Soy and the Odwalla Chocolate Protein Monster

Posted on April 16, 2012 by Dr Kaayla Daniel

Odwalla’s Chocolate Protein Monster made the news last week when four consumers experienced severe allergic reactions.   This set off  a “nationwide allergy alert”, a product recall and a lot of speculation about what might have caused the reactions.   Although all four of the victims were allergic to peanuts, and two were also allergic to tree nuts, the drink contained neither peanuts nor tree nuts.   There was also no evidence of accidental or malicious cross contamination at the manufacturing plant.

With the possibility of contamination from peanuts unlikely, detectives are considering the potential for cross reactivity.    Cross reactivity refers to a reaction that occurs when people allergic to one class of proteins react to another similar in structure.   A good example is soy and peanuts, members of the grain-legume botanical family.   In fact, scientists have known for years that people allergic to one are often allergic to the other.   Food safety experts say they are clueless as to what might have happened in the Odwalla case, but given that the Chocolate Protein Monster drink contained soy protein, and the victims all suffered from peanut allergies, the likely culprit is soy.

Severe reactions to soy were once rare.   Today they are increasingly common, and pose especially high risks to children already afflicted with peanut allergies.   In 1999, the journal Allergy reported that four children in Sweden died after eating a minuscule amount of soy “hidden” in hamburgers.    The Swedish National Food Administration promptly warned parents and pediatricians of the soy-peanut link, and stated that children suffering from both peanut allergy and asthma are at very high  risk.   Additional risk factors reported included other food allergies, a family history of peanut or soy allergies, a diagnosis of asthma, rhinitis or eczema, and/or a family history of those diseases.    The researchers found it took only a tiny, almost indiscernible, amount of soy to create a severe and even life-threatening reaction in susceptible individuals.   Even more surprising, they discovered severe allergic reactions could happen suddenly and unexpectedly to people with no known soy allergies.    In fact, the reactions documented by the Swedes were very similar to the reactions to the Odwalla Chocolate Protein Monster drink.

Tragically, the Swedish National Food Administration warning has not been publicized much in the U.S.   Indeed, the Soyfoods Association of North America –  and even many allergy support groups –  recommend soy nut butter and soy nuts for children allergic to peanuts and tree nuts.   As a result, few people have heard of the deadly soy/peanut connection, and numerous adverse reactions have been reported.

Even worse, we know for certain of several deaths.

Six years ago, 13-year old Emily Van Der Meulen died on April 13, 2006.   Emily had a severe peanut allergy and assiduously avoided peanuts, but did not know she should also have avoided soy.   She died after eating a meal that was apparently peanut free but contained a tiny amount of soy.  Just as in the Swedish study, she had not previously reacted to soy.

After Newsweek ran a cover story on the growing threat of food allergies to children, Emily’s parents Paul and Catrina Vonder Meulen spoke up to warn people about soy:“

“The Newsweek article talks about the growing threat of food allergies but with no mention of soy.   Soy is a silent killer—a hidden ingredient in almost every type of food out there from hamburgers to breads.  We were never told about the dangers of cross reactivity despite well-documented cases of children with peanut allergies who have died after eating soy, not peanuts.   The Mayo Clinic has warned about the dangers of soy for severely peanut-allergic people with asthma, yet most allergists and allergy information websites fail to warn parents of this danger.     We very much want to alert the many parents who are unaware of soy’s risks to children with peanut allergies and asthma.”

On February 22, the Weston A.. Price Foundation learned the sad news of the death of a nine year old girl who was allergic to peanuts but died after drinking soy milk:

“My cousin’s daughter just passed yesterday after having soy milk for the first time.  She was known to have peanut allergies and asthma.     My cousin watched what she ate but he was not aware of the relationship between the peanut allergy and soy.  She had an asthma attack and did not respond to treatment.  My cousin and his wife performed CPR; she was taken to a hospital in Baltimore then flown to DC Children’s. All of her systems failed and she died Tuesday morning.  She was the light in her father’s eyes. Her brother thought she hung the moon just for him; her mother is devastated.”

Hundreds of other mystery deaths may also have been caused by the soy-peanut connection.   Indeed, it’s a question that needs to be asked whenever we hear that someone with peanut allergies dies suddenly after eating a hamburger, a burrito or some other food that did not contain peanut ingredients.   The obvious question is, why so many reactions, and why now?

Soy is now widely acknowledged to be one of the top eight allergens, and many experts believe it will soon be in the top four.   Reasons for the rise include the widespread use of soy infant formula, growing numbers of vegetarians and others health-conscious individuals who substitute soy products for meat and/or dairy,  and the increased number of allergens found in genetically modified (GMO) soy.   The last appears to be particular important as the number of people diagnosed with soy allergies has increased by 50 percent since 1998, the first year that genetically modified soybeans entered our food supply.

