,1991~page 64
13. Soloman H Katz, Food and Biocultural Evolution: A Model for the
Investigation of Modern Nutritional Problems, Nutritional Anthropology, Alan R.
Lisa, Inc., 1987, page 50
14. Joseph J Rackis, et al. The USDA trypsin inhibitor study. 1. Background,
objectives and procedural
details. Qualification of Plant Foods in Human Nutrition , 1985, volume 35
15. Van-Rensburg, et al, Nutritional status of African populations predisposed
to esophageal cancer,
Nutrition and Cancer, 1983 4:206-216; P B Moser, et al, Copper, iron, zinc and
selenium dietary intake and status ofNepalese lactating women and their breast'
fed infants, American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, April 1988,47:729-734; B F
Harland, et al, Nutritional status and phytate: zinc and phytate X calcium: zinc
dietary molar ratios oflacto-ovo-vegetarian Trappist monks: 10 years later.
Journal of the American Dietetic Association, December 1988, 88:1562-1666
16. A H El Tiney, Proximate Composition and Mineral and Phytate Contents of
Legumes Grown in Sudan, Journal of Food Composition and Analysis, 1989 2: 67-68
17. A D 01oghobo,et al. Distribution of phosphorus and phytate in some Nigerian
varieties of legumes and some effects of processing, Journal of Food Science,
January/February 1984,49:(l):199-201
18. B Sandstrom, et al. Effect of protein level and protein source on zinc
absorption in humans. Journal of Nutrition, January 1989, 119:(l):48-53; Susan
Tail, et al. The availability of minerals in food, with particular reference to
iron, Journal of Research in Society and Health, April 1983 103:(2);74-77.
19. Phytate reduction of zinc absorption has been demonstrated in numerous
studies. These results are
summarized in Richard Leviton, Tofu, Tempeh Miso and Other Soy foods: The Food
of the Future- How to Enjoy Its Spectacular Health Benefits, Keats Publishing,
Inc., New Canaan CT 1982, pages 14-15.
20. Edward Mellanby, Experimental rickets: The effect of cereals and their
interaction with other factors of diet and environment in producing rickets,
Journal of the Medical Research Council, March 1925 93:2-
65; MR Wills, et al, Phytic Acid and Nutritional Rickets in Immigrants, The
Lancet, April 8, 1972, pages 771-773.
21. Joseph J Rackis, et al. The USDA trypsin inhibitor study. 1. Background,
objectives and procedural
details, Qualification of Plant Foods in Human Nutrition, 1985, volume 35
22. Joseph J Rackis, et al. The USDA trypsin inhibitor study. 1. Background,
objectives and procedural
details. Qualification of Plant Foods in Human Nutrition, 1985,36:232.
23. Wallace, G.M., Studies on the Processing and Properties of Soy milk, Journal
of Science and Food
Agriculture, October 1971, 22: 526-535.
24. Joseph J Rackis, et al, The USDA trypsin inhibitor study. 1. Background,
objectives and procedural
details, Qualification of Plant Foods in Human Nutrition, 1965, 35:22;
Evaluation of the Health Aspects of Soy Protein Isolates as Food Ingredients,
Prepared for FDA by Life Sciences Research Office, Federation of American
Societies for Experimental Biology, 9650 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, MD 20014,
Contract No, FDA 223-75-2004, 1979
25. See http://www/truthinlabeling.org
26. Joseph, J Rackis, Biological and physiological Factors in Soybeans, Journal
of the American Oil Chemists' Society, January 1974 51:161A-170A
27. Joseph J Rackis, et al. The USDA trypsin inhibitor study. 1. Background,
objectives and procedural details, Qualification of Plant Foods in Human
Nutrition, 1985, volume 35
28. Benjamin Torum, Nutritional Quality of Soybean Protein Isolates: Studies in
Children of Preschool Age, Soy Protein and Human Nutrition, Harold L Wileke, et
al, eds, Academic Press, New York 1979
29. Marwin Zreik, CCN, The Great Soy Protein Awakening, Total Health, February
2000, Vol 32, * 1.
