Como anda a questão da soja?

[ZOOM 399]

Em 04/09/2017 at 15:46, mut4nt3 disse:

 

Valor biológico do ovo: 100
valor biológico do Whey concentrado: 104

valor biológico do Whey ISOLADO: até 159

E você me posta aquela merda de tabela kkkkkkkkkkkkk engraçado demais bixo

imagina se a soja fosse tão boa, por que ela seria tão baratinha?? por que que o mercado da suplementação faz amino spiking com proteína de soja no whey JUSTO pra baratear os custos?? A própria indústria de suplementos trata a soja como lixo, só é ver que as marcas colocam: SOY FREE em todo suplemento TOP de linha

Meu caro, só expus fatos, mas não me posicionei a favor, tampouco contra. Se você demoniza tanto a soja, não a consuma e seja feliz.

 

É óbvio que proteínas de origem animal sempre prevalecerão como as melhores opções em questão de variedade e quantidade de aminoácidos essenciais, mas complementar a dieta com um pouco de extrato de soja não faz disso o fim do mundo.

 

Aqui no fórum tem muito extremista para tudo, os 'jejunistas', os 'cetogenistas', os demonizadores do leite, os haters da soja etc.

 

 

[mut4nt3 260]

1 hora atrás, krebz disse:

 

Errado

Existem estudos mostrando que GMO são seguros.

 

Estudo de 90 dias a 2 anos com animais

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22155268

 

Overview dos ultimos 10 anos e mais de 1800 pesquisas sobre o assunto

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.3109/07388551.2013.823595?scroll=top&needAccess=true

 

Estudo sobre 29 anos de GMO  :

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25184846

review aqui http://www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php/trillions-data-points-gmo-foods-safe-no-debate/

 

Aprox. 400 estudos sobre em GMO (geral) aqui:
http://genera.biofortified.org/viewall.php

 

--

 

Quando a discussão sobre Monsanto, concordo que os caras são um monopólio desgraçado (principalmente nos EUA), ao ponto de ferrar os produtores facilmente se quiserem. Não torna o produto deles "ruim" ou inseguro, mas economicamente eles fazem o que quiserem de quem depender deles.

 

O banimento por alguns países vem ou de governantes mentindo que GMO não é seguro ou não há interesse em deixar entrar empresas como Monsanto na industria local.

 

--

 

Não existe estudos que mostrem que autismo e outras complicações "podem" estar relacionados com GMO.

 

Mas existe a "boa e velha" (e errada) correlação:

 

Nesse caso autismo "claramente" é causado por comida orgânica. Mesma lógica do pessoal sem noção que correlaciona autismo com GMO ou vacinas, mas com outros dados no meio.

 

 

É por ai mesmo.

 

Tem aquela:

beleza, existem pesquisas pagas para provar que é bom e/ou ruim (pra todo lado).

Mas:

-Qual delas foi financiada pela "industria da soja"? Todas que falam bem do soja?

-Qual foi financiada apenas por faculdade/institutos/etc sem dinheiro "da industria"? Se elas falam bem também, estão erradas?

-As pesquisas negativas contra soja estão corretas? Essas não podem ter sido também financiadas por industria contrária ao soja?

 

Por mais que a suspeita exista, a "lógica" só bate pra um lado e não pra outro... Isso que mal existe evidencia que estudo XYZ foi financiado (ou não) para ter resultado manipulado.

Discordo dessas pesquisas recentes financiadas claramente para acalmar a população que come isso sem saber desde os anos 90. Se você reparar, essas pesquisas veio de 2014 pra cá, quando se passou a ser MUITO questionado essa prática.

Quais são os efeitos dos alimentos transgênicos na saúde?

Depois de longas pesquisas, experimentos e estudos foram constatados até o momento os seguintes efeitos negativos sobre a saúde:

• Aparição de novas alergias: devido ao fato de que estes alimentos contêm novas toxinas e alérgenos com impacto negativo no organismo. Uma prova disto foi o caso conhecido como Milho Starlink (2000) nos Estados Unidos. Na cadeia alimentar foram encontrados traços de milho transgênico no autorizado que provocou sérias reações alérgicas.
• Aparição de genes resistentes aos antibióticos em bactérias patógenas para o organismo. Isto quer dizer que algumas das bactérias receberam a força que necessitam para serem imunes a certos medicamentos.
• Maior incremento de contaminação nos alimentos, por um aumento no uso de produtos químicos no processo de cultivo.
• Um estudo realizado na Áustria demonstrou que estes alimentos reduzem a capacidade de fertilidade, pois em um experimento feito com ratos, chegou-se a uma conclusão de que aqueles que se alimentaram com milho modificado geneticamente foram menos férteis em comparação com aqueles que comeram milho natural.
• A longo prazo não foi possível estabelecer os riscos para a saúde que o consumo de alimentos transgênicos possa ter. No entanto, suspeita-se que estes alimentos podem influenciar na aparição de certas doenças, como o câncer.
  
   

EU não acredito na ciência, ela trabalha para grupos interessados e sabota quem vai contra o padrão

1 hora atrás, ZOOM disse:

Meu caro, só expus fatos, mas não me posicionei a favor, tampouco contra. Se você demoniza tanto a soja, não a consuma e seja feliz.

 

É óbvio que proteínas de origem animal sempre prevalecerão como as melhores opções em questão de variedade e quantidade de aminoácidos essenciais, mas complementar a dieta com um pouco de extrato de soja não faz disso o fim do mundo.

 

Aqui no fórum tem muito extremista para tudo, os 'jejunistas', os 'cetogenistas', os demonizadores do leite, os haters da soja etc.

