Reversing Soy Damage

Nutrition
21

[quote]MP1 wrote:

Professor X wrote:
I know a bodybuilder who can’t eat eggs or any milk products. he gets much of his extra protein from soy. He is also more developed and in better shape than nearly all of the pictures I have seen posted on this site from the forums here.

Huh? wrote:
What are you trying to prove with this one-man case study? Maybe some people are more tolerant to Soy than others.

While some may be more tolerant to soy than others anyone who lifts, apparently seriously enough to look better than nearly all the pictures on T-Nation, is going to be in great shape regardless of if they eat soy or not. I don’t think anyone’s suggesting it will halt gains or create milk ducts; the question how damaging is soy, is the damage done by soy reversible and if so what can reverse it.

It seems you feel it’s not that damaging though I’m curious as to the other experiences you’ve had with soy because the case study or antidote you gave doesn’t hold up.[/quote]

Case study? I won’t be able to respond in detail until tonight, but please tell me when we were discussing case studies or where anyone in this thread presented any studies and discussed what was found?

The previous poster grabbed direct quotes from authors…THAT ARE NOT CASE STUDIES which implies he isn’t doing any research himself but relying on the words of others. Find the studies. Present the studies. Discuss the studies. Other than that, quit finding quotes of authors and using that as law or as if you have proven anything.

I wrote about someone I know and never wrote that I was presenting a “case study”. Some of you completely ignore any real world evidence when it comes to training and base your view of the world on studies. It makes me wonder how many of you even realize that many studies are biased and that simply finding one with a conclusion that matches what you want to believe doesn’t constitute as “proof” in and of itself.

If this were not the case, every study done in the late 60’s and 70’s proving steroids do NOT cause enhanced muscle growth would be the end of discussion on that subject.

If you are going to criticize the lack of a “case study”, step up and present your own first.

22

a quick pubmed search turned up nothing for potential soy related damage

where is the “evidence” i’ve read all the stuff on here about it, but are there more published studies available?

23

lots on google of referenced articles

24

So if I drink soy milk everyday, should I stop? Problem is that I cannot drink regular milk, I don’t like the taste and it makes me a lil sick, so what else can I consume to get calcium and other beneficial nutrients? Is the soy milk effecting me that much?

I’ve been drinking it for quite sometime, and I haven’t felt any bad effects, my libido is higher than ever, and have not felt any loss of strength etc really…

25

[quote]dtehollis wrote:
so what else can I consume to get calcium and other beneficial nutrients? Is the soy milk effecting me that much?
[/quote]

Vegetables, lean meats, fish, fruit, nuts and seeds!

I don’t want to open the paleo can ‘o’ worms but we didn’t always drink dairy and soy milk.

Drew Price

26

[quote]MP1 wrote:
A few months back I stumbled upon a free small tub of soy protein and took it happily. Is there any way to counteract the possible damage due to the excess estrogen?

I took it fairly quickly so my body could have been overloaded.
Would a simple low-level legal test booster help or is it too late?[/quote]

This is serious. I would recommend a cycle of DBol, Equipoise, Sust and Deca to counteract the negative effects of the soy. You’ll also need to have dialysis before the cycle to remove the soy impurities from your blood, and afterwards because your kidneys and liver will be busy shutting down. (DISCLAIMER: I was kidding. By no means should you do this)

On a serious note. When they talk about how bad soy is, it is cumulative over years. Its one of those things where they say it could be bad so people avoid it. However a lot of people also have good results with soy. I just don’t use it because I don’t want to take any chances.

27

i just have to say that this tuna quiche i’m having for a 3rd meal is delicious!

28

[quote]texasguy wrote:
i just have to say that this tuna quiche i’m having for a 3rd meal is delicious!

[/quote]

Tuna Quiche? Interesting. I’ll have to try it.

29

I was expecting this thread to be filled with studies proving exactly how much physical or hormonal damage is caused by soy. What happened?

30

A good friend of mine was a vegan in high school and also into bodybuilding. He just bought soy protein and by the end of high school was bigger than half the guys on this site. Last I heard, he gave up veganism to increase his protein options.

31

[quote]veruvius wrote:
A good friend of mine was a vegan in high school and also into bodybuilding. He just bought soy protein and by the end of high school was bigger than half the guys on this site. Last I heard, he gave up veganism to increase his protein options. [/quote]

I got pretty dern big without meat in my early 20’s. I eat it these days, but have been slowly returning to a low meat diet. I suspect the soy hype is utter nonsense. The body can adapt to most conditions if it has to, including eating soy.

I think this thread was started as a joke originally, but there have actually been some interesting comments.