The GMO issue may be the key to the increasingly number of severe soy-peanut cross-reactions.   As reported by Robyn O’Brien on the AllergyKids website:

“According to previously undisclosed research and the Peanut Genome Initiative, it appears that in the genetic engineering of soy, a soy allergen was created that is 41 percent identical to a known peanut allergen, ara h 3. This new allergen, now found in soy, is recognized by 44 percent of peanut allergic individuals.    Recent studies out of the University of London conducted by Gideon Lack support this undisclosed research and highlight the role that conventional soy (and soy formula) play in the development of the peanut allergy.  . .   In the United States, 90 percent of soy now contains these new proteins, chemicals and allergens.”

Why hasn’t this news gotten out?   Why do so many allergy support groups neglect to issue warnings about the soy-peanut connection?     Given the fact that soy ingredients are in more than 60 percent of processed or packaged foods and nearly 100 percent of fast foods, this is simply irresponsible.   Not surprisingly, the reason appears to be the usual principle of profits over people.    According to Robyn O’Brien of AllergyKids, “Leading pediatric allergists and researchers have been funded by the agrichemical corporation responsible for engineering these proteins, chemicals and toxins into soy.”

Will the Odwalla case bring this lifesaving information into the mainstream media?   As yet, the culprit hasn’t been identified as soy.   The likelihood is high, however that soy will soon be accused and proven guilty.   In the meantime, we can only hope, pray, and make a concerted grassroots effort to share this information with as many people as possible.

Posted in WAPF Blog | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Save Your Bacon! Sizzling Bits about Nitrites, Dirty Little Secrets about Celery Salt and Other Aporkalyptic News

Posted on March 29, 2012 by Dr Kaayla Daniel

Neal Barnard MD, head of the Physicians Committee for (Ir)Responsible Medicine, tried to round up an army of vegans to protest a Bacon Festival in Iowa last month, but succeeded in recruiting only six volunteers. 1

Why so few?    Probably fear of bacon!   Not fear of death by bacon, which is what Dr. Barnard hoped to fuel with anti-meat rhetoric and billboards of skulls and crossbones, but vegan fears of succumbing to the lure of bacon itself!  Bacon’s smell and taste are so seductive that many vegetarians fear it as “the gateway meat.”

But what of those health risks?   What about all that fat, cholesterol and sodium?   And what about nitrites?   It’s not just vegans after all who warn us against bacon.   Recently, the Harvard School of Public Health announced with great fanfare that just a small daily serving of red meat would increase our likelihood of death by 13 percent, while a little bacon, hot dogs, sausage or other processed red meats every day would kill us off 20 percent faster. 2,3

In fact, the study was pseudo science at its best — an observational study using notoriously fallible food-frequency questionnaires, with researchers drawing unwarranted conclusions based on mere associations.   Much ado about nothing, in other words.  A careful look at the data suggests a 0.2-fold increased risk at most.   And that’s for people eating supermarket meat from factory farms who also happen to smoke, couch potato, and eat their red meat wrapped up in white bread and buns. 4-6

Sadly lots of people assume Harvard’s warnings must be valid.  Red meat, bacon and other tasty high-fat foods, after all, have long enjoyed reputations as being both delicious and dangerous.  Indeed, the bacon question has been argued for years, now with most non-vegan internet bloggers concluding that bacon’s “not so bad” if used to add a bit of flavor and crunchiness to “healthy” foods such as salads and vegetables.  Comedian Jim Gaffigan spoofed this on Late Night with Conan O’Brien when he described bits of bacon as “the fairy dust of the food community” and eating a salad sprinkled with bacon as “panning for gold.”

A bit more bacon –  even a few strips –  sometimes even gets the Food-Police stamp of approval , provided it’s a special treat, of course, and not a daily indulgence.   But such recommendations usually come complete with a warning to stick with lean bacon, and then cook it so it’s firm but not soft.   While that last sounds a bit naughty, it’s actually anti fat puritanism — the goal being to render the soft parts into fat that can be poured or patted off.

But what if bacon is actually good for us?  What if it actually supports good health and is not a mortal dietary sin after all?   What if we can eat all we’d like?   Naughty propositions to be sure,  but ones the Naughty Nutritionist™ is prepared to argue.  And that promise is not just a strip tease!

HEALTHY FAT

Bacon’s primary asset is its fat, and that fat— surprise! –  is primarily monounsaturated.  Fifty percent of the fat in bacon is monounsaturated,  mostly consisting of oleic acid, the type so valued in olive oil.   About three percent of that is palmitoleic acid, a monounsaturate with valuable antimicrobial properties.  About 40 percent of bacon fat is saturated, a level that worries fat phobics, but is the reason why bacon fat is relatively stable and unlikely to go rancid under normal storage and cooking conditions.   That’s important, given the fact that the remaining 10 percent is in the valuable but unstable form of polyunsaturates.7

Pork fat also contains a novel form of phosophatidyl choline that possesses antioxidant activity superior to Vitamin E.   This may be one reason why lard and bacon fat are relatively stable and unprone to rancidity from free radicals.8

Bacon fat from pastured pigs also comes replete with fat-soluble vitamin D, provided it’s bacon from foraging pigs that romp outdoors in the sun for most of year.    Factory-farmed pigs kept indoors and fed rations from soy, casein, corn meal,  and other grains, are likely to show low levels of Vitamin D.