 

 

Fatos de que? Você colocou uma tabela ridícula dizendo que a PIS é superior a whey protein

E sim, eu não gosto de soja, não uso soja e quem usa apenas tem que saber que ela não presta.

Editado Setembro 6, 2017 às 02:49 por mut4nt3

[Lucas, o Schrödinger 10789]

17 minutos atrás, mut4nt3 disse:

EU não acredito na ciência, ela trabalha para grupos interessados e sabota quem vai contra o padrão

Como assim? Vc postou alguns estudos pelo tópico (ou não?), mas qd a ciência não mostra o que vc acredita ela tá errada? Se a ciência não serve, o que serve de critério pra tirar conclusões? E pq em alguns momentos vc tentou usá-la como fonte de argumentos?

 

Cara, honestamente nem sei se soja é bom ou ruim, se transgênicos são bons ou ruins, mas isso é justamente pq não fui atrás da ciência sobre o assunto. Pode até ser que a ciência nesses casos seja escassa - e isso pode ser suficiente pra qualquer um ter um pé atrás com esses alimentos e evitá-los -, mas se esse for o caso não dá pra cravar nada com toda essa certeza.

[krebz 3662]

mut4nt3 to achando que vc tava me trollando, eu não percebi e cai 

 

Por um segundo o norton achou que tinha achado alguem pra andar com ele no recreio, triste...

Editado Setembro 6, 2017 às 03:27 por krebz

[mut4nt3 260]

22 minutos atrás, Shrödinger disse:

Como assim? Vc postou alguns estudos pelo tópico (ou não?), mas qd a ciência não mostra o que vc acredita ela tá errada? Se a ciência não serve, o que serve de critério pra tirar conclusões? E pq em alguns momentos vc tentou usá-la como fonte de argumentos?

 

Cara, honestamente nem sei se soja é bom ou ruim, se transgênicos são bons ou ruins, mas isso é justamente pq não fui atrás da ciência sobre o assunto. Pode até ser que a ciência nesses casos seja escassa - e isso pode ser suficiente pra qualquer um ter um pé atrás com esses alimentos e evitá-los -, mas se esse for o caso não dá pra cravar nada com toda essa certeza.

Existem estudos e estudos. Você acredita no inibidor de miostatina da MHP? Clinicamente testado. 

Agora, estudos de coisas duvidosas tem que se tomar o máximo de cuidado, a questão de estudos contra a soja são sempre anteriores às favoráveis, aqui analisamos variáveis e não um montante de estudo ruim e estudo bom, temos que ver a situação em que o objeto de estudo está, se a indústria quer enfiar ele guela abaixo ou não, etc

12 minutos atrás, krebz disse:

mut4nt3 to achando que vc tava me trollando, eu não percebi e cai 

 

Por um segundo o norton achou que tinha achado alguem pra andar com ele no recreio, triste...

Eu sei que você é bitolado em acreditar em tudo que é científico, e eu considero você como 1 dos caras mais tops do fórum.

Mas a minha opinião pessoal eu não vou mudar pra pagar da pessoa comum que acredita veemente na ciência.

Editado Setembro 6, 2017 às 03:39 por mut4nt3

[GianToledoNunes 19]

Resumo até agora:

 

Soja é um super alimento, sem estudos comprovando seus "malefícios" e com vários estudos relacionando o consumo com até prevenção de câncer.

Algumas pessoas fazem o consumo de soja diariamente há anos e não possuem nenhum efeito colateral. 

Transgênicos? até posso concordar que olho com mais cuidado, mas assim como a soja, não possui estudos COMPROVANDO malefícios.

Agora, falar que a "industria" da soja banca esses estudos e ser ingênuo o suficiente para achar que a "industria da carne" não faz o mesmo é complicado.. 

Sugiro o bambam nutricionista aí postar a dieta para ver o quão cheio de saúde ele é.

[leo42k 64]

10 horas atrás, mut4nt3 disse:

 a questão de estudos contra a soja são sempre anteriores às favoráveis

 

não queria entrar na discussão, mas só apontar que é assim que funciona a ciência mesmo. A linha temporal segue assim: "substância tal tem indícios de provocar tal doença em tal população" >>> "Substância tal inibe não sei qual enzima em ratos" >>> "Substância tal não tem correlação com doença tal em humanos" (ou seja, precisa isolar outro fator pra ver o que é que despertou a suspeita no estudo inicial). 

 

Bom, mas aí vai de querer discutir o que é "acreditar na ciência" ou "acreditar em estudos", até mesmo debater o que é "acreditar" e o que é "questionar", não acho que esse pareça ser o foro (em qquer sentido) apropriado para este debate, pelo visto. 

[Born4Run 2165]

Um dos problemas que acho é encarar "a ciência" como crença e tratar como verdade imutável.

E sobre estudos...são metodologias para evidenciar a sua tese.(isso extremamente a grosso modo).

Se sou "contra" a soja...ela faz mal, preparo uma tese, evidenciando e tentando demonstrar que faz.

Editado Setembro 6, 2017 às 14:57 por Born4Run

[Norton 3556]

Pesquisa mais recente sobre o motivo pelo qual você deve evitar a soja

 

Spoiler

By Sally Fallon & Mary G. Enig, Ph.D.

Cinderella's Dark Side

The propaganda that has created the soy sales miracle is all the more remarkable because, only a few decades ago, the soybean was considered unfit to eat – even in Asia. During the Chou Dynasty (1134-246 BC), the soybean was designated one of the five sacred grains, along with barley, wheat, millet, and rice.

