Recently, the health benefits of soy beans and soy products have come into question. Since we're now a society that consumes a lot of soy, this can only be a good line if inquiry. However, much of what has been forwarded to me over the past year has been written in the same tone as Chicken Little's "The sky is falling!", as if eating soy was the worst decision humans have made since overly dramatic if it's the worst food decision since Pope Clement croaked after eating a death cap mushroom in the 1500s.

 

First, a perspective: the topic of soy, and whether it is "good or bad for health because those are the only black and white choices right?" is no different from questioning any and all other foods that we can place into our mouths in the form of nutrition. Humans have done this since the beginning of time. It is usually a matter of:

  1. what is the source of the food (what soil? Where?)
  2. how the food was prepared and processed (some foods will kill you in their raw state. Others are useless unless cooked a certain way)
  3. amounts we're talking about (2 millionths of a grams per week? 20 pounds per week?)

Some quick examples for perspective:

Beets are one of the finest sources of Vitamin A and beta carotene. They're historically known as a blood purifier. But they also contain quite a bit of oxalic acid (especially the leaves) which is known to cause joint problems and kidney stones. I've seen someone improve by removing all beets from their diet.

Dried red kidney beans contain natural toxins called lectins, which can cause stomach aches and vomiting. These are destroyed if you soak the dried beans for at least 12 hours and then boil them vigorously for at least 10 minutes in fresh water.

All potatoes contain natural toxins called glycoalkaloids, usually at low levels. But higher levels of glycoalkaloids can be found in green parts of potatoes, sprouted potatoes and potatoes stored in light. Symptoms include headache, nausea, fatigue, vomiting, abdominal pain and diarrhea.

Some foods do fine in animals, yet are harmful for humans (goats thrive on a type of poisonous thistle). The opposite is true as well: all chocolate contains up to 2% theobromine, a psychoactive chemical that can kill a dog outright with as little as a half pound. If chocolate killed humans, my wife, along with every woman I've ever met, would have keeled over years ago.

There are scores of examples we could look at—from alcohol to celery to beef heart— all foods that are eaten every day by people who survive well into their old age. What is the point? Foods aren't necessarily 100% benign, or 100% poisonous.

It makes sense, then, for someone to finally look at the lowly soy bean and examine whether our sudden increase in consumption is all of a good thing. The US went from using soybeans for feeding pigs, to soybeans in tofu, tempeh, tamari, and hundreds of protein powder drinks and bars. It was the next savior food for a country questioning its animal treatment and animal consumption.

The two people most responsible for this initial spirited questioning about "Is Soy All Good?" were two women, Mary Enig, Ph.D, and Sally Fallon, current president of the Weston A. Price Foundation, and author of books that promote cultured vegetables, real food, and farm raised animals. (see Healing Traditions).

Having been a big consumer of soy products since the late 70s, I read their articles with great interest. Although everyone should read their writings to make up their own minds, the essence of what they were saying was this:

  1. Soy beans are hard to digest. Further, if not prepared a certain way, they can block certain processes from happening inside the body
  2. Much of the soy beans currently used has been genetically modified and isn't the real deal.
  3. Isolated soy proteins are especially bad for us, and they're in everything from soy "milk", to soy bars, to hundreds of other "hey-we're-vegeterian!" food products.
  4. There are a growing number of symptoms that we US soybeaners are starting to see that may have a correlation to our soy consumption, such as B12 deficiency, pancreatic disorders, high levels of aluminum, bone loss, and many others.

The thing I like about these two women's writings is that they both rely strongly on the science of historical experience ; meaning, that instead of looking at laboratory-based double blind studies, they look at real life results, at the groups of our ancestors that had the healthiest track records. and take their clues from them. This is the heart and soul behind both Weston Price and Pottenger's work, two diet/disease researchers that I mention in Cellular Cleansing Made Easy.

Both Mary and Sally are also are telling Americans to start paying attention to the sources of their foods. And because of their strong opinions on the health properties of consuming a lot of animal food, they are able to reach a huge audience that would otherwise be turned off by those of us that are suggesting trying out a lowering of these animal foods.

I think they are both offering an important counterpoint to what is currently popular (including my style and opinions on how to stay healthy and drug-free). They are willing to challenge the current beliefs about health that have come into play since the 1970s.

The problem I have always had with both of their writing is the undertone of disrespect that I sense they hold towards anyone that has tried to figure out how to stay healthy in the last 30 years, and not just towards those that introduced tofu and soy products to the US. I never detect any hint or admittance that what they are espousing at is theory. Hey, it could be a good theory, maybe even a right theory. But it is certainly not the gospel of truth from on high. I also question the sheer amount of animal foods that they recommend on a daily basis, including recipes with sausag, bacon, and brains. It's as if, in helping people get off of fast food and hydrogenated oil, they want to redeem all animal fats, and lots of it.

They also seem so bent on getting the message out about their soy views that they miss an important fact: some of the longest living people on earth use soy products. Here's a quote, taken from a Time magazine article last year, on the inhabitants of the isolated Japanese island of Okinawa, considered to be in the top three healthiest and longest living peoples on earth:

"Scientists working for the U.S. National Institutes of Health and Japan's Ministry of Health have been following oldsters... since 1976 in the Okinawa Centenarian Study.... Elderly Okinawans tend to get plenty of physical and mental exercise. Their diets, moreover, are exemplary: low in fat and salt, and high in fruits and vegetables packed with fiber and antioxidant substances that protect against cancer, heart disease and stroke. They consume more soy than any other population on earth: 60-120 g a day, compared to 30-50 g for the average Japanese, 10 for Chinese and virtually 0 g for the average American. Soy is rich in flavonoids—antioxidants strongly linked to low rates of cancer. This may be one of many reasons why the annual death rate from cancer in Okinawa is far below the U.S. rate." (Time magazine, May, 2004, page 43, How to Live to be 100)

Look at that bolded text again. The longest living people on the planet not only consume soy products, they consume far more than anyone else on the planet. Far more than even me, and most likely, far more than both Mary and Sally.

 

So: as with most great studies, my guess is that the truth lies somewhere in the middle. Mary and Sally have pointed out that our source of most of our soy beans is not a good one, nor from a whole bean source. They've pointed out that even the Okinawans don't drink soy milk or prepare their soy products in the historically new ways that we are using it. I think these are very valid points, and I myself am paying attention to this. However, I like modeling those dang Okinawans. I think they're on to something. I will continue to eat soy products, as well as prepare my own cultured pickles, miso soup, and whole-grain rice.

There's more to this topic, but author John Robbins has written a great response about soy, well worth reading. Consider it Part Two of this article.

Scott Ohlgren
How Health Works