NUMBERS GAME

How much Vitamin D is the question.   Most databases suggest 100 to 250 IU per 100 grams, with some of the higher numbers coming from Italy, where even commercial pigs are more likely to see the great outdoors.9,10

However, far higher numbers have been reported, especially for pastured pigs.    According to Dr. Mary Enig, USDA laboratories in the 1980s came up with the figure of 2,800 IUs per 100 grams though that data was never officially reported by the government agency.11 According to her source at the USDA, the agency chose to suppress this information because it wanted the public to think its vitamin D must come from fortified milk and other BigAg products.  Whether the 2,800 IUs figure is valid and represents sophisticated laboratory testing still not in common use, or a typographical error for 280 IUs is not known.   USDA databases from that period do not even include Vitamin D.

Other unanswered questions involve the Vitamin A content of bacon fat or lard.   USDA tables — both the official tables and the unpublished 1980 findings discovered by Dr. Enig – report levels of zero. 12,13 Yet a 1948 study showed that Vitamin A deficiency in rats can be corrected with lard.    Indeed Vitamin A-deficient rats reversed the deficiency provided  fats replaced the sucrose in their chow.   Even more interesting, those animals fared better than those on the same diet with added Vitamin A palmitate, a synthetic form of A.    Although any fats seemed to help, the effect was most pronounced with lard.14 This makes little sense given the seeming lack of Vitamin A in lard, but a series of studies from the early 1950s identified the presence of a “vitamin A replacing factor” in lard even when Vitamin A itself was not detected.15-19

As we would expect, the good fat in bacon comes accompanied by cholesterol, a “no no” according to the Food Police, and yet another reason for bacon’s dangerous reputation.   The evidence against cholesterol causing or contributing to heart disease, of course, is inconsistent, contradictory, misinterpreted and sparse.  It’s oxidized cholesterol — as found in the powdered milk and powdered egg ingredients used for processed, packaged and fast foods, including low-fat and non-fat milks  — that contributes to heart disease. What’s more, as biochemical textbooks make clear, cholesterol is the mother of all hormones, including our reproductive and mood hormones. 20 Thus bacon’s cholesterol content may be part of the reason it enjoys such a reputation as a “feel good” food.

HEART OF THE MATTER

Even so, “everyone knows” bacon’s bad for us, and Dr. Barnard would have us think it’s a veritable risk factor for heart disease.   In fact, bacon might be good for the heart.   And not just because it makes us happy, though that’s surely a plus!    Monounsaturated fat — the primary fat in bacon — is widely lauded for reducing inflammation and lowering blood pressure, while the antimicrobial palmitoleic content in bacon fat can keep plaque at bay.   Triglycerides too may improve because bacon fat is especially good at helping us achieve satiety and stable blood sugar.   Bacon can thus be useful for diabetics and prediabetics as well as everyone else coping with sugar cravings and carbohydrate addictions.

Promoting bacon as a red hot ticket to weight loss might seem over the top, but eggs and bacon do add up to a high-fat, high-protein and low-carb breakfast.   They not only help people start their day feeling happy, but can reduce hunger pains and rev the metabolism.  For many people, bacon’s signature salty and savory sweetness is a treat that reduces feelings of deprivation and lack.   It can help people transition away from high carb diets and overcome carb addictions.   And by stabilizing blood sugar, bacon helps prevent mood swings, reduce anxiety, improve focus and enhance coping skills.

SALT  OF THE EARTH

Those not worried about bacon’s fat and cholesterol content often fret about the salt.  Sodium restriction, of course, is the latest goal of the Food Police despite underwhelming evidence that salt contributes to high blood pressure and heart disease. In fact, Americans today eat about half the salt they consumed during the good old days prior to refrigeration when meat and fish were preserved by salting and curing, and vegetables by culturing and pickling.   Animals seek out salt licks, paleo people eat and drink salty blood and other animal parts, and biochemists point out we need sodium and chloride for blood, sweat, tears, mucus and semen.  Textbooks “worth their salt” make all of this abundantly clear, yet U.S. government guidelines recommend drastic reductions in salt intake.   Sadly, low-salt diets increase the likelihood of heart disease, hypertension, cognitive decline, osteoporosis,insulin resistance and erectile dysfunction.21,22 Given today’s epidemic of chronic illness, that’s pouring salt on a gaping healthcare wound!   And it’s a poor reason indeed to avoid bacon.