However, the pictograph for the soybean, which dates from earlier times, indicates that it was not first used as a food; for whereas the pictographs for the other four grains show the seed and stem structure of the plant, the pictograph for the soybean emphasizes the root structure. Agricultural literature of the period speaks frequently of the soybean and its use in crop rotation. Apparently, the soy plant was initially used as a method of fixing nitrogen.¹³

The soybean did not serve as a food until the discovery of fermentation techniques, sometime during the Chou Dynasty. The first soy foods were fermented products like tempeh, natto, miso, and soy sauce.

At a later date, possibly in the 2nd century BC, Chinese scientists discovered that a purée of cooked soybeans could be precipitated with calcium sulfate or magnesium sulfate (plaster of Paris or Epsom salts) to make a smooth, pale curd – tofu or bean curd. The use of fermented and precipitated soy products soon spread to other parts of the Orient, notably Japan and Indonesia.

The Chinese did not eat unfermented soybeans as they did other legumes such as lentils because the soybean contains large quantities of natural toxins or "antinutrients." First among them are potent enzyme inhibitors that block the action of trypsin and other enzymes needed for protein digestion.

These inhibitors are large, tightly folded proteins that are not completely deactivated during ordinary cooking. They can produce serious gastric distress, reduced protein digestion and chronic deficiencies in amino acid uptake. In test animals, diets high in trypsin inhibitors cause enlargement and pathological conditions of the pancreas, including cancer.¹⁴

Soybeans also contain haemagglutinin, a clot-promoting substance that causes red blood cells to clump together.

Trypsin inhibitors and haemagglutinin are growth inhibitors. Weanling rats fed soy containing these antinutrients fail to grow normally. Growth-depressant compounds are deactivated during the process of fermentation, so once the Chinese discovered how to ferment the soybean, they began to incorporate soy foods into their diets.

In precipitated products, enzyme inhibitors concentrate in the soaking liquid rather than in the curd. Thus, in tofu and bean curd, growth depressants are reduced in quantity but not completely eliminated.

Soy also contains goitrogens - substances that depress thyroid function.

Additionally 99% a very large percentage of soy is genetically modified and it also has one of the highest percentages of contamination by pesticides of any of our foods.

Soybeans are high in phytic acid, present in the bran or hulls of all seeds. It's a substance that can block the uptake of essential minerals – calcium, magnesium, copper, iron, and especially zinc – in the intestinal tract.

Although not a household word, phytic acid has been extensively studied; there are literally hundreds of articles on the effects of phytic acid in the current scientific literature. Scientists are in general agreement that grain- and legume-based diets high in phytates contribute to widespread mineral deficiencies in third world countries.¹⁵

Analysis shows that calcium, magnesium, iron, and zinc are present in the plant foods eaten in these areas, but the high phytate content of soy- and grain-based diets prevents their absorption.

The soybean has one of the highest phytate levels of any grain or legume that has been studied,¹⁶ and the phytates in soy are highly resistant to normal phytate-reducing techniques such as long, slow cooking.¹⁷ Only a long period of fermentation will significantly reduce the phytate content of soybeans.

When precipitated soy products like tofu are consumed with meat, the mineral-blocking effects of the phytates are reduced.¹⁸ The Japanese traditionally eat a small amount of tofu or miso as part of a mineral-rich fish broth, followed by a serving of meat or fish.

Vegetarians who consume tofu and bean curd as a substitute for meat and dairy products risk severe mineral deficiencies. The results of calcium, magnesium, and iron deficiencies are well known; those of zinc are less so.

Zinc is called the intelligence mineral because it is needed for optimal development and functioning of the brain and nervous system. It plays a role in protein synthesis and collagen formation; it is involved in the blood-sugar control mechanism and thus protects against diabetes; it is needed for a healthy reproductive system.

Zinc is a key component in numerous vital enzymes and plays a role in the immune system. Phytates found in soy products interfere with zinc absorption more completely than with other minerals.¹⁹ Zinc deficiency can cause a "spacey" feeling that some vegetarians may mistake for the "high" of spiritual enlightenment.

Milk drinking is given as the reason why second-generation Japanese in America grow taller than their native ancestors. Some investigators postulate that the reduced phytate content of the American diet – whatever may be its other deficiencies – is the true explanation, pointing out that both Asian and Western children who do not get enough meat and fish products to counteract the effects of a high-phytate diet, frequently suffer rickets, stunting, and other growth problems.²⁰

Soy Protein Isolate: Not So Friendly

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.

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 soybean 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 to impart the flavor of meat.²⁵

In feeding experiments, the 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 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; that over half suffered from periods of moderate diarrhea; that some had upper respiratory infections; and that others suffered from rash and fever.

It should be noted that the researchers did not dare to use soy products to help the children recover from malnutrition, and were obliged to supplement the soy-sugar mixture with nutrients largely absent in soy products – notably, vitamins A, D, and B12, iron, iodine, and zinc.

Marketing the Perfect Food

"Just imagine you could grow the perfect food. This food not only would provide affordable nutrition, but also would be delicious and easy to prepare in a variety of ways. It would be a healthful food, with no saturated fat. In fact, you would be growing a virtual fountain of youth on your back forty."

The author is Dean Houghton, writing for The Furrow,² a magazine published in 12 languages by John Deere. "This ideal food would help prevent, and perhaps reverse, some of the world's most dreaded diseases. You could grow this miracle crop in a variety of soils and climates. Its cultivation would build up, not deplete, the land... this miracle food already exists... It's called soy."