32

[quote]Professor X wrote:
I was expecting this thread to be filled with studies proving exactly how much physical or hormonal damage is caused by soy. What happened?[/quote]

People don’t want to write a dissertation to appease your curiosity. There is a significant amount of research on soy and developing humans, take a dive into pubmed, academic search premiere, and google scholar if you really care.

I’ve read a fair bit on it, and my kids won’t be getting any formulas with more than a tiny amount of soy if they get any formula at all.

33

[quote]Professor X wrote:
I was expecting this thread to be filled with studies proving exactly how much physical or hormonal damage is caused by soy. What happened?[/quote]

well go ahead and post them then. this post of yours certainly doesn’t contribute much.

34

[quote]buffalokilla wrote:
Professor X wrote:
I was expecting this thread to be filled with studies proving exactly how much physical or hormonal damage is caused by soy. What happened?

People don’t want to write a dissertation to appease your curiosity. There is a significant amount of research on soy and developing humans, take a dive into pubmed, academic search premiere, and google scholar if you really care.

I’ve read a fair bit on it, and my kids won’t be getting any formulas with more than a tiny amount of soy if they get any formula at all. [/quote]

A dissertation? I asked for the studies supporting the stance against soy for children, I didn’t ask for a dissertation.

35

Since it seems some of you don’t actually want a discussion on the subject and refer all of your knowledge to direct quotes from authors with no references, I guess we can start with:

Iacono G, Cavataio F, Montalto G, et al. Intolerance of cow’s milk and chronic constipation in children. N Engl J Med 1998 Oct 15; 339:1100-4.
concluding: [quote]Soy milk decreased chronic constipation in young children[/quote]

According to Mark R. Corkins, MD, CNSP, SPR, at the 2005 Annual Meeting of the Pediatric Academic Societies in Washington:

[quote]studies in humans show that nutrition and growth are equivalent to cow’s milk-based formulas. A reproductive study of more than 800 adolescents who received soy-based formulas found no differences, and IQ studies in 9- and 10-year-olds found no differences between those who were given soy-based formulas. Vaccine response was also no different in children who received soy-based formulas.

According to Corkins, long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids (LCPUFAs) are essential to the development of the infant’s nervous system. LCPUFAs are naturally found in breast milk, and some formulas contain supplements, although Corkins said that breast milk is the best option for supplying LCPUFAs to the infant[/quote]

Centre for the Evaluation of Risks to Human Reproduction. DRAFT NTP-CERHR EXPERT PANEL REPORT on the REPRODUCTIVE and DEVELOPMENTAL TOXICITY of SOY FORMULA. January 2006.
and
Strom BL, Schinnar R, Ziegler EE et al. Exposure to soy-based formula in infancy and endocrinological and reproductive outcomes in young adulthood. JAMA. 2001 Aug 15;286(7):807-14.

states:

[quote]Studies in children

"Giampietro et al. (ref 156 in full text of report, freely available) … conducted a retrospective study to determine the hormonal and metabolic effects of long-term feeding of soy formula in children. The study population consisted of 48 children age 7-96 months who had been fed soy formula exclusively for at least 6 months…

In terms of results, the authors found:

“Height and weight were in the normal range for all children, and there were no differences between soy-fed and control groups. No signs of precocious puberty in girls or of gynecomastia in boys were found. All 17a-estradiol concentrations were below the method detection limit of 20 pg/mL. No significant differences were seen in serum or urinary measurements, except that soyfed infants had significantly lower urinary calcium and significant higher urinary phosphate in children 7-24 months old compared to control children.
The authors concluded that long-term feeding of soy formula in infants did not produce estrogenlike hormonal effects. They suggested that their findings confirm the theory that phytoestrogens have a low affinity for ERs and therefore produce only weak biologic effects…” [/quote]

It also states:

[quote]n addition, Strom et al examined exposure to soy-based formula in infancy and endocrinological and reproductive outcomes in adults:

“DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Retrospective cohort study conducted from March to August 1999 among adults aged 20 to 34 years who, as infants, participated during 1965-1978 in controlled feeding studies conducted at the University of Iowa, Iowa City (248 were fed soy formula and 563 were fed cow milk formula during infancy). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Self-reported pubertal maturation, menstrual and reproductive history, height and usual weight, and current health, compared based on type of formula exposure during infancy. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences were observed between groups in either women or men for more than 30 outcomes.”

“CONCLUSIONS: Exposure to soy formula does not appear to lead to different general health or reproductive outcomes than exposure to cow milk formula. Although the few positive findings should be explored in future studies, our findings are reassuring about the safety of infant soy formula.” [/quote]

As far as adults:

[quote]Studies in adults

“Studies in men used dietary additions of tofu (198), soy milk (201), or a soy supplement (200). Interventions were applied for 1 or 2 months. These studies found no effect of the intervention on serum testosterone or 17a-estradiol,…Mitchell et al. (200) found no effect of a daily soy supplement with 40 mg isoflavones on testicular volume or semen analysis parameters after 2 months of treatment. There were only 15 subjects in this study.” [/quote]

Bottom line, I am not saying there is no risk. I am saying fearmongering is a little uncalled for.

