Custom Search


Reply To This Post         Return to Posts Index           VegSource Home

From: Marie Oser (
Subject:         Re: Genistein in soy health article & question
Date: January 30, 2006 at 11:36 pm PST

In Reply to: Genistein in soy health article & question posted by Helen and Steve on January 27, 2006 at 11:21 am:

There is no substitute equal to mother’s milk and the very best
source of nutrition, bonding, and natural immunity for the first
year of an infant’s life. I heartily recommend nursing for at least
18 months. That being said, soy formula has been used for
centuries in Asia and since 1909 here in the west.

Soy formula has become enormously popular, capturing 25 percent
of the formula market, nationwide. And like soymilk, soy formula
has suffered the same backlash precipitated by the virulently anti-
soy devotees of the Enig/Fallon, Weston A. Price Foundation.

Many physicians and scientists believe that the use of animal
models in research has done a great job of curing mice and
monkeys of cancer, while squandering billions of dollars
perpetrating unspeakable horror on untold millions of innocent
creatures. Humans metabolize soy and most everything else quite
differently from other animals, and to apply the results of feeding
soy to mice at birth to the human experience does not hold water
in enlightened medical circles. Even more bizarre, to repeatedly
inject mice with large doses of an isolated component of soy
(genistein) and then react with an “AHA” when they develop
abnormalities, is absurd. We should be shocked they didn’t grow
another head, I guess. There are lots of so-called “scientific
studies” that wouldn’t stand up to public scrutiny, if these arrogant
lab grunts were to “report” in actual English.

The infant formula industry is not alone in rejecting the
condemnation of soy formula. Scientists have blasted this criticism
of soy, which they describe as "scientifically unjustified claims that
could unduly frighten thousands of parents."

Some experts contend that the anti-soy campaigns have gone too
far. Kenneth Setchell, a pediatrics professor at Children's Hospital
in Cincinnati and a leading advocate of soy, contends that scientific
studies on soy show promise in fighting a number of diseases and
that adverse effects seen in animals do not apply to humans and
further, that blaming soymilk for causing developmental problems
is unfounded.

Dr. Setchell points out that the studies that sparked the New
Zealand outcry were done in animals, not people. And while soy
can cause some endocrine disruptions in animals, humans
metabolize soy very differently, he says.

"There have been literally hundreds of thousands of infants that
have been raised on those soy formulas," Setchell said on 20/20.
"Some of those infants would be well into their late 30s, early 40s
now. And you know, I don't see evidence of tremendous numbers
of cases where there are abnormalities."

Setchell's views are supported by British pediatrician Charles Essex,
MD, who wrote in the Aug. 31, 1996, British Medical Journal that
there is virtually no data on the effects of phytoestrogens on
children. He also noted that pediatricians have not reported large
numbers of male infants developing breasts or other female traits
because of soy formula.

Reply To This Post         Return to Posts Index           VegSource Home

Follow Ups:


Post Reply

E-mail: (optional)


Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL:

See spam or
inappropriate posts?
Please let us know.

Want to see more videos? Subscribe to VegSource!

Every time we post a new video, we'll send you a notice by e-mail.

No spam ever and you can easily unsubscribe at anytime.

Enter your email address, your first name, and press Submit.

Your Email:
First Name:
Newsletter archive

Infomercial production direct marketing