Just imagine. Farmers have been imagining – and planting more soy. What was once a minor crop, listed in the 1913 US Department of Agriculture (USDA) handbook not as a food but as an industrial product, now covers 72 million acres of American farmland. Much of this harvest will be used to feed chickens, turkeys, pigs, cows, and salmon. Another large fraction will be squeezed to produce oil for margarine, shortenings, and salad dressings.

Advances in technology make it possible to produce isolated soy protein from what was once considered a waste product – the defatted, high-protein soy chips – and then transform something that looks and smells terrible into products that can be consumed by human beings. Flavorings, preservatives, sweeteners, emulsifiers, and synthetic nutrients have turned soy protein isolate, the food processors' ugly duckling, into a New Age Cinderella.

The new fairy-tale food has been marketed not so much for her beauty but for her virtues. Early on, products based on soy protein isolate were sold as extenders and meat substitutes – a strategy that failed to produce the requisite consumer demand. The industry changed its approach.

"The quickest way to gain product acceptability in the less affluent society," said an industry spokesman, "is to have the product consumed on its own merit in a more affluent society."³ So soy is now sold to the upscale consumer, not as a cheap, poverty food but as a miracle substance that will prevent heart disease and cancer, whisk away hot flushes, build strong bone, and keep us forever young.

The competition – meat, milk, cheese, butter, and eggs – has been duly demonised by the appropriate government bodies. Soy serves as meat and milk for a new generation of virtuous vegetarians.

Marketing Costs Money

This is especially when it needs to be bolstered with "research," but there's plenty of funds available. All soybean producers pay a mandatory assessment of one-half to one percent of the net market price of soybeans. The total – something like US$80 million annually⁴ – supports United Soybean's program to "strengthen the position of soybeans in the marketplace and maintain and expand domestic and foreign markets for uses for soybeans and soybean products".

State soybean councils from Maryland, Nebraska, Delaware, Arkansas, Virginia, North Dakota, and Michigan provide another $2.5 million for "research."⁵ Private companies like Archer Daniels Midland also contribute their share. ADM spent $4.7 million for advertising on Meet the Press and $4.3 million on Face the Nation during the course of a year.⁶

Public relations firms help convert research projects into newspaper articles and advertising copy, and law firms lobby for favorable government regulations. IMF money funds soy processing plants in foreign countries, and free trade policies keep soybean abundance flowing to overseas destinations.

The push for more soy has been relentless and global in its reach. Soy protein is now found in most supermarket breads. It is being used to transform "the humble tortilla, Mexico's corn-based staple food, into a protein-fortified "super-tortilla" that would give a nutritional boost to the nearly 20 million Mexicans who live in extreme poverty."⁷ Advertising for a new soy-enriched loaf from Allied Bakeries in Britain targets menopausal women seeking relief from hot flushes. Sales are running at a quarter of a million loaves per week.⁸

The soy industry hired Norman Robert Associates, a public relations firm, to "get more soy products onto school menus."⁹ The USDA responded with a proposal to scrap the 30 percent limit for soy in school lunches. The NuMenu program would allow unlimited use of soy in student meals. With soy added to hamburgers, tacos, and lasagna, dietitians can get the total fat content below 30 percent of calories, thereby conforming to government dictates. "With the soy-enhanced food items, students are receiving better servings of nutrients and less cholesterol and fat."

Soy milk has posted the biggest gains, soaring from $2 million in 1980 to $300 million in the US last year.¹⁰ Recent advances in processing have transformed the gray, thin, bitter, beany-tasting Asian beverage into a product that Western consumers will accept – one that tastes like a milkshake, but without the guilt.

Processing miracles, good packaging, massive advertising, and a marketing strategy that stresses the products' possible health benefits account for increasing sales to all age groups. For example, reports that soy helps prevent prostate cancer have made soy milk acceptable to middle-aged men. "You don't have to twist the arm of a 55- to 60-year-old guy to get him to try soy milk," says Mark Messina. Michael Milken, former junk bond financier, has helped the industry shed its hippie image with well-publicized efforts to consume 40 grams of soy protein daily.

America today, tomorrow the world. Soy milk sales are rising in Canada, even though soy milk there costs twice as much as cow's milk. Soybean milk processing plants are sprouting up in places like Kenya.¹¹ Even China, where soy really is a poverty food and whose people want more meat, not tofu, has opted to build Western-style soy factories rather than develop western grasslands for grazing animals.¹²

FDA Health Claim Challenged

On October 25, 1999, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) decided to allow a health claim for products "low in saturated fat and cholesterol" that contain 6.25 grams of soy protein per serving. Breakfast cereals, baked goods, convenience food, smoothie mixes, and meat substitutes could now be sold with labels touting benefits to cardiovascular health, as long as these products contained one heaping teaspoon of soy protein per 100-gram serving.

The best marketing strategy for a product that is inherently unhealthy is, of course, a health claim.

"The road to FDA approval," writes a soy apologist, "was long and demanding, consisting of a detailed review of human clinical data collected from more than 40 scientific studies conducted over the last 20 years. Soy protein was found to be one of the rare foods that had sufficient scientific evidence not only to qualify for an FDA health claim proposal but to ultimately pass the rigorous approval process."²⁹

The "long and demanding" road to FDA approval actually took a few unexpected turns. The original petition, submitted by Protein Technology International, requested a health claim for isoflavones, the estrogen-like compounds found plentifully in soybeans, based on assertions that "only soy protein that has been processed in a manner in which isoflavones are retained will result in cholesterol lowering."