FEAR OF NITRITES

For members of the Weston A. Price Foundation, the big issue is not fear of fat, cholesterol or salt, but fear of nitrites, which have been associated with cancer and many other ills.    Indeed studies — such as the recent one out of Harvard –  make the headlines so often that nearly all educated, health conscious consumers think they should either avoid processed meats altogether or choose “uncured bacons” that are advertised as “nitrite free.”   Popular brands assumed to be healthy include Niman, Bieler, Applegate, Coleman’s and nearly every other bacon brand found at Whole Foods Market or other health food stores.

The question is, are these “uncured” bacons healthier?

DECEIVING THE PUBLIC

The short answer is no.   Dr. Nathan Bryan, University of Texas Houston Biomedical Research Center, pulls no punches when he states, “This notion of ‘nitrite-free’ or ‘organically cured’ meats is a public deception.”23

Traditionally bacon was cured by adding sodium nitrite salts directly to the meat.  Today’s manufacturers of  “nitrite free” brands add celery salt, which is about 50 percent nitrate, plus a starter culture of bacteria.   This transforms the nitrate found naturally in the celery salt into nitrite, which cures the meat.    Although manufacturers label this bacon “nitrite free,” this method actually generates more nitrite from the celery salt than would ever be added as a salt.   Indeed, “nitrite free” bacon can have twice the nitrite content of bacons cured directly with nitrite salts.   “Some convert 40 percent, some convert 90 percent, so the consistency of the residual nitrite is highly variable,” Dr. Bryan says.   Yet his biggest concern is not nitrite content but the possibility of bacterial contamination.   “I think it is probably less healthy than regular cured meats because of the bacteria load and the unknown efficacy of conversion by the bacteria,” he says.24

Nitrites were used traditionally to preserve food safely, including cured meat and fish, as well as some cheeses.  Although improved hygiene and availability of refrigeration diminishes the need for nitrite, it remains useful for its antioxidant properties, antimicrobial activity, flavor enhancement and color development. 25-30 Modern alternatives such as sorbates,  parabens and biological acidulants are FDA approved and generally considered safe.   However, sorbates are associated with contact dermatitis31 while biological acidulants such as sodium and potassium bisulfates have been linked to respiratory problems, including lung irritation and coughing. 32 Parabens are significant endocrine disrupters, with the potential to adversely affect the fertility and sex lives of both men and women.33

THE BACON CURE

Could it be our ancestors were right after all?   That today’s new, improved and supposedly healthy versions are not?    The traditional way to make bacon is dry cured through hand rubbing with a mixture of herbs, sugars, salt, and the sodium nitrite curing salts.  Vitamin C in the mix helps form the nitrosylheme pigment that gives cured meats their wonderful red color.   Producers then leave the bacon to cure for anywhere from a day to a month before slow-smoking it over applewood, hickory or other wood fires,  generally from one to three days.  The extended curing time intensifies the pork flavor and shrinks the meat so that the bacon doesn’t shrivel and spatter as it cooks.   Flavor can vary quite a bit from producer to producer, and is determined by the ingredients of the cure, the method of smoking, and the timing.   The age, gender, and breed of the pig, as well as its time outdoors, forage and feed all influence the final flavor of the bacon.

DIRTY LITTLE SECRETS

Supermarket bacon may also use sodium nitrite, but not in a traditional way.  Instead, manufacturers opt for fast and cheap methods by which inferior quality factory-farmed meat is pumped and plumped with a liquid cure solution that includes sodium erythorbate and sodium nitrite, along with “liquid smoke,” spices and flavorings heavy in MSG.  After “curing” for a few hours, the pork is sprayed with more “liquid smoke” and heated until a smoke-like flavor permeates the meat. The pork is then quickly chilled, machine-pressed into a uniform shape, sliced, and packaged for sale.   Pumped and plumped bacon may look big in the package, but shrinks, shrivels and spatters when cooked.

FRIED BACON

Researchers have consistently found carcinogenic nitrosamines in fried bacon,34,35 but the bacon studied almost certainly comes from factory farms.   Fatty acid composition has a big effect on nitrosamine formation, and factory-farmed pigs routinely eat feeds that include inferior oils.   In a 1984 study, researchers discovered that bacon from pigs fed corn oil-supplemented diets contains significantly higher levels of the nitrosamines n-nitrosopyrrolidine and n-nitrosodimethylamine compared to controls.  They also learned that bacon from pigs fed a coconut fat-supplemented diet contains significantly lower levels of n-nitrosopyrrolidine but no significant difference in NDMA levels compared to controls.   Given that the controls were fed a standard commercial corn and soy-based diet supplemented with vitamins and minerals, we can only wonder what would might be found with bacon sourced from optimally nourished, pastured pigs.   Be that as it may,  one of the researchers’ conclusions is telling:  “Fatty acid analyses of the adipose tissue of the bacon samples indicated that n-nitrosopyrrolidine levels in bacon correlated well with the degree of unsaturation of the adipose tissue,36 Other researchers have reported similar findings.37-40.