36

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Since it seems some of you don’t actually want a discussion on the subject and refer all of your knowledge to direct quotes from authors with no references, I guess we can start with:

Iacono G, Cavataio F, Montalto G, et al. Intolerance of cow’s milk and chronic constipation in children. N Engl J Med 1998 Oct 15; 339:1100-4.
concluding: Soy milk decreased chronic constipation in young children

According to Mark R. Corkins, MD, CNSP, SPR, at the 2005 Annual Meeting of the Pediatric Academic Societies in Washington:
studies in humans show that nutrition and growth are equivalent to cow’s milk-based formulas. A reproductive study of more than 800 adolescents who received soy-based formulas found no differences, and IQ studies in 9- and 10-year-olds found no differences between those who were given soy-based formulas. Vaccine response was also no different in children who received soy-based formulas.

According to Corkins, long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids (LCPUFAs) are essential to the development of the infant’s nervous system. LCPUFAs are naturally found in breast milk, and some formulas contain supplements, although Corkins said that breast milk is the best option for supplying LCPUFAs to the infant

Centre for the Evaluation of Risks to Human Reproduction. DRAFT NTP-CERHR EXPERT PANEL REPORT on the REPRODUCTIVE and DEVELOPMENTAL TOXICITY of SOY FORMULA. January 2006.
and
Strom BL, Schinnar R, Ziegler EE et al. Exposure to soy-based formula in infancy and endocrinological and reproductive outcomes in young adulthood. JAMA. 2001 Aug 15;286(7):807-14.

states:
Studies in children

"Giampietro et al. (ref 156 in full text of report, freely available) … conducted a retrospective study to determine the hormonal and metabolic effects of long-term feeding of soy formula in children. The study population consisted of 48 children age 7-96 months who had been fed soy formula exclusively for at least 6 months…

In terms of results, the authors found:

“Height and weight were in the normal range for all children, and there were no differences between soy-fed and control groups. No signs of precocious puberty in girls or of gynecomastia in boys were found. All 17a-estradiol concentrations were below the method detection limit of 20 pg/mL. No significant differences were seen in serum or urinary measurements, except that soyfed infants had significantly lower urinary calcium and significant higher urinary phosphate in children 7-24 months old compared to control children.
The authors concluded that long-term feeding of soy formula in infants did not produce estrogenlike hormonal effects. They suggested that their findings confirm the theory that phytoestrogens have a low affinity for ERs and therefore produce only weak biologic effects…”

It also states:
n addition, Strom et al examined exposure to soy-based formula in infancy and endocrinological and reproductive outcomes in adults:

“DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Retrospective cohort study conducted from March to August 1999 among adults aged 20 to 34 years who, as infants, participated during 1965-1978 in controlled feeding studies conducted at the University of Iowa, Iowa City (248 were fed soy formula and 563 were fed cow milk formula during infancy). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Self-reported pubertal maturation, menstrual and reproductive history, height and usual weight, and current health, compared based on type of formula exposure during infancy. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences were observed between groups in either women or men for more than 30 outcomes.”

“CONCLUSIONS: Exposure to soy formula does not appear to lead to different general health or reproductive outcomes than exposure to cow milk formula. Although the few positive findings should be explored in future studies, our findings are reassuring about the safety of infant soy formula.”

As far as adults:
Studies in adults

“Studies in men used dietary additions of tofu (198), soy milk (201), or a soy supplement (200). Interventions were applied for 1 or 2 months. These studies found no effect of the intervention on serum testosterone or 17a-estradiol,…Mitchell et al. (200) found no effect of a daily soy supplement with 40 mg isoflavones on testicular volume or semen analysis parameters after 2 months of treatment. There were only 15 subjects in this study.”

Bottom line, I am not saying there is no risk. I am saying fearmongering is a little uncalled for.[/quote]

atta boy.

37

[quote]Differential effects of soy-containing diets on the reproductive tissues growth and reproductive hormone secretion in male rats.Gorski K, Taciak M, Romanowicz K, Misztal T.
Department of Endocrinology, The Kielanowski Institute of Animal Physiology and Nutrition, Polish Academy of Sciences, 05-110 Jablonna, Poland. t.misztal@ifzz.pan.pl.