IEH assessment on Phytoestrogens in the Human Diet, Final Report to the Ministry
of Agriculture)
Fisheries and Food, UK, November 1997, page II
31. Food Labeling: Health Claims: Soy Protein and Coronary Heart Disease, Food
and Drug Administration 21 CFR Part 101 (Docket No. 98P- 0683)
32. Daniel M Sheegan and Daniel R Doerge, Letter to Dockets Management Branch
(HFA-305) February
18,1999
33. James W Anderson, et al, Meta-analysis of the Effects of Soy Protein Intake
on Scrum Lipids, New England Journal of Medicine, 1995 333:(5):276-82
34. Camille Guy, Doctors warned against magic, quackery. New Zealand Herald
September 9, 1995,
Section Eight, Page 5
35. Kate Sander and Hilary Wilson, FDA approves new health claim for soy, but
little fallout expected for dairy, Cheese Market News, October 22, 1999, page 24
36. Mary G Enig, and Sally Fallen, The Oiling of America, Nexus Magazine,
December 1998-January 1999 and February 1999-March 1999, also available at
www.WestonAPrice.org
37. Natural Medicine News, L & H Vitamins, 32-33 47th Avenue, Long Island City,
NY 11101, January/
February 2000, page 8
38. Angela Harras, Ed. Cancer Rates and Risks, 4th Edition, 1996 National
Institutes of Health, National
Cancer Institute
39. Charles E Searie, Ed, Chemical Carcinogens, ACS Monograph 173, American
Chemical Society,
Washington, DC 1976
40. C Nagata, et al. Journal of Nutrition, 1998, 128:209-13
41. T Colin Campbell, et al, The Cornell Project in China
42. K C Chang, ed, Food in Chinese Culture: Anthropological and Historical
Perspectives, New
Haven, 1977
43. Mark J Messina, et al, Soy Intake and Cancer Risk: A Review of the In Vitro
and In Vivo Data, Nutrition and Cancer, 199421:(2):113-131
44. Joseph J Rackis, et al, The USDA trypsin inhibitor study. 1. Background,
objectives and procedural details. Qualification of Plant Foods in Human
Nutrition, 1985, volume 35
45. N L Petrakis, at al, Stimulatory influence of soy protein isolate on breast
secretion in pre-and
postmenopausal women, Cancer Epid Bio Prev 1996 5:785-794
46. C Dees, et at. Dietary estrogens stimulate human breast cells to enter the
cell cycle. Environmental
Health Perspectives 1997 105 (Suppl 31:633-636
TOWNSEND LETTER for DOCTORS & PATIENTS - JULY 2000
TOWNSEND LETTER for DOCTORS & PATIENTS -JULY 2001
Tragedy and Hype
The Third International Soy Symposium Part II
by Sally Fallon and Mary G. Enig, PhD, All Rights Reserved, 2000
Phytoestrogens Panacea or Poison?
The male species of tropical birds carries the drab plumage of the female at
birth and "colors up" at maturity ,somewhere between nine and 24 months. In
1991, Richard and Valerie James, bird breeders in Whangerai, New Zealand,
purchased a new kind of feed for their birds, one based largely on soy
protein.47 When soy-based feed was used, their birds "colored up" after just a
few months. In fact, one bird food manufacturer claimed that this early
development was an advantage imparted by the feed. A 1992ad for Roudy bush feed
formula showed a picture of the male crimson rosella, an Australian parrot that
acquires beautiful red plumage at 18 to 24 months, already brightly colored at
II weeks old.
Unfortunately, in the ensuing years, there was decreased fertility in the birds
with precocious maturation, deformed, stunted and still-born babies, and
premature deaths, especially among females, with the result that the total
population in the aviaries went into steady decline. The birds suffered beak and
bone deformities, goitre, immune system disorders and pathological aggressive
behavior. Autopsy revealed digestive organs in a state of disintegration. The
list of problems corresponded with many of the problems the Jameses had
encountered in their two children, who had been fed soy-based infant formula.