In 1998, the FDA made the unprecedented move of rewriting PTI's petition, removing any reference to the phyto-estrogens and substituting a claim for soy protein – a move that was in direct contradiction to the agency's regulations. The FDA is authorized to make rulings only on substances presented by petition.

The abrupt change in direction was no doubt due to the fact that a number of researchers, including scientists employed by the US Government, submitted documents indicating that isoflavones are toxic.

The FDA had also received, early in 1998, the final British Government report on phytoestrogens, which failed to find much evidence of benefit and warned against potential adverse effects.³⁰

Even with the change to soy protein isolate, FDA bureaucrats engaged in the "rigorous approval process" were forced to deal nimbly with concerns about mineral blocking effects, enzyme inhibitors, goitrogenicity, endocrine disruption, reproductive problems, and increased allergic reactions from consumption of soy products.³¹

One of the strongest letters of protest came from Dr. Dan Sheehan and Dr. Daniel Doerge, government researchers at the National Center for Toxicological Research.³² Their pleas for warning labels were dismissed as unwarranted.

"Sufficient scientific evidence" of soy's cholesterol-lowering properties is drawn largely from a 1995 meta-analysis by Dr James Anderson, sponsored by Protein Technologies International and published in the New England Journal of Medicine.³³

A meta-analysis is a review and summary of the results of many clinical studies on the same subject. Use of meta-analyses to draw general conclusions has come under sharp criticism by members of the scientific community.

"Researchers substituting meta-analysis for more rigorous trials risk making faulty assumptions and indulging in creative accounting," says Sir John Scott, President of the Royal Society of New Zealand. "Like is not being lumped with like. Little lumps and big lumps of data are being gathered together by various groups."³⁴

There is the added temptation for researchers, particularly researchers funded by a company like Protein Technologies International, to leave out studies that would prevent the desired conclusions. Dr. Anderson discarded eight studies for various reasons, leaving a remainder of twenty-nine.

The published report suggested that individuals with cholesterol levels over 250 mg/dl would experience a "significant" reduction of 7 to 20 percent in levels of serum cholesterol if they substituted soy protein for animal protein. Cholesterol reduction was insignificant for individuals whose cholesterol was lower than 250 mg/dl.

In other words, for most of us, giving up steak and eating veggie burgers instead will not bring down blood cholesterol levels. The health claim that the FDA approved "after detailed review of human clinical data" fails to inform the consumer about these important details.

Research that ties soy to positive effects on cholesterol levels is "incredibly immature," said Ronald M. Krauss, MD, head of the Molecular Medical Research Program and Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.³⁵ He might have added that studies in which cholesterol levels were lowered through either diet or drugs have consistently resulted in a greater number of deaths in the treatment groups than in controls – deaths from stroke, cancer, intestinal disorders, accidents, and suicide.³⁶

Cholesterol-lowering measures in the US have fuelled a $60 billion per year cholesterol-lowering industry, but have not saved us from the ravages of heart disease.

http://www.mercola.com/article/soy/avoid_soy.htm

 

[mut4nt3 260]

26 minutos atrás, Norton disse:

Pesquisa mais recente sobre o motivo pelo qual você deve evitar a soja

 

  Ocultar conteúdo

By Sally Fallon & Mary G. Enig, Ph.D.

Cinderella's Dark Side

The propaganda that has created the soy sales miracle is all the more remarkable because, only a few decades ago, the soybean was considered unfit to eat – even in Asia. During the Chou Dynasty (1134-246 BC), the soybean was designated one of the five sacred grains, along with barley, wheat, millet, and rice.

However, the pictograph for the soybean, which dates from earlier times, indicates that it was not first used as a food; for whereas the pictographs for the other four grains show the seed and stem structure of the plant, the pictograph for the soybean emphasizes the root structure. Agricultural literature of the period speaks frequently of the soybean and its use in crop rotation. Apparently, the soy plant was initially used as a method of fixing nitrogen.¹³

The soybean did not serve as a food until the discovery of fermentation techniques, sometime during the Chou Dynasty. The first soy foods were fermented products like tempeh, natto, miso, and soy sauce.

At a later date, possibly in the 2nd century BC, Chinese scientists discovered that a purée of cooked soybeans could be precipitated with calcium sulfate or magnesium sulfate (plaster of Paris or Epsom salts) to make a smooth, pale curd – tofu or bean curd. The use of fermented and precipitated soy products soon spread to other parts of the Orient, notably Japan and Indonesia.

The Chinese did not eat unfermented soybeans as they did other legumes such as lentils because the soybean contains large quantities of natural toxins or "antinutrients." First among them are potent enzyme inhibitors that block the action of trypsin and other enzymes needed for protein digestion.

These inhibitors are large, tightly folded proteins that are not completely deactivated during ordinary cooking. They can produce serious gastric distress, reduced protein digestion and chronic deficiencies in amino acid uptake. In test animals, diets high in trypsin inhibitors cause enlargement and pathological conditions of the pancreas, including cancer.¹⁴

Soybeans also contain haemagglutinin, a clot-promoting substance that causes red blood cells to clump together.

Trypsin inhibitors and haemagglutinin are growth inhibitors. Weanling rats fed soy containing these antinutrients fail to grow normally. Growth-depressant compounds are deactivated during the process of fermentation, so once the Chinese discovered how to ferment the soybean, they began to incorporate soy foods into their diets.

In precipitated products, enzyme inhibitors concentrate in the soaking liquid rather than in the curd. Thus, in tofu and bean curd, growth depressants are reduced in quantity but not completely eliminated.

Soy also contains goitrogens - substances that depress thyroid function.

