Irritable Bowel Syndrome Message Boards | Re: For parents of young children: Soy induced thyroid disease

Hi Heather, Like me, you pose a lot of answers to questions with questions. I'm afraid I will have to do the same in some instances here if I haven't yet found documentation. That, or speculate based on some of what I've read so far. I do invite you, if you have the
time to read some of the links I posted. I keep going over them myself. Unfortunately, like you, I don't have the adequate time to properly research ALL the information out there, and there is constantly new research coming out.

Hi Kandee - I have to check the links you posted (thanks for that) but my first impulse to ask about thyroid disorder rates in countries with a history of high soy consumption (such as Asian nations). Americans eat very little soy compared to other countries - I'd like to see what the thyroid disorder rate is in, say, Japan. Their children eat soy foods daily from the time they're first eating solid foods (tofu is often what they start with). And it's been this way for centuries. So, if there's a link between soy and thyroid problems, Japan would be a place to see it.

The below explains it better than I could. Quote:

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 to 58 grams per day, with a mean of about 12.41 Assuming that two-thirds of legume consumption is soy, then the maximum consumption is about 40 grams or less than 3 tablespoons per day, with an average consumption of about 9 grams, less than two teaspoons. A survey conducted in the 1930s found that soy foods accounted for only 1.5 percent of calories in the Chinese diet, compared with 65 percent 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 a replacement for animal foods�with one exception Celibate monks living in monasteries and leading a vegetarian life style find soy foods quite helpful because they dampen libido.
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 Persepctives, New Haven, 1977

Actually, consumption of soy in traditional Asian diets is low. A 1975 report lists soyfoods as minor sources of protein in Japan and China.1 Major sources of protein listed were meat including organ meats, poultry, fish and eggs. Average isoflavone consumption in Asian diets ranges from 3-28 mg/day, as shown in the table below.

1. Nutrition during Pregnancy and Lactation. California Department of Health, 1975.

Studies indicate that isoflavone consumption at levels slightly exceeding those found in tradition diets results in thyroid suppression and endocrine disruption. The AdvantaSoyTMClearTM supplement would add 30-50 mg of isoflavones to a 100-gram serving of various common western foods, levels that exceed the amounts found in traditional diets and that are in the range of levels shown to cause problems, especially for sensitive individuals. Note that this level is also greater than the amount provided by 25 mg soy protein isolate, the amount determined by the FDA to warrant a health claim. It is not only possible but likely that many individuals will consume two or more servings of foods to which the Cargill isoflavones have been added, especially as these foods will be promoted with much advertising touting their health benefits. Two or more servings of such foods would provide 60-100 mg isoflavones per day, an amount that provides the estrogen equivalent of the contraceptive pill2 and one that clearly poses dangers after only a brief period of daily intake.
Isoflavones
China (1990 survey)3 3 mg/day
Japan (1996 survey)4 10 mg/day
Japan (1998 survey)5 25 mg/day
Japan (2000 survey)6 28 mg/day
In Japanese subjects receiving adequate iodine, causing thyroid suppression after 3months7 35 mg/day
In American women, causing hormonal changes after 1 month8 45 mg/day
In American women, causing changes presaging breast cancer after 14 days9 45 mg/day
FDA recommended amount10 24 mg/day
AdvantaSoyTMClearTM 30-50 mg/ 100 g serving

And a quote from another article (the last on my list of references in the original post):

To begin with, soy does not comprise a major part of the Japanese, or any other Asian diet. And it is likely that very little of the domestically produced soy is grown from the genetically modified cultivar which dominates the Western market. In any case, except in poverty and during times of famine, Asians consume soy in tiny amounts - 7 to 8 grams per day - and most of this has been fermented for from 3 to 5 years to remove the toxins. The fermentation process also reduces the growth depressants in all soy products, but does not remove them entirely. The Japanese eat a small amount of tofu and miso as part of a mineral-rich broth, followed by meat or fish, which offsets some of the dangers.

Whilst on the subject of soy consumption in Asian countries, one real and bitter truth that does not appear in the producers' handouts is that in parts of China where the people are too poor to get other forms of protein, their intake of soy has created, according to scientists who went there and studied the situation, 100 million cretins. This has occurred due to the goitrogens in soy, which, as we have seen, depress the thyroid gland and can create brain damage. New Zealand toxicologist Dr Mike Fitzpatrick says, "An epidemiological study in China has shown that high soy intake is not protective against breast cancer. There have been several similar studies, which have refuted the theory that soy helps prevent breast cancer".
Furthermore, Asians, unlike Westerners, do not guzzle soy protein isolate as a milk substitute. Milk is not a part of their culture.

So how do these 'myths' originate? In recent years, several studies have been published regarding the soybean's effect on human health. Thanks to the power of the well-oiled PR machine, the most widely-published results are those of the studies underwritten by various factions of the soy industry. Not surprisingly, they are always overwhelmingly in favor of soy. The primary claims about soy's health benefits are based purely on bad science. Although arguments for cancer patients to use soy focus on statistics showing low rates of breast, colon and prostate cancer among Asian people, there are obvious facts being utterly ignored.

While soy-funded studies boast that Asian women suffer far fewer cases of breast cancer than do American women, they neglect to point out that these Asian women eat a diet that is dramatically different from that of their Western counterparts. The standard Asian diet consists of more natural products, and greater amounts of vegetables and more fish. Their diets are also lower in chemicals and toxins, as they eat far fewer processed foods. It is likely these studies are influenced by the fact that cancer rates rise among Asian people who move to the U.S. and adopt American diets. Ignoring the remarkable diet and lifestyle changes, to assume only that reduced levels of soy in these American-Asian diets is a primary factor in greater cancer rates, is bad science.