Startled, aghast, angry.. .the Jameses hired toxicologist Mike Fitzpatrick to
investigate further. Dr. Fitzpatrick's literature review uncovered evidence that
soy consumption has been linked to numerous disorders, including infertility,
increased cancer and infantile leukemia; and, in studies dating back to the
1950s,48 that genistein in soy causes endocrine disruption in animals. Dr.
Fitzpatrick also analyzed the bird feed and found that it contained high levels
of phytoestrogens, especially genistein. When the Jameses discontinued using
soy-based feed, the flock gradually returned to normal breeding habits and
behavior.
The Jameses embarked on a private crusade to warn the public and government
officials about soy foods, particularly the endocrine disrupting isoflavones
(genistein and diadzen.) Protein Technologies International (PTI)
In 1991, Japanese researchers reported that consumption of as little as 30
grains or 2 tablespoons of soybeans per day for only one month resulted in a
significant increase in thyroid stimulating hormone.49 Diffuse goitre and
hypothyroidism appeared in some of the subjects and many complained of
constipation, fatigue and lethargy, even though their intake of iodine was
adequate. In 1997, researchers from the FDA's National Center for Toxicological
Research made the embarrassing discovery that the goitrogenic components of soy
were the very same isoflavones.50
Twenty-five grams of soy protein isolate, the minimum amount PTI claimed to have
cholesterol-lowering effects, contains at least 50 mg of isoflavones. It took
only 45 mg daily of isoflavones in premenopausal women to exert significant
biological effects including reduction in hormones needed for adequate thyroid
function. These effects lingered for three months after soy consumption was
discontinued.51
One hundred grams of soy protein, the maximum suggested cholesterol-lowering
dose (and the amount recommended by Protein Technologies International), can
contain almost 600 mg of isoflavones,52 an amount that is undeniably toxic. In
1992, the Swiss health service estimated that 100 grams of soy protein provided
the estrogenic equivalent of the pill.53
In vitro studies suggest that isoflavones inhibit synthesis of estradiol and
other steroid hormones. 54 Reproductive problems, infertility, thyroid disease
and liver disease due to dietary intake of isoflavones have been observed for
several species of animals including mice, cheetah, quail, pigs, rats, sturgeon
and sheep.55
It is the isoflavones in soy that are said to have a favorable effect on
postmenopausal symptoms, including hot flashes and protection from osteoporosis.
Quantification of discomfort from hot flashes is extremely subjective and most
studies show that control subjects report reduction in discomfort in amounts
equal to subjects given soy.56
The claim that soy prevents osteoporosis is extraordinary, given that soy foods
block calcium and cause vitamin D deficiencies. If Asians indeed have lower
rates of osteoporosis than Westerners it is because their diet provides plenty
of vitamin D from shrimp, lard and sea food; and plenty of calcium from bone
broths. The reason that Westerners have such high rates of osteoporosis is
because they have substituted soy oil for butter, which is a traditional source
of vitamin D and other fat-soluble activators needed for calcium absorption,
Birth Control Pills for Babies but it was the isoflavones in infant formula that
gave the James family the most cause for concern. In 1998, investigators
reported that the daily exposure of infants to isoflavones in soy infant formula
is six to eleven times higher on a body weight basis than the dose that has
hormonal effects in adults consuming soy foods. Circulating concentrations of
isoflavones in infants fed soy-based formula were 13,000 to 22,000 times higher
than plasma estradiol concentrations in infants on cows' milk formula.57
Approximately 25% of bottle-fed children in the US receive soy-based formula - a
much higher percentage than in other parts of the Western world. Fitzpatrick
estimated that an infant exclusively fed soy formula receives the estrogenic
equivalent (based on body weight) of at least five birth control pills per
day.58 By contrast, almost no phytoestrogens have been detected in dairy-based
infant formula or in human milk, even when the mother consumes soy products.