The takeaway here is to choose traditionally cured artisanal bacon — and to let our farmers and health food stores know we want the real thing.    Not the newfangled celery salt “uncured” bacon, not supermarket pumped and plumped bacon-like products, and certainly not fakin’ bacon from turkey or soy.   What we want is good old-fashioned bacon cured with a precise amount of sodium nitrite curing salts.    If the idea of nitrite still seems scary, consider this:   Ascorbic acid is routinely added to cured meats along with the nitrite in order to promote beneficial nitric oxide formation from nitrite, and to inhibit nitrosation reactions in the stomach that can lead to carcinogenic nitrosamines.41 Bringing alpha tocopherol (Vitamin E) into the mix seems to further prevent occurrence of nitrosamine formation.42,43 Old-fashioned processing, involving leisurely time for curing and smoking, further enhances the conversion of nitrite to the beneficial nitric oxide molecule.

JUST SAY “NO”

In 1998  Robert F. Furchgott, Louis J. Ignarro and Ferid Murad won the Nobel prize in physiology and medicine for their discovery of nitric oxide (NO) as a signaling molecule in the cardiovascular system.  As the first molecule discovered that can literally communicate with other molecules, nitric oxide revolutionized conventional scientific thinking.44

In terms of preventing heart disease, nitric oxide produced by the cells in our blood vessels signals the surrounding arterial tissues to tell them to relax.  That lowers blood pressure, expands narrow blood vessels, eliminates dangerous clots ,and reduces the formation of plaque.   Interestingly enough, NO lowers triglyceride levels, but not cholesterol, and researchers even report that NO even seems to protect those with high cholesterol.   WAPF thinking, of course, holds that NO’s failure to lower cholesterol is a point in its favor, as cholesterol has many benies and no protection against high cholesterol is needed.

By optimizing circulation, NO affects every part of the body.   More blood flow means better oxygen transfer and more energy.  More blood flow means better brain function and better attention.   And more blood flow means a better sex life.    Accordingly, NO is a key ingredient in many well-known erectile dysfunction products.   Nitric oxide also benefits the immune system, where it helps us fight off infections, and the nervous system where it helps our brain cells communicate properly.   NO’s myriad health benefits are summed up in the popular book The Nitric Oxide (NO) Solution by Nathan S.Bryan, PhD and Janet Zand, OMD.45 Although the book does not contain citations, a quick PubMed search reveals Dr. Bryan’s contribution to at least 88 journal articles, many establishing the NO benefits described above.

NO FOR LIFE

The message is NO is vital for a long, healthy and vital life.   Unfortunately, few people today produce enough NO for optimal health, and NO deficiencies have been identified in many chronic diseases.  Although NO supplements have been developed and marketed, and might well be helpful for people on plant-based, low-fat, low-cholesterol diets, such products might not be needed with a return to traditional foods.   Traditionally cured bacon, sausage and other meats cured with sodium nitrite might be just the ticket to increasing NO production in the body.    Another big NO producing food is beets, suggesting yet another reason why so many WAPFers thrive on beet kvaas.    Although foods rich in the amino acids citrulline and arginine are often recommended to increase NO production, most people are not young enough or healthy enough to turn that trick.   Perhaps the more direct route from nitrite to NO is the way to go.

NITRATES, NITRITES AND THE NITROGEN CYCLE

But aren’t nitrates and nitrites dangerous?   Yes, and no.    Nitrates are natural products of the nitrogen cycle and found in water, plants and animals.   Nitrites are naturally present in saliva, in the gut and indeed in all mammalian tissue.    Levels of nitrite naturally increase in the body to help boost oxygen when people live at high altitudes, and such people are often considered among the healthiest in the world. 46 In short, nitrites are not a problem, provided our diets are rich enough in antioxidants to facilitate the conversion of nitrites to NO and to prevent nitrosation reactions that convert nitrites into carcinogenic nitrosamines.    It’s also obviously important to avoid eating readymade sources of nitrosamines, such as occur in soy protein isolates , non-fat dry milk and other products that have undergone acid washes, flame drying or high temperature spray-drying processes.  Nitrosamines don’t just come from nitrites.47, 48 As for environmental damage from nitrates, this problem comes from the land use abuses of factory farming.

BRING HOME THE BACON

Then why do so many health experts condemn bacon and other cured meats because of their nitrite content?   Well, why do fats and cholesterol still get a bum rap?   The reason is bad studies and worse publicity, with the latest shoddy work out of Harvard a prime example.    According to Dr. Bryan, the body of studies show only a “weak association” with evidence that is “inconclusive.”   As he puts it, “This paradigm needs revisiting in the face of undisputed health benefits of nitrite- and nitrate-enriched diets.”49

So what’s the last word on America’s favorite meat?   Indulge bacon lust freely,  know that the science is catching up, the media lags behind, and, as usual, our ancestors got it right.

