[quote]Schmazz wrote:
Perhaps it works like Clomid? If it acts as a “weaker” version of estrogen, and occupies receptor space that would normally be occupied by “full strength” estrogen it could actually have a positive impact for bodybuilders.
I’m not sure how flax works, but it sounds like it could work like Clomid does.[/quote]
This is a good question and gets to the heart of the debate. Let’s get a few undisputed things out into the open here:
First, it is clear that flax contains phytoestrogens. In fact, as stated already, flax contains the most phytoestrogens of any other substance on the planet. The question is whether those phytoestrogens can help or hurt people who are seeking to maximize their androgenic hormone profiles as I assume we all do.
Second, it is not sufficient to say that flax has estrogenic properties because there are really different forms of estrogen. Whereas testosterone is testosterone, estrogen has many different forms (e.g., esterone, estradiol, etc.). These forms of estrogen vary in characteristics and potency. But even within these forms, it appears that different types also have different characteristics.
For example, even among estradiol–widely regarded as a very potent form of estrogen–there are different types. The 2-hydroxy types of estradiol are supposed to be very weak estrogens that have anti-cancer properties. In contrast, the 16-hydroxy types of estradiol are regarded as the very potent forms of estrogen that have been linked to hormone-dependent cancers (e.g., breast or prostate cancer).
The theory with flax is that flaxseed (and to a lesser extent, flaxseed oil) will skew the ratio of estradiol in favor of the 2-hydroxy types. This has been shown in scientific studies to be the case. This is very good from an anti-cancer perspective, but the question that I have is whether the 2-hydroxy types of estradiol are any different from the standpoint of corrupting our androgenic profiles than the 16-hyrdoxy types.
Opinions differ on that issue. At least one person who studies such information lumps flax in with soy and believes that, like soy, flax is still problematic for anyone seeking to maximize their androgenic profiles. However, he does not offer a scientific analysis to support his opinion. (Not saying he lacks one, but it is not stated.)
Another doctor who studies soy made a similar comparison between soy and flax but again without supporting analysis.
Another camp distinguishes between soy and flax on the basis that the former (soy) is recognized by the body as the more potent forms of estradiol and therefore operates like the very harmful xenoestrogens, whereas the latter (flax) skews the ratio of estradiol in favor of the more benign types, as discussed above.
Notably, the science that I’ve read seems to indicate that ingesting flax does not seem to increase the amount of estrogen (specifically estradiol) in the body, it only changes the specific type of estrodiol. If true, this would seem to suggest that, at worst, taking in flax would not harm you at all and may be beneficial (certainly from a cancer perspective and perhaps from a phyisque/lifestyle perspective as well).
Ori Hofmekler, author of the “Warrior Diet,” recently wrote a new book called the “Anti-Estrogenic Diet” (AED). In AED, Hofmekler espouses the view that holds that while soy is poison, flax is beneficial in the fight against excess estrogen for the reasons I described above.
Another benefits attributed to flax suggest that it . . .
-
Inhibits the enzyme 5-alpha-reductase, which is responsible for converting testosterone into DHT. Although many believe that DHT is a potent anabolic hormone, it doesn’t appear to do anything that testosterone wouldn’t do and, moreover, is implicated in hair loss and prostate cancer/enlargement.
-
Reduces aromatase enzyme, which is resposible for converting testosterone into estrogen.
Some potential concerns with flax are . . .
-
At least one study found that flax increased levels of prolactin in females. This is not a good thing from a male’s perspective.
-
At least one report mentioned in passing that flax seems to increase the amount of sex-hormone-binding globulin (SHBG) which limits the bioavailability of sex hormones. If by that comment the author(s) meant that the increased SHBG binds to estrogen but not testosterone, this would be great. But if it binds to testosterone in addition to or instead of estrogen, that would range from bad to very, very bad.
One last comment and then I’ll stop: A study from Duke University indicated that flax consumption decreases testosterone. The scientists commented that flax appears to bind to testosterone and pull it out of the body. Two responses are in order:
First, the study involved men who were eating a low-fat diet (20% of calories from fat) in addition to flax consumption. Because low-fat diets clearly lead to diminished testosterone levels, the question arises as to which variable caused the diminished testosterone levels: the low-fat diet or the flax. This is a classic example of bad science. (Where are the other groups eating high/moderate fat and flax or low fat and no flax?)
Second, the scientist’s comment about how flax lowers testosterone by binding to it should be given little weight. Their experiment MIGHT have indicated that flax lowers testosterone levels but even assuming that is the case, the study surely did not reveal a mechanism. As such, that comment may be discarded as pure speculation.
In sum, the great weight of opinions on the issue suggests that flax may not be a problem and may acutally be helpful. I am conducting my own “experiment” with flax at the moment. Maybe someday someone will do a real bona fide study to see if flax in and of itself negatively impacts the estrogen-testosterone balance in the male body.