Additionally 99% a very large percentage of soy is genetically modified and it also has one of the highest percentages of contamination by pesticides of any of our foods.

Soybeans are high in phytic acid, present in the bran or hulls of all seeds. It's a substance that can block the uptake of essential minerals – calcium, magnesium, copper, iron, and especially zinc – in the intestinal tract.

Although not a household word, phytic acid has been extensively studied; there are literally hundreds of articles on the effects of phytic acid in the current scientific literature. Scientists are in general agreement that grain- and legume-based diets high in phytates contribute to widespread mineral deficiencies in third world countries.¹⁵

Analysis shows that calcium, magnesium, iron, and zinc are present in the plant foods eaten in these areas, but the high phytate content of soy- and grain-based diets prevents their absorption.

The soybean has one of the highest phytate levels of any grain or legume that has been studied,¹⁶ and the phytates in soy are highly resistant to normal phytate-reducing techniques such as long, slow cooking.¹⁷ Only a long period of fermentation will significantly reduce the phytate content of soybeans.

When precipitated soy products like tofu are consumed with meat, the mineral-blocking effects of the phytates are reduced.¹⁸ The Japanese traditionally eat a small amount of tofu or miso as part of a mineral-rich fish broth, followed by a serving of meat or fish.

Vegetarians who consume tofu and bean curd as a substitute for meat and dairy products risk severe mineral deficiencies. The results of calcium, magnesium, and iron deficiencies are well known; those of zinc are less so.

Zinc is called the intelligence mineral because it is needed for optimal development and functioning of the brain and nervous system. It plays a role in protein synthesis and collagen formation; it is involved in the blood-sugar control mechanism and thus protects against diabetes; it is needed for a healthy reproductive system.

Zinc is a key component in numerous vital enzymes and plays a role in the immune system. Phytates found in soy products interfere with zinc absorption more completely than with other minerals.¹⁹ Zinc deficiency can cause a "spacey" feeling that some vegetarians may mistake for the "high" of spiritual enlightenment.

Milk drinking is given as the reason why second-generation Japanese in America grow taller than their native ancestors. Some investigators postulate that the reduced phytate content of the American diet – whatever may be its other deficiencies – is the true explanation, pointing out that both Asian and Western children who do not get enough meat and fish products to counteract the effects of a high-phytate diet, frequently suffer rickets, stunting, and other growth problems.²⁰

Soy Protein Isolate: Not So Friendly

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.

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 soybean 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 to impart the flavor of meat.²⁵

In feeding experiments, the 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 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; that over half suffered from periods of moderate diarrhea; that some had upper respiratory infections; and that others suffered from rash and fever.

It should be noted that the researchers did not dare to use soy products to help the children recover from malnutrition, and were obliged to supplement the soy-sugar mixture with nutrients largely absent in soy products – notably, vitamins A, D, and B12, iron, iodine, and zinc.

Marketing the Perfect Food

"Just imagine you could grow the perfect food. This food not only would provide affordable nutrition, but also would be delicious and easy to prepare in a variety of ways. It would be a healthful food, with no saturated fat. In fact, you would be growing a virtual fountain of youth on your back forty."

The author is Dean Houghton, writing for The Furrow,² a magazine published in 12 languages by John Deere. "This ideal food would help prevent, and perhaps reverse, some of the world's most dreaded diseases. You could grow this miracle crop in a variety of soils and climates. Its cultivation would build up, not deplete, the land... this miracle food already exists... It's called soy."

Just imagine. Farmers have been imagining – and planting more soy. What was once a minor crop, listed in the 1913 US Department of Agriculture (USDA) handbook not as a food but as an industrial product, now covers 72 million acres of American farmland. Much of this harvest will be used to feed chickens, turkeys, pigs, cows, and salmon. Another large fraction will be squeezed to produce oil for margarine, shortenings, and salad dressings.

Advances in technology make it possible to produce isolated soy protein from what was once considered a waste product – the defatted, high-protein soy chips – and then transform something that looks and smells terrible into products that can be consumed by human beings. Flavorings, preservatives, sweeteners, emulsifiers, and synthetic nutrients have turned soy protein isolate, the food processors' ugly duckling, into a New Age Cinderella.

The new fairy-tale food has been marketed not so much for her beauty but for her virtues. Early on, products based on soy protein isolate were sold as extenders and meat substitutes – a strategy that failed to produce the requisite consumer demand. The industry changed its approach.

"The quickest way to gain product acceptability in the less affluent society," said an industry spokesman, "is to have the product consumed on its own merit in a more affluent society."³ So soy is now sold to the upscale consumer, not as a cheap, poverty food but as a miracle substance that will prevent heart disease and cancer, whisk away hot flushes, build strong bone, and keep us forever young.

The competition – meat, milk, cheese, butter, and eggs – has been duly demonised by the appropriate government bodies. Soy serves as meat and milk for a new generation of virtuous vegetarians.

Marketing Costs Money

This is especially when it needs to be bolstered with "research," but there's plenty of funds available. All soybean producers pay a mandatory assessment of one-half to one percent of the net market price of soybeans. The total – something like US$80 million annually⁴ – supports United Soybean's program to "strengthen the position of soybeans in the marketplace and maintain and expand domestic and foreign markets for uses for soybeans and soybean products".

State soybean councils from Maryland, Nebraska, Delaware, Arkansas, Virginia, North Dakota, and Michigan provide another $2.5 million for "research."⁵ Private companies like Archer Daniels Midland also contribute their share. ADM spent $4.7 million for advertising on Meet the Press and $4.3 million on Face the Nation during the course of a year.⁶

Public relations firms help convert research projects into newspaper articles and advertising copy, and law firms lobby for favorable government regulations. IMF money funds soy processing plants in foreign countries, and free trade policies keep soybean abundance flowing to overseas destinations.