*  *  *  *  *

Thanks to Dr Sylvia Onusic for research assistance.

© copyright 2012 Kaayla T. Daniel, PhD, CCN

Endnotes

1.  Neuman, Jeannette.  Vegetarian Doctors Go Whole Hog to Burn Bacon in Iowa.  Wall Street Journal, Feb. 18, 2012, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204792404577227201273665554.html

2.  Harvard School of Public Health.  2012 Releases.   Red Meat Consumption Linked to Increased Risk of Total, Cardiovascular, and Cancer Mortality http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/press-releases/2012-releases/red-meat-cardiovascular-cancer-mortality.html?__utma=1.1943123867.1332886318.1332886318.1332886318.1&__utmb=1.2.10.1332886318&__utmc=1&__utmx=-&__utmz=1.1332886318.1.1.utmcsr=hsph.harvard.edu|utmccn=(referral)|utmcmd=referral|utmcct=/news/press-releases/2010-releases/processed-meats-unprocessed-heart-disease-diabetes.html&__utmv=-&__utmk=127139469

3.  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22412075

4.  Taubes, Gary.   Science, pseudoscience, nutritional epidemiology, and meat.  March 14, 2012.  http://garytaubes.com/2012/03/science-pseudoscience-nutritional-epidemiology-and-meat/

5.  Harcombe, Zoë.   Red meat & mortality & the usual bad science.   March 13, 2012.  http://www.zoeharcombe.com/2012/03/red-meat-mortality-the-usual-bad-science/

6.  Minger, Denise.  Will eating red meat kill you?   March 14, 2012.   http://www.marksdailyapple.com/will-eating-red-meat-kill-you/#ixzz1pVwS4zDd

7.   Enig, Mary G.  Know Your Fats: The Complete Primer for Understanding the Nutriton of Fats, Oils and Cholesterol (Silver Spring, MD, Bethesda Press, 2000. p 135.)   Note: Dr Enig’s figures are for the fatty acid composition of lard, not bacon fat,  but the percentages should be very close.  Percentages of fat may also vary according to the animal’s diet and lifestyle.

8.   Koga T, Terao J.  Antioxidant Activity of a Novel Phosphatidyl Derivative of Vitamin E in Lard and Its Model System J Ag Food Chem, 1994, 42 (6), 1291–1294.    This study looks at lard, but likely applies to bacon fat as well.

9.  http://www.ajcn.org/content/88/2/558S.full#R7 Regarding the USDA database and the Vitamin D foods,  Dr.  Sylvia Onusic notes:  “The USDA first published data on the vitamin D content of foods in a provisional table in 1991, a table that did not include lard or bacon fat,  and issued updates in http://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/foodcomp/Data/Other/vit_d99.pdf.   Since 2002, and most recently in September 2007, the USDA has ncorporated these data and their updates into the annual public releases of the USDA’s NNDB for Standard Reference.  http://www.ars.usda.gov/ba/bhnrc/ndl .  However, these databases have incomplete vitamin D content information, with data available for only 594 of 7519 foods in the 2007 release. The sources of vitamin D information in the database include analytic values, label declarations for many processed foods, literature values, and calculated values based on ingredient composition.

10.  Food Composition Database for Epidemiological Studies in Italy (Banca Dati di Composizione degli Alimenti per Studi Epidemiologici in Italia – BDA) published by the European Institute of Oncology.    http://www.ieo.it/bda2008/homepage.aspx

11.   FAX from Mary G. Enig, PhD, to Sally Fallon.   USDA Data on Vitamin A, Vitamin D and Cholesterol, February 1997.

12.  http://www.ajcn.org/content/88/2/558S.full#R7

13.  FAX from Mary G. Enig, PhD, to Sally Fallon.

14. Mayer J and WA Krehl.   The relation of diet composition and vitamin C to vitamin A deficiency.   J Nutrition, 1948, 35, 523.

15.  Kaunitz H, Slanetz CA.    A possible new factor distilled from lard.  Fed  Proc., 1950, 9,335.

16.  Kaunitz H and CA Slanetz.   An unknown factor with vitamin A activity distilled from lard.  J Nutrition, 1950, 42, 375. http://jn.nutrition.org/content/42/3/375.full.pdf

17  Kaunitz H and CA Slanetz.   Relation of vitamin A and ‘lard factor” to disease caused by rancid lard.  J. Nutrition, 1950, 75, 322.

18.   Herb SF,  Riemenschneider  HF,  Kaunitz H, Slanetz CA.   Nature of the “vitamin A-like factor in lard.   J Nutrition.  1953 http://jn.nutrition.org/content/51/3/393.full.pdf

19.    Lowe, JS and R. A. Morton.   Studies in Vitamin A: The Vitamin A replacing effect of lard.  1953, 55,   681- 686.   http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1269380/pdf/biochemj01091-0150.pdf.