Scientists have known for years that soy-based formula can cause thyroid
problems in babies. But what are the effects of soy products on the hormonal
development of the infant, both male and female? Male infants undergo a
"testosterone surge" during the first few months of life, when testosterone
levels may be as high as those of an adult male. During this period, the infant
is programmed to express male characteristics after puberty, not only in the
development of his sexual organs and other masculine physical traits, but also
in setting patterns in the brain characteristic of male behavior. In monkeys,
deficiency of male hormones impairs the development of spatial perception
(which, in humans, is normally more acute in men than in women), of learning
ability and of visual discrimination tasks (such as would be required for
reading.)59 It goes without saying that future patterns of sexual orientation
may also be influenced by the early hormonal environment. Male children exposed
during gestation to diethylstilbesterol (DES), a synthetic estrogen that has
effects on animals similar to those of phytoestrogens from soy, had testes
smaller than normal on maturation.60
Learning disabilities and behavioral problems, especially in male children, have
reached epidemic proportions. Soy infant feeding - which began in earnest in the
early 1970s - cannot be ignored as a probable cause for these tragic
developments.
As for girls, an alarming number are entering puberty much earlier than normal,
according to a recent study reported in the journal Pediatrics.61 Investigators
found that one percent of all girls now show signs of puberty, such as breast
development or pubic hair, before the age of three; by age eight, 14.7% of white
girls and almost 50% of African-American girls had one or both of these
characteristics. New data indicate that environmental estrogens such as PCBs and
DDE (a breakdown product of DDT) may cause early sexual development in girls.62
In the 1986 Puerto Rico Premature Thelarche study, the most significant dietary
association with premature sexual development was not chicken - as reported in
the press – but soy infant formula.63 The Woman, Infants and Children (WIC)
program, which supplies free infant formula to welfare mothers, stresses soy
formula for African Americans because they are supposedly allergic to milk.
The consequences of truncated childhood are tragic. Young girls with mature
bodies must cope with feelings and urges that most children are not well-
equipped to handle. And early maturation in girls is frequently a harbinger for
problems with the reproductive system later in life - including failure to
menstruate, infertility and breast cancer. Parents who have contacted the
Jameses recount other problems associated with children of both sexes who were
fed soy- based formula, including extreme emotional behavior, asthma, immune
system problems, pituitary insufficiency, thyroid disorders and irritable bowel
syndrome - the same endocrine and digestive havoc that afflicted the James'
parrots.
Dissention in the Ranks
Organizers of the Third International Soy Symposium would be hard pressed to
call the conference an unqualified success. On the second day of the conference
the London-based Food Commission and the Weston A Price Foundation of
Washington, DC held a joint press conference in the same hotel to present
concerns about soy infant formula. Industry representatives sat stony faced
through the recitation of potential dangers and a plea from concerned scientists
and parents to pull soy-based infant formula from the market. Under pressure
from the Jameses, the New Zealand government had issued a health warning about
soy infant formula in 1998. It was time for the American government to do the
same.
On the last day of the conference, presentations on new findings related to
toxicity sent a well-oxygenated chill through the industry's giddy helium hype.
Dr. Lon White reported on a study of Japanese Americans living in Hawaii. It
showed a significant statistical relationship between two or more servings of
tofu per week and "accelerated brain aging.”65 Those participants who consumed
tofu in midlife had lower cognitive function in late life and a greater
incidence of AIzheimers and dementia. "What's more," said Dr. White, "those who
ate a lot of tofu, by the time they were 75 or 80, looked five years older.'""
