Lately there have been a lot of threads about is soy is good/bad for you. This article was on Yahoo and it explains how soy does not have cholesterol-lowering properties, not that it's necessarily unhealthy to consume. It doesn't have the straightforward answer we all want to hear about if soy is something to avoid or eat in moderation, but I just thought I'd share.

"Soy proteins and isoflavones don't have any major health benefits other than soy protein products are generally good foods," said Dr. Frank Sacks, a professor of nutrition at the Harvard School of Public Health in Boston who led the committee. "They're good to replace other foods that are high in cholesterol."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060124/ap_on_he_me/fit_soy_health_6

Yeah, "the View" had a guest on talking about the whole soy thing. She pretty much said the same thing, that it doesn't have the cholesterol lowering properties that they thought, but she didn't actually say it was bad for you. She said to stay away from products with isoflavones. I'm guessing to just follow the old moderation rule as has been said in many of the threads on VB.

The spin that the popular press put on this story is really very sad. The article I read began with a single sentence: "It seems that veggie burgers aren't really good for you after all."

This is the kind of pro-meat propanganda that warms the hearts and souls of the National Cattlemen's Beef Association and other sickness-promoting organizations. These groups are well aware that in order to maintain the (very profitable) status quo, you just have to keep people confused. Stories like this are extremely valuable in that regard.

The fact is that the studies in question were done on people consuming the fundamentally unhealthy Standard American Diet (SAD). The fact that messing around with soy consumption had little effect on cholesterol is not surprising. An analogy: would you expect someone to show great improvement in overall health if they went from 500 pounds overweight to 450 pounds?

Well, folks, let's continue fighting the good fight. It's an uphill battle, but all good fights are uphill battles in an evil world. :sunny:

The spin that the popular press put on this story is really very sad. The article I read began with a single sentence: "It seems that veggie burgers aren't really good for you after all."

This is the kind of pro-meat propanganda that warms the hearts and souls of the National Cattlemen's Beef Association and other sickness-promoting organizations. These groups are well aware that in order to maintain the (very profitable) status quo, you just have to keep people confused. Stories like this are extremely valuable in that regard.

The fact is that the studies in question were done on people consuming the fundamentally unhealthy Standard American Diet (SAD). The fact that messing around with soy consumption had little effect on cholesterol is not surprising. An analogy: would you expect someone to show great improvement in overall health if they went from 500 pounds overweight to 450 pounds?

Well, folks, let's continue fighting the good fight. It's an uphill battle, but all good fights are uphill battles in an evil world. :sunny:

:yes:

Veggie burgers and tofu might not be so great at warding off heart disease after all.

...

Still, the Heart Association statement notes that soy products like tofu, soy butter, soy nuts and some soy burgers should be heart-healthy because they contain a lot of polyunsaturated fats, fiber, vitamins and minerals and are low in saturated fat.

...

"There's no quick fix," he said. "Our bad cholesterol numbers would certainly get worse if instead of eating tofu burgers we went out and had hamburgers each night of the week."


So what's the problem? Why not prevent the problem instead of looking for a quick fix?

Because our stupid society is all about the quick fixes. :rolleyes:

But...what kind of soy products did they test?

Isn't it valuable to note (as mentioned deep in the article) that people eat this stuff in place of say, hamburgers, which would raise LDL levels?

<<not impressed with the study overall.

Going along with what everyone else is saying.... this is just so ridiculous... I don't eat soy to ward off heart disease... I try and eat healthy in general and have a healthy lifestyle to ward off heart disease. I eat soy (among other forms of protein) because it's a healthier and more natural source of protein than animal carcass. So while I don't care if my soy specifically has heart-disease-preventing properties, it doesn't have heart-disease-causing properties like meat.

<<not impressed with the study overall.
:yes: I think it was realllllllly stupid. Most people don't even EAT soy products, and those who do eat it for a different reason than cholesterol: WE DON'T EAT MEAT!!!!

Most people don't even EAT soy products
Actually like 60% (I can't remember the exact percentage but it's in the 60's) of products contain soy ingredients. I can't remember where I got this fact, so I could be wrong.

Actually like 60% (I can't remember the exact percentage but it's in the 60's) of products contain soy ingredients. I can't remember where I got this fact, so I could be wrong.
What I MEANT is most people don't go "Oh, I could have a soy burger or a meat burger, I'll go for the soy burger". Most people (in our culture) decide that soy is utterly disgusting and is a work of the devil.
All right, I'm a drama queen.

Well, I've never really gone in for that "miracle food of the week" type of thing, so this isn't really surprising. Touting isoflavones to me is not much different than raw foodies touting enzymes. Individual foods are going to have little net effect. Total diet, however, can have a measurable effect on health.

Still, if a person were to replace all of the meat in his diet with soy, then I guarantee that person's cholesterol would go down. Isn't that probably what was happening in the earlier studies that suggested soy might have cholesterol lowering properties?

Well, I've never really gone in for that "miracle food of the week" type of thing, so this isn't really surprising. Touting isoflavones to me is not much different than raw foodies touting enzymes. Individual foods are going to have little net effect. Total diet, however, can have a measurable effect on health.

Still, if a person were to replace all of the meat in his diet with soy, then I guarantee that person's cholesterol would go down. Isn't that probably what was happening in the earlier studies that suggested soy might have cholesterol lowering properties?
Such a deduction would require common sense:whip:

Yeah, "the View" had a guest on talking about the whole soy thing. She pretty much said the same thing, that it doesn't have the cholesterol lowering properties that they thought, but she didn't actually say it was bad for you. She said to stay away from products with isoflavones. I'm guessing to just follow the old moderation rule as has been said in many of the threads on VB.

Funny, the healthiest perceived soy foods have the highest amount of isoflavones...tempeh, tofu, etc. Meatless soy burgers (at least the ones I've seen info on) actually have a very small amount of isoflavones. But then, they're also pretty processed.

And yeah, in reponse to what someone else said...soy *is* in tons of things, but in very small and almost undetectable amounts, if it's not a mostly soy-based food.

Because our stupid society is all about the quick fixes. :rolleyes:
I Agree Unfortunately.