I'd also be interested in children raised in the US but given soy instead of dairy as they grow up. Typically, this would be the children of vegetarian/vegan parents - and from studies I've seen on these children, they are just flat-out healthier across the board.

I think these studies may be hard to find. You're right, we do know that feeding cow's milk is linked to early diabetes, and allergies, but soy is a common allergen as well. Aren't most vegan infants breast fed as opposed to given milk or any commercial formula? Isn't it also common knowledge that vegan raised children, from infancy on, have a less sedentary lifestyle and consume less calories. These and other factors I feel, do indeed lead to the reason these children are healthier over all.

I found the following from: Considerations in planning vegan diets: Infants.
Journal of the American Dietetic Association, June, 2001, by Ann Reed Mangels, Virginia Messina

Although many foods can cause allergic reactions in infants, vegan infants may be at somewhat reduced risk for food allergies since they do not consume cow's milk, the leading source of food allergy in young children. Foods most likely to cause allergic reactions in vegan infants include nut butters, peas, citrus fruits, corn products, soy products (including infant soy-based formula) and wheat. As for any infant, solid foods should be introduced as single ingredient foods, one at a time, at weekly intervals, to allow identification of food allergies [2].

Among healthy infants, soy-based formula may be less likely to provoke allergic responses than cow's milk formula [83]. However, among high-risk infants, soy-based formula does not appear to have any relative value over cow's milk formula in the prophylaxis or prevention of allergic symptoms [84].

In addition to raising risk for allergy, early consumption of cow's milk, either as untreated cow's milk or in commercial infant formula has been linked to increased risk for insulin dependent diabetes mellitus in genetically susceptible infants [85, 86] although not all studies support this finding [87]. It is not clear whether the findings represent a protective effect of breastfeeding or a possible risk associated with cow's milk feedings. Some evidence suggests that soy could raise risk for diabetes as well, based on studies of soybean meal in rodent models for diabetes [88-90]. This would suggest that it is breastfeeding that is protective rather than avoidance of specific proteins.

Are they distinguishing between infants fed soy-formula as opposed to breast-fed, and children raised on soy foods?

From what I've read, it all starts with the formula. Quote:

In simple terms, though obviously not simple enough for some in the medical profession, feeding an infant soy formula is the equivalent of giving it five birth control pills a day.

The Swiss Health Service put it this way: "100gr of soy protein has the oestrogenic equivalent of one contraceptive pill", and there are numerous other studies published since the early 1960s which confirm this undeniable fact. Many enlightened scientists and medical professionals argue that the continued use of soy in baby formula is a form of genocide, since these effects have been known and published within the scientific community for decades.

Try this for a vicious circle � drinking soy milk during pregnancy can cause a failure to produce breast milk, which then leads to feeding the baby soy formula. By far the most distressing cases of soy damage that I have heard personally are those of women who have drunk soy milk while pregnant, and then fed their babies soy formula. Often these women cannot restrain their tears when describing the dreadful health problems their children suffer. They keep repeating to me, "I didn't know, I just didn't know; the doctor told me to drink it for my bones and to feed baby the soy formula".

The multinational Nestl� Carnation corporation is a major soy advertiser. You may remember them as the company which brought infant formula to third world countries, discouraging breast feeding and killing, according to the World Health Organization, one and one-half million babies each year. Well, they're still at it, shamelessly flogging their soy milk formulas in spite of all the evidence that it is deadly. Apart from the ravaging of delicate hormonal systems, serious gastrointestinal disturbances suffered by babies on soy formula are now commonplace.

From: http://www.doctorsaredangerous.com/soy_chapter2/Soy_Page_2.html

What about thyroid disorder rates in children given formula of any kind instead of breast-fed? Is it the soy, or is it that they're not breast-fed, in other words?

It's been 32 years since I've had even a need to check out infant formula but my suspicions are that there are currently many MORE soy based ones on the market than milk based ones. So, logically yes, it would be the soy formula.

If you find more info, please let me know. I'd be reluctant to abandon a plant food that has been a staple for millions of people for over a millenia with a lot of well-established health benefits.

I agree that eating "lower on the food chain" IS the most healthy over all, but when it comes to the studies on the health advantages of soy it is the companies like Monsanto and ADM (that supermarket to the world) that has done the studies, and that makes me suspicious!!!!

But I also would not take soy formula for an infant over breast-feeding, and I'd be sticking mostly to whole soy foods (soy milk, tofu, seitan) as opposed to processed and isolated soy proteins.

Below from:

http://www.westonaprice.org/soy/tragedy.html

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. [How do we know which brands?] 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.

This is terribly long, and for that, I apologize. Believe me, I'm in no way trying to sabotage the use of soy alternatives to dairy for those with IBS. I just find it extremely interesting that, like HFCS (high fructose corn syrup) which is cheap to produce, in so many of our prepared products, and supposedly harmless (based on manufacture's claims), that soy may not be the magic bullet a lot of us thought it was, and may actually have damaging long range (and even short range in infants) affects. Don't we owe it to ourselves (and our youth) to be as informed as we can possibly be, examining both sides of the coin? Knowledge is power and with it we can make wiser decisions for ourselves and our families.

Kandee

--------------------

Print Remind Me Notify Moderator