20.   The cholesterol debate is thoroughly covered on the Weston A Price Foundation’s website www.westonaprice.org, on Chris Masterjohn’s website www.cholesterol-and-health.com and in Gary Taubes’ excellent book Good Calories, Bad Calories (Knopf, 2007).

21.  Satin, Morton.  Salt and our health.   http://www.westonaprice.org/vitamins-and-minerals/salt-and-our-health

22.  Fallon Morell, Sally.  The salt of the earth.  http://www.westonaprice.org/vitamins-and-minerals/the-salt-of-the-earth

23.  http://www.feedstuffsfoodlink.com/Media/MediaManager/nitrites_and_nitrates.pdf

24.  Ibid.

25.   Skovgaard N.   Microbiological aspects and technological need: technological needs for nitrates and nitrites Food Addit Contam. 1992 Sep-Oct;9(5):391-7.

26.   Pierson MD, Smoot LA.   Nitrite, nitrite alternatives, and the control of Clostridium botulinum in cured meats. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 1982;17(2):141-87.

27.   Jouve JL,  Calier V,  Rozier J.   Antimicrobial effects of nitrates in meat products, [Article in French]   Ann Nutr Aliment. 1980;34(5-6):807-26.

28.  Christiansen LN, Johnston RW, et al.   Effect of nitrite and nitrate on toxin production by Clostridium botulinum and on nitrosamine formation in perishable canned comminuted cured meat.    Appl Microbiol. 1973, Mar;25(3):357-62.

29.   Hustad GO, Cervey JG et al.   Effect of sodium nitrite and sodium nitrate on botulinal toxin production and nitrosamine formation in wieners. Appl Microbiol. 1973 Jul;26(1):22-6.

30.  Pierson MD, Smoot LA.   Nitrite, nitrite alternatives, and the control of Clostridium botulinum in cured meats.   Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 1982;17(2):141-87.

31.   http://www.livestrong.com/article/458500-why-is-sorbic-acid-added-to-foods/

32. http://www.livestrong.com/article/308673-potassium-bisulphate-as-a-food-preservative/ and http://www.livestrong.com/article/308673-sodium-bisulphate-as-a-food-preservative/

33.http://www.livestrong.com/article/140208-paraben-effects/?utm_source=popslideshow&utm_medium=a1

34.   Fiddler W, Pensabene JW.   Supercritical fluid extraction of volatile N-nitrosamines in fried bacon and its drippings: method comparison.  J AOAC Int. 1996 Jul-Aug;79(4):895-901.

35.  Havery DC, Fazio T, Howard JW.   Survey of cured meat products for volatile N-nitrosamines: comparison of two analytical methods.    IARC Sci Publ. 1978;(19):41-52.

36.   Gray JL, Skrypec DJ et al. Further factors influencing N-nitrosamine formation in bacon. IARC Sci Publ, 1984;(57):301-9.

37.   Mottram DS, Pattterson RLS et al.   The preferential formations of volatile N nitrosamines in the fat of fried bacon.  J  Sci food Agric 1977 28, 1025-1029.

38.  Goutefongea R, Cassens RG, Woolford G.  Distribution of sodium nitrite in adipose tissue during curing.   J Food Sci, 1977. 42, 1637-1641.

39.  Walters CL, Hart Rj, Perse S.  1979.  The possible role of lipid pseudonitrosites in nitrosamine formation in fried bacon.   Z. Lebensm Unters Forsch , 168, 177-180.

40.   Canas BJ, Havery DC et al.  Current trends in levels of volatile N-nitrosamines in fried bacon and fried-out bacon fat.   J Assoc Off Anal Chem. 1986 Nov-Dec;69(6):1020-1.

41.   http://www.feedstuffsfoodlink.com/Media/MediaManager/nitrites_and_nitrates.pdf

42.  Mergens WJ, Kamm JJ, et al.  Alpha-tocopherol: uses in preventing nitrosamine formation. IARC Sci Publ. 1978;(19):199-212.

43.  Fiddler W, Pensabene JW et al.  Inhibition of formation of volatile nitrosamines in fried bacon by the use of cure-solubilized alpha-tocopherol.   J Agric Food Chem. 1978 May-Jun;26(3):653-6.

44.  http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/medicine/laureates/1998/press.html

45.  Bryan, Nathan and Janet Zand with Bill Gottlieb.  The Nitric Oxide (NO) Solution (Austin, TX, Neogenesis, 2010).

46.  Ibid.

47.  Daniel, Kaayla T.  The Whole Soy Story: The Dark Side of America’s Favorite Health Food (Washington DC, New Trends, 2005)  122-126.

48.  Hotchkiss JH.  Sources of N-nitrosamine contamination in foods. Adv Exp Med Biol. 1984;177:287-98.

49. Hord NG, Tang Y, Bryan NS.  Food sources of nitrates and nitrites: the physiologic context for potential health benefits. Am J Clin Nutr. 2009 Jul;90(1):1-10.