White and his colleagues blamed the negative effects on isoflavones, a finding
that supports an earlier study in which post-menopausal women with higher levels
of circulating estrogen experienced greater cognitive decline.66
Scientists Daniel Sheehan and Daniel Doerge from the National Center for
Toxicological Research ruined PTI's day by presenting findings from rat feeding
studies indicating that genistein in soy foods causes irreversible damage to
enzymes that synthesize thyroid hormones.67 "The association between soybean
consumption and goiter in animals and humans has a long history," wrote Dr.
Doerge. "Current evidence for the beneficial effects of soy requires a full
understanding of potential adverse effects as well." Dr. Claude Hughes reported
that rats born to mothers fed genistein had decreased birth weights compared to
controls and onset of puberty occurred earlier in male offspring.68 His research
suggested that the effects observed in rats "...will be at least somewhat
predictive of what occurs in humans. There is no reason to assume that there
will be gross malformations of fetuses but there may be subtle changes, such as
neurobehavioral attributes, immune function and sex hormone levels." The
results, he said "...could be nothing or could be something of great
concern...if morn is eating something that can act like sex hormones, it is
logical to wonder if that could change the baby's development. "69
A study of babies born to vegetarian mothers, published in January 2000,
indicated just what those changes in baby's development might be. Mothers who
ate a vegetarian diet during pregnancy had a fivefold greater risk of delivering
a boy with hypospadias, a birth defect of the penis.70 The authors of the study
suggested that the cause was greater exposure to phytoestrogens in soy foods
popular with vegetarians. Problems with female offspring of vegetarian mothers
are more likely to show up later in life. While soy's estrogenic effect is less
than that of diethylstilbestrol (DES), the dose is likely to be higher because
it's consumed as a food, not taken as a drug. Daughters of women who took DES
during pregnancy suffered from infertility and cancer when they reached their
twenties.
GRAS Status
Lurking in the background of industry whoopla for soy is the nagging question of
whether it's even legal to add soy protein isolate to food. All food additives
not in common use prior to 1958, including casein protein from milk, must have
GRAS (Generally Recognized As Safe) status. In 1972, the Nixon administration
directed a reexamination of substances believed to be GRAS in the light of any
scientific information then available. This reexamination included casein
protein which became codified as GRAS in 1978. In 1974, the FDA obtained a
literature review of soy protein because, as soy protein had not been used in
food until 1959 and was not even in common use in the early 1970s, it was not
eligible to have its GRAS status grandfathered under the provisions of the Food,
Drug and Cosmetic Act.71
The scientific literature up to 1974 recognized many antinutrients in factory-
made soy protein, including trypsin inhibitors, phytic acid, and genistein. But
the FDA literature review dismissed discussion of adverse impacts with the
statement that it was important for "adequate processing" to remove them.
Genistein could be removed with an alcohol wash but it was an expensive
procedure that processors avoided. Later studies determined that trypsin
inhibitor content could be removed only with long periods of heat and pressure,
but the FDA has imposed no requirements for manufacturers to do so.
The FDA was more concerned about toxins formed during processing, specifically
nitrites and lysinoalanine.72 Even at low levels of consumption - averaging
one-third of a gram per day at the time - the presence of these carcinogens was
considered too great a threat to public health to allow GRAS status. Soy protein
did have approval for use as a binder in cardboard boxes and this approval was
allowed to continue because researchers considered that migration of nitrites
from the box into the food contents would be too small to constitute a cancer
risk. FDA officials called for safety specifications and monitoring procedures
before granting of GRAS status for food. These were never performed. To this
day, use of soy protein is codified as GRAS only for limited industrial use as a
cardboard binder. This means that soy protein must be subject to premarket
approval procedures each time manufacturers intend to use it as a food or add it
to a food. Soy protein was introduced into infant formula in the early 1960s. It
was a new product with no history of any use at all. As soy protein did not have
GRAS status, premarket approval was required. This was not and still has not
been granted. The key ingredient of soy infant formula is not recognized as
safe.
The Next Asbestos?