The push for more soy has been relentless and global in its reach. Soy protein is now found in most supermarket breads. It is being used to transform "the humble tortilla, Mexico's corn-based staple food, into a protein-fortified "super-tortilla" that would give a nutritional boost to the nearly 20 million Mexicans who live in extreme poverty."⁷ Advertising for a new soy-enriched loaf from Allied Bakeries in Britain targets menopausal women seeking relief from hot flushes. Sales are running at a quarter of a million loaves per week.⁸

The soy industry hired Norman Robert Associates, a public relations firm, to "get more soy products onto school menus."⁹ The USDA responded with a proposal to scrap the 30 percent limit for soy in school lunches. The NuMenu program would allow unlimited use of soy in student meals. With soy added to hamburgers, tacos, and lasagna, dietitians can get the total fat content below 30 percent of calories, thereby conforming to government dictates. "With the soy-enhanced food items, students are receiving better servings of nutrients and less cholesterol and fat."

Soy milk has posted the biggest gains, soaring from $2 million in 1980 to $300 million in the US last year.¹⁰ Recent advances in processing have transformed the gray, thin, bitter, beany-tasting Asian beverage into a product that Western consumers will accept – one that tastes like a milkshake, but without the guilt.

Processing miracles, good packaging, massive advertising, and a marketing strategy that stresses the products' possible health benefits account for increasing sales to all age groups. For example, reports that soy helps prevent prostate cancer have made soy milk acceptable to middle-aged men. "You don't have to twist the arm of a 55- to 60-year-old guy to get him to try soy milk," says Mark Messina. Michael Milken, former junk bond financier, has helped the industry shed its hippie image with well-publicized efforts to consume 40 grams of soy protein daily.

America today, tomorrow the world. Soy milk sales are rising in Canada, even though soy milk there costs twice as much as cow's milk. Soybean milk processing plants are sprouting up in places like Kenya.¹¹ Even China, where soy really is a poverty food and whose people want more meat, not tofu, has opted to build Western-style soy factories rather than develop western grasslands for grazing animals.¹²

FDA Health Claim Challenged

On October 25, 1999, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) decided to allow a health claim for products "low in saturated fat and cholesterol" that contain 6.25 grams of soy protein per serving. Breakfast cereals, baked goods, convenience food, smoothie mixes, and meat substitutes could now be sold with labels touting benefits to cardiovascular health, as long as these products contained one heaping teaspoon of soy protein per 100-gram serving.

The best marketing strategy for a product that is inherently unhealthy is, of course, a health claim.

"The road to FDA approval," writes a soy apologist, "was long and demanding, consisting of a detailed review of human clinical data collected from more than 40 scientific studies conducted over the last 20 years. Soy protein was found to be one of the rare foods that had sufficient scientific evidence not only to qualify for an FDA health claim proposal but to ultimately pass the rigorous approval process."²⁹

The "long and demanding" road to FDA approval actually took a few unexpected turns. The original petition, submitted by Protein Technology International, requested a health claim for isoflavones, the estrogen-like compounds found plentifully in soybeans, based on assertions that "only soy protein that has been processed in a manner in which isoflavones are retained will result in cholesterol lowering."

In 1998, the FDA made the unprecedented move of rewriting PTI's petition, removing any reference to the phyto-estrogens and substituting a claim for soy protein – a move that was in direct contradiction to the agency's regulations. The FDA is authorized to make rulings only on substances presented by petition.

The abrupt change in direction was no doubt due to the fact that a number of researchers, including scientists employed by the US Government, submitted documents indicating that isoflavones are toxic.

The FDA had also received, early in 1998, the final British Government report on phytoestrogens, which failed to find much evidence of benefit and warned against potential adverse effects.³⁰

Even with the change to soy protein isolate, FDA bureaucrats engaged in the "rigorous approval process" were forced to deal nimbly with concerns about mineral blocking effects, enzyme inhibitors, goitrogenicity, endocrine disruption, reproductive problems, and increased allergic reactions from consumption of soy products.³¹

One of the strongest letters of protest came from Dr. Dan Sheehan and Dr. Daniel Doerge, government researchers at the National Center for Toxicological Research.³² Their pleas for warning labels were dismissed as unwarranted.

"Sufficient scientific evidence" of soy's cholesterol-lowering properties is drawn largely from a 1995 meta-analysis by Dr James Anderson, sponsored by Protein Technologies International and published in the New England Journal of Medicine.³³

A meta-analysis is a review and summary of the results of many clinical studies on the same subject. Use of meta-analyses to draw general conclusions has come under sharp criticism by members of the scientific community.

"Researchers substituting meta-analysis for more rigorous trials risk making faulty assumptions and indulging in creative accounting," says Sir John Scott, President of the Royal Society of New Zealand. "Like is not being lumped with like. Little lumps and big lumps of data are being gathered together by various groups."³⁴

There is the added temptation for researchers, particularly researchers funded by a company like Protein Technologies International, to leave out studies that would prevent the desired conclusions. Dr. Anderson discarded eight studies for various reasons, leaving a remainder of twenty-nine.

The published report suggested that individuals with cholesterol levels over 250 mg/dl would experience a "significant" reduction of 7 to 20 percent in levels of serum cholesterol if they substituted soy protein for animal protein. Cholesterol reduction was insignificant for individuals whose cholesterol was lower than 250 mg/dl.

