I'm just wondering what is the "dietary recommendation" for soy isoflavone in a vegan getting most of their protein from soy, and how is this limit advertised or enforced? Can you point me to the soy limit in the DGA?
-
-
Replying to @puddleg @YoniFreedhoff and
"No data on modification of gender-related characteristics or feminization in humans in consequence of soy consumption have been found"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4270274/ …
1 reply 1 retweet 13 likes -
Replying to @johnzahorik @YoniFreedhoff and
Well, that's a lie, it shows a sexist bias, and why wouldn't the effects seen in animals (which are potent PSYCHOLOGICAL ones) be worth following up on? Soy in pregnancy is associated with early substance use here:https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/acer.13494 …
4 replies 0 retweets 12 likes -
Replying to @puddleg @johnzahorik and
"data from food frequency questionnaires"... Must be one of those days when FFQs are valid again. I'm sure it'll last. Also, maternal meat consumption would be linked to mother's socioeconomic status wouldn't it?
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @PlomeekSoup @johnzahorik and
The gene variant analysis answers confounding questions. Survey questions are qualitative as well as quantitative. RR is decent size. And in our culture the privileged have been early adopters of plant-based diets. 1/2
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @puddleg @PlomeekSoup and
And if there hasn't been enough research to satisfy you, then, given the importance of the question of children's happiness, and the blackmailing push onto to plant-based junk food, doesn't this prove negligence on the part of public health authorities, more than anything? 2/2
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @puddleg @PlomeekSoup and
Lots of loaded language there, but probably worth pointing out that this study on soy is no more convincing than the ~many~ similar trials showing associations between meat consumption and a host of negative outcomes. Using a single measure of dietary exposure...
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
...and not controlling for important factors (i.e. maternal substance use) could easily have led to a spurious result. It's also quite worrying, given they used logistic regression, that they don't report the numbers in each group. It appears the weekly soy intake group...
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
...may have been quite small, which would make the logistic regression unreliable. There was also a very high attrition rate for the follow-up data, which they examine in the supplementaries, and could have completely reversed some of those associations
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @GidMK @PlomeekSoup and
So you want to see a larger sized, even more rigorous test? So do I, so do I. Preferably before soy consumption increases.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
I mean, not really? Seems like a very weak association at best, while soy consumption orders of magnitude higher than this is the norm for the majority of humans on the planet
-
-
I mean, the highest category of soy consumption in that study was "weekly+". It's not uncommon in South Korea (for example) to eat soy with ~every meal~
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @GidMK @PlomeekSoup and
You haven't been paying attention - 1) weekly+ includes highest consumers, incl all-the-timers. 2) Asian diets supply 10-15% of isoflavones one can get from western processed soy if you're interested in this question, you need to understand the differencehttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308814616306537 …
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like - Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.