"Against the backdrop of widespread praise. . . there is growing suspicion that
soy - despite its undisputed benefits - may pose some health hazards," writes
Marian Burros, a leading food writer for the New York Times. More than any other
writer, Ms. Burros' endorsement of a lowfat, largely vegetarian diet has herded
Americans into supermarket aisles featuring soy foods. Yet her January 26, 2000
article "Doubts Cloud Rosy News on Soy" contains the following alarming
statement: "Not one of the 18 scientists interviewed for this column was willing
to say that taking isoflavones was risk free." Ms. Burros did not enumerate the
risks, nor did she mention that the recommended 25 daily grams of soy protein
contain enough isoflavones to cause problems in sensitive individuals, but it
was evident that the industry had recognized the need to cover itself.
Because the industry is extremely exposed. Contingency lawyers will soon
discover that the number of potential plaintiffs can be counted in the millions
and the pockets are very, very deep. Juries will hear something like the
following: "The industry has known for years that soy contains many toxins. At
first they told the public that the toxins were removed by processing. When it
became apparent that processing could not get rid of them, they claimed that
these substances were beneficial. Your government granted a health claim to a
substance that is poisonous and the industry lied to the public to sell more
soy."
The "industry" includes merchants, manufacturers, scientists, publicists,
bureaucrats, former bond financiers, food writers, vitamin companies and retail
stores. Farmers will probably escape because they were duped like the rest of
us. But they need to find something else to grow before the soy bubble bursts
and the market collapses - grass-fed livestock, designer vegetables ...or hemp
to make paper for thousands and thousands of legal briefs.
Sally Fallon is the author of Nourishing Traditions: The Cookbook t
hat Challenges Politically Correct Nutrition and the Diet Dictocrats, Second Edition 1999 (New Trends Publishing 877-707- 1776 or 219-268-2601) and President of the Weston A Price Foundation, Washington, DC, www.WestonAPrice.org Mary G. Enig, PhD is the author of Know Your Fats: The Complete Primer for Understanding the Nutrition of Fats, Oils and Cholesterol 2000 (www. BethesdaPress.corn). President of the Maryland Nutritionists Association and Vice President of the Weston A Price Foundation, Washington, DC. The authors wish to thank Mike Fitzpatrick, Ph.D and Valerie & Richard James for their help in preparing this article.
References
47. D J Woodhams, Phytoestrogens and parrots: The anatomy of an investigation,
Proceedings of the Nutrition Society of New Zealand, 1995 20:22-30.
48. G Matrone et al. Effect of Genistin on Growth and Development of the Male
Mouse, Journal of Nutrition, 1956,235-240.
49. Y Ishizuki, et al. The effects on the thyroid gland of soybeans administered
experimentally in healthy subjects, Nippon Naibunpi Gakkai Zasshi 1991 767:
622-629.
50. R L Divi, et al, Anti-thyroid isoflavones from the soybean, Biochemical
Pharmacology, 1997 54:1087- 1096.
51. A Cassidy, et al. Biological Effects of a Diet of Soy Protein Rich in
Isoflavones on the Menstrual Cycle of Premenopausal Women, American Journal of
Clinical Nutrition 1994 60: 333-340 (1994).
52. P A Murphy, Phytoestrogen Content of Processed Soybean Foods, Food
Technology,1982, pages 50-54.
53. Bulletin de L’Office Federal de la Sante Publique, No 28, July 20.1992.
54. W M Keung, Dietary estrogenic isoflavones are potent inhibitors of B-hydroxysteroid
(Dehydrogenase of P testosteronii, Biochemical and Biophysical Research
Committee 1995 215:1137-1144; S I Makela, et al, Estrogen specific 12 B-hydroxysteroid
oxidoreductase type I (E.C. 1.1.1.62) as a possible target for the action of
phytoestrogens, PEUM, 1995 208:51-59.