In other words, for most of us, giving up steak and eating veggie burgers instead will not bring down blood cholesterol levels. The health claim that the FDA approved "after detailed review of human clinical data" fails to inform the consumer about these important details.

Research that ties soy to positive effects on cholesterol levels is "incredibly immature," said Ronald M. Krauss, MD, head of the Molecular Medical Research Program and Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.³⁵ He might have added that studies in which cholesterol levels were lowered through either diet or drugs have consistently resulted in a greater number of deaths in the treatment groups than in controls – deaths from stroke, cancer, intestinal disorders, accidents, and suicide.³⁶

Cholesterol-lowering measures in the US have fuelled a $60 billion per year cholesterol-lowering industry, but have not saved us from the ravages of heart disease.

http://www.mercola.com/article/soy/avoid_soy.htm

 

Eu já postei esse link, é nele exatamente que fala sobre a PIS.

Isolado de proteína de soja: não tão amigável

Os processadores de soja trabalharam arduamente para tirar esses antinutrientes do produto acabado, particularmente o isolado de proteína de soja (SPI), que é o ingrediente chave na maioria dos alimentos de soja que imitam carne e produtos lácteos, incluindo fórmulas para bebês e algumas marcas de leite de soja.

SPI não é algo que você pode fazer em sua própria cozinha. A produção ocorre em fábricas industriais onde uma pasta de grãos de soja é primeiro misturada com uma solução alcalina para remover a fibra, depois precipitada e separada com uma lavagem ácida e, finalmente, neutralizada em uma solução alcalina.

A lavagem ácida em tanques de alumínio libera altos níveis de alumínio no produto final. A coalhada resultante é seca por pulverização a altas temperaturas para produzir um pó de alta proteína. Uma indignidade final com a soja original é o processamento de extrusão de alta pressão e alta temperatura de isolados de proteína de soja para produzir proteína vegetal texturizada (TVP).

Grande parte do conteúdo do inibidor de tripsina pode ser removido através de processamento de alta temperatura, mas não todos. O teor de inibidor de tripsina do isolado de proteína de soja pode variar tanto quanto cinco vezes.21 (Em ratos, mesmo a inibição de tripsina de baixo nível, a alimentação de SPI resulta em ganho de peso reduzido em relação aos controles.22)

Mas o processamento de alta temperatura tem o infeliz efeito colateral de desnaturalizar as outras proteínas na soja, que são tornadas em grande parte ineficazes.23 É por isso que os animais na alimentação de soja precisam de suplementos de lisina para o crescimento normal.

Os nitritos, que são agentes cancerígenos potentes, são formados durante a secagem por pulverização, e uma formação de toxina denominada lisinoalanina é formada durante o processamento alcalino.24 Numerosos aromas artificiais, particularmente MSG, são adicionados ao isolado de proteína de soja e produtos proteicos vegetais texturizados para mascarar seu forte "beany "gosto e dá o sabor da carne.25

Nas experiências de alimentação, o uso de SPI aumentou os requisitos para vitaminas E, K, D e B12 e criou sintomas de deficiência de cálcio, magnésio, manganês, molibdênio, cobre, ferro e zinco.26 O ácido fítico que permanece nesses produtos de soja inibe grandemente absorção de zinco e ferro; Os animais de teste alimentados com SPI desenvolvem órgãos ampliados, particularmente o pâncreas e a glândula tireoideia, e o aumento da deposição de ácidos graxos no fígado.27

No entanto, proteína isolada de proteína de soja e proteína vegetal texturizada são amplamente utilizadas em programas de almoço escolar, produtos cozidos no mercado, bebidas dietéticas e produtos de fast food. Eles são fortemente promovidos em países do terceiro mundo e formam a base de muitos programas de brindes de comida.

Apesar dos fracos resultados em ensaios de alimentação animal, a indústria da soja patrocinou uma série de estudos destinados a demonstrar que os produtos de proteína de soja podem ser utilizados em dietas humanas como substituto de alimentos tradicionais.

Um exemplo é "Qualidade Nutricional de Isolados de Proteínas de Feijão de Soja: Estudos em Crianças de Idade Pré-Escolar", patrocinado pela Empresa Ralston Purina.28 Um grupo de crianças centro-americanas que sofrem de desnutrição foi primeiro estabilizado e trazido em melhor saúde, alimentando-os com alimentos nativos. , incluindo carne e produtos lácteos. Então, durante um período de duas semanas, esses alimentos tradicionais foram substituídos por uma bebida feita com proteína isolada de soja e açúcar.

 

Todo o nitrogênio absorvido e todo o nitrogênio excretado foram medidos de maneira verdadeiramente orwelliana: as crianças foram pesadas nuas todas as manhãs, e todos os excrementos e vômitos foram coletados para análise. Os pesquisadores descobriram que as crianças mantiveram nitrogênio e que seu crescimento era "adequado", de modo que o experimento foi declarado um sucesso.

 

Se as crianças eram realmente saudáveis em uma dieta desse tipo, ou poderiam permanecer assim por um longo período, é outra questão. Os pesquisadores observaram que as crianças vomitaram "ocasionalmente", geralmente depois de terminar uma refeição; que mais de metade sofria de períodos de diarréia moderada; que alguns tiveram infecções respiratórias superiores; e que outros sofreram de erupção cutânea e febre.

Note-se que os pesquisadores não se atreveram a usar produtos de soja para ajudar as crianças a se recuperar da desnutrição e foram obrigados a complementar a mistura de soja com nutrientes em grande parte ausentes nos produtos de soja - notadamente vitaminas A, D e B12, ferro, iodo e zinco.