The effects of feeding a breeding diet containing soy products to pregnant and lactating females on reproductive tissues and secretion of the reproductive hormones in their male progeny, immediately after weaning (postnatal day - PND 22) and after reaching puberty (PND 60) were studied. Similarly, the response of adult males to a soy maintenance diet over shorter (PND 160) and longer (PND 280) periods of time was examined. The relative weights (standardized by body weight) of the testes, epididymis and prostate, and the concentrations of luteinizing hormone (LH), testosterone and prolactin (PRL) were used as the examined endpoints. In rats on PND 22, no significant differences in the relative organs weights and the plasma hormones concentrations were found between the experimental and control groups. In rats on PND 60 which continued consuming a soy breeding diet, the relative tissue weights did not differ significantly, while the mean plasma LH and PRL concentrations were higher (p<0.01-0.001) compared to the controls. In rats on PND 160 fed soy maintenance diet, the higher relative testes (p<0.01) and epididymis (p<0.05) weights as well as plasma testosterone (p<0.001) concentration were recorded compared to the controls. In rats on PND 280 fed a soy maintenance diet, the relative weights of all reproductive tissues were similar to those of controls, however, the weight of the body and the real weights of the reproductive tissues were lower (p<0.05) than in controls. The mean plasma concentrations of the reproductive hormones did not differ significantly between the two groups. In conclusion, a supplement of soy in the rat diet may affect growth and/or development of the reproductive tissues in male rats and also affect concentrations of reproductive hormones. The effects depend on the period of life when the soy diet is applied.[/quote]

…“The effects depend on the period of life when the soy diet is applied.”

38

[quote]Acute exposure of adult male rats to dietary phytoestrogens reduces fecundity and alters epididymal steroid hormone receptor expression.

Glover A, Assinder SJ.
Department of Anatomy and Structural Biology, School of Medical Sciences, University of Otago, PO Box 913, Dunedin, New Zealand.

Phytoestrogens are plant-derived compounds with oestrogenic activity. They are common in both human and animal diets, particularly through soy-based foods. This study assessed whether exposure of adult male rats to a high phytoestrogen diet for 3-25 days affected their fertility, and assessed possible mechanisms through which phytoestrogens may disrupt fertility. Adult males, fed a high phytoestrogen diet for 3 days, demonstrated significantly reduced fecundity. This effect was transient, with fecundity returning to control levels by day 12. The expression of oestrogen receptor-alpha and androgen receptor mRNA was increased in the initial segment of the epididymis, but decreased in the cauda epididymis following 3 days on the high phytoestrogen diet. Epididymal sperm counts cannot account for the reduction in fertility at day 3. However, lipid peroxidation of epididymal sperm was significantly increased in animals fed a high phytoestrogen diet for 3 days. Disruption of the steroid regulation of the epididymis by phytoestrogens may alter its function, resulting in decreased quality of sperm, and thereby reducing fecundity.[/quote]

I just think people should stay away from a SOY-ONLY diet. Soy ain’t bad, in moderation. Too little, and too much of anything is a bad thing.

39

FWIW, This is an anti-anti-soy article.

I use a 50/50 whey+soy to make protein shakes as a supplement to the Anabloic Solution Diet.

I am making good gains and losing bodyfat.

When I run out of the Soy/Whey I will whip up a batch of 1:1:1 Soy/Whey/Egg White.

40

[quote]Fulmen wrote:
Acute exposure of adult male rats to dietary phytoestrogens reduces fecundity and alters epididymal steroid hormone receptor expression.

Glover A, Assinder SJ.
Department of Anatomy and Structural Biology, School of Medical Sciences, University of Otago, PO Box 913, Dunedin, New Zealand.

Phytoestrogens are plant-derived compounds with oestrogenic activity. They are common in both human and animal diets, particularly through soy-based foods. This study assessed whether exposure of adult male rats to a high phytoestrogen diet for 3-25 days affected their fertility, and assessed possible mechanisms through which phytoestrogens may disrupt fertility. Adult males, fed a high phytoestrogen diet for 3 days, demonstrated significantly reduced fecundity. This effect was transient, with fecundity returning to control levels by day 12. The expression of oestrogen receptor-alpha and androgen receptor mRNA was increased in the initial segment of the epididymis, but decreased in the cauda epididymis following 3 days on the high phytoestrogen diet. Epididymal sperm counts cannot account for the reduction in fertility at day 3. However, lipid peroxidation of epididymal sperm was significantly increased in animals fed a high phytoestrogen diet for 3 days. Disruption of the steroid regulation of the epididymis by phytoestrogens may alter its function, resulting in decreased quality of sperm, and thereby reducing fecundity.

I just think people should stay away from a SOY-ONLY diet. Soy ain’t bad, in moderation. Too little, and too much of anything is a bad thing.
[/quote]

Now that we know soy is bad for rats, what about people?

DJ