55. K DR Setchell , et al, Dietary estrogens - a probable cause of infertility
and liver disease in captive cheetahs, Gastroenterology 93: 225-233 (1987); A S
Leopold, Phytoestrogens: Adverse effects on reproduction in California Quail,
Science 1976 191: 98-100; Drane HM et al, Oestrogenic activity of soya-bean
products, Food Cosmetics and Technology 1980 18:425-427; S Kimura, et al.
Development of malignant goiter by defatted soybean with iodine-free diet in
rats, 1976, Gann 67: 763-765; C,Pelissero, et al, Estrogenic effect of dietary
soy bean meal on vitellogenesis in cultured Siberian Sturgeon Acipenser baeri,
Gen Comp End 83:447-457; Braden et al, The oestrogenic activity and metabolism
of certain isoflavones in sheep, Australian Journal of Agricultural Research
196718:335-348.
56. Jean Ginsburg and Giordana M Prelevic, Is there a proven place for
phytoestrogens in the menopause? Climacteric, 19992:75-78.
57. K D Setchell et al, Isoflavone content of infant formulas and the metabolic
fate of these early phytoestrogens in early life, American Journal of Clinical
Nutrition, December 1998 Supplement 1453S-1461S.
58. Cirvine.etal, The Potential Adverse Effects of Soybean Phytoestrogens in
Infant Feeding, New Zealand Medical Journal, May 24, 1995, page 318.
59. C Hagger and J Bachevalier, Visual habit formation in 3-month-old monkeys (Macaca
mulatta): reversal of sex difference following neonatal manipulations of
androgen, Behavior and Brain Research 1991 45:57- 63.
60. R K Ross et al, Effect of in-utero exposure to diethylstilbestrol on age at
onset of puberty and on post-pubertal hormone levels in boys, Canadian Medical
Association Journal, May 15m 1983 128:(10):1197-8.
61. Marcia E Herman-Giddens, et al Secondary Sexual Characteristics and Menses
in Young Girls Seen in Office Practice: A Study from the Pediatric Research in
Office Settings Network, Pediatrics April 1997, 99:(4):505-512.
62. Rachel's Environment & Health Weekly, #263, The Wingspread Statement, Part
I, December II, 1991; Theo Colborn, Dianne Dumanoski and John Peterson Myers,
Our Stolen Future, Little Brown and Company, London, 1996.
63. L W Freni-Titulaer, Premature Thelarch in Puerto Rico, A search for
environmental factors, American Journal of Diseases of Children, December 1986
140:(12):1263-1267
64. Lon White, Association of High Midlife Tofu Consumption with Accelerated
Brain Aging, Plenary Session #8: Cognitive Function, The Third International Soy
Symposium, Program, November1999, page 26.
65. Helen Altonn, Too much tofu induces ‘brain aging,’ study shows, Honolulu
Star-Bulletin, November 19, 1999.
66. Journal of the American Geriatric Society, 1998 46:816- 21.
67. Daniel R Doerge, Inactivation of Thryoid Penoxidase by Genistein and
Daidzein in Vitro and in Vivo; Mechanism for Anti-Thyroid Activity of Soy,
presented at the November 1999 Soy Symposium in Washington, DC National Center
for Toxicological Research, Jefferson, AR 72029.
68. Claude Hughes, Center for Women's Health and Department of Obstetrics &
Gynecology, Cedara-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA.
69. Soy Intake May Affect Fetus, Reuters News Service, November 5,1999.
70. Vegetarian diet in pregnancy linked to birth defect, British Journal of
Urology International, January 2000 85:107-113.
71. FDA ref 72/104, Report FDABFGRAS –258
72. Evaluation of the Health Aspects of Soy Protein Isolates as Food
Ingredients, Prepared for FDA by Life Sciences Research Office, Federation of
American Societies for Experimental Biology, 9650 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, MD
20014, Contract No, FDA 223-75-2004. 1979.
TOWNSEND LETTER for DOCTORS & PATIENTS - AUGUST/SEPTEMBER 2000
For more on soy:
http://www.soyonlineservice.co.nz/