Posted in WAPF Blog | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Thyroid Cancer on the Rise: Is Soy a Cause?

Posted on February 2, 2012 by Dr Kaayla Daniel

and Dr. Sylvia Onusic, PhD

Cristina Fernandez, the President of Argentina, had her thyroid removed on January 4 only to find out the gland wasn’t cancerous after all.   Although her supporters whooped with joy at this news, doctors can’t put it back, and Fernandez will be on thyroid meds for life.(1) Were her doctors incompetent or did they act appropriately?   As that debate rages on over the internet, the Fernandez case has also led to widespread discussion of why thyroid cancer incidence, especially among women, has dramatically increased over the last 30 years.

AN EPIDEMIC OF THYROID CANCER

According to the National Cancer Institute, incidences of thyroid cancer have nearly doubled since the early 1970s.   Thyroid cancer now affects about 11 people per 100,000 in the United States.    In 2011,  56,460 new cases were diagnosed.  In January 2008, there were 458,403 Americans alive who had a history of thyroid cancer, of which 100,952 were men and 357,451 women.  In 2011, 56,460 new cases of thyroid cancer were diagnosed and 1,740 people died.(2, 3)

Doctors do not know why the numbers of thyroid cancer cases are increasing though some blame increased overweight and obesity, radiation exposure, and diets low in fruits and vegetables.

RADIATION

Certainly exposure to radiation is a known risk factor for thyroid cancer.(4) In 2009 epidemiologist Joseph Mangano, PhD, took data on thyroid cancer incidence from the Centers for Disease Control for the years 2001 to 2005, compared it the proximity of nuclear power stations, and found that the counties with the highest thyroid cancer incidence were located close together in eastern Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and southern New York.  He concluded, “Exposure to radioactive iodine emissions from 16 nuclear power reactors within a 90 mile radius in this area   .  . .     are likely a cause of rising incidence rates.”(5) Pennsylvania has the highest rate of thyroid cancer in the U.S.

In 2010 the Associated Press revealed that 75 percent of U.S. nuclear power plants leak radioactive materials into our air and water.(6) And many of the 104 commercial nuclear power plants and 34 nuclear research stations now operating in the U.S. sit in seismically active locations, including at least four near the “high risk” San Francisco Bay Area and three within the area SFBA itself.(7) As might be expected, there is a high incidence of thyroid cancer in the San Francisco Bay Area.(8)

FRACKING

Radiation in ground water linked to fracking has also been linked to increasing rates.   Fracking has also led to a 2,400 percent increase in earthquakes compared to the number of quakes that occurred in the years before fracking started in the US. (9,10) Geologist Tracy Bank, speaking at the American Geological Society meeting in Denver last November, reported that fracking releases rock-bound uranium, posing a further radiation risk to our groundwater. (11)

HORMONE HAVOC

Hormonal factors may also play a significant role, according to the National Cancer Institute.   Although NCI arrived at this conclusion due to the preponderance of thyroid cancer cases in women under age 45,  human estrogens should be regarded as just one piece of the hormonal picture.   Xenoestrogens –  estrogenic substances found in the diet and the environment — also play a role.   Commonly found in plastics, pesticides, cosmetics, personal care products, our water supply, factory-farmed meats and soy foods, xenoestrogens can be significant “endocrine disruptors” and interfere with the functioning of many systems in the body.(12)

While it’s human nature to try to single out one factor to blame, the causes of thyroid cancer most likely are many and synergistic.  Exposure to radiation,  mercury, fluoride, (13,14) plastics, pesticides, dioxins, solvents, low iodine intake,(15) and estrogens and estrogen mimickers found in commercial meats and produce, plastic and hormone replacement therapies have all been implicated.   And so has soy.

SOY

Soy is widely marketed as a “health food” although soybeans naturally contain the phytoestrogens (plant estrogens) known as isoflavones.  While not true hormones, isoflavones closely resemble estradiol (E2),(16) the most potent form of the three forms of estrogen found in the human body(17) and the form of estrogen that has been implicated in thyroid cancer.(18-20) Soy isoflavones cause significant endocrine disruption both directly and indirectly:  directly by binding with estrogen receptors, and indirectly by interfering with the body’s production of estrogen, testosterone and other hormones.    The effects are felt throughout the body, especially the thyroid reproductive system, and are well documented in chapters 26 to 30 of The Whole Soy Story: The Dark Side of America’s Favorite Health Food.(21)

The key isoflavones found in soy, genistein and daidzein, are potent inhibitors of thyroid peroxidase (TPO), an enzyme involved in the synthesis of  the thyroid hormones,T3 and T4.   In vitro experiments carried out at the National Center for Toxicological Research in Jefferson, Arkansas, Rao L. Divi, PhD, and Daniel R. Doerge, PhD showed soy isoflavones will inhibit the thyroid peroxidase and interfere with a critical stage in thyroid hormone production — the iodinization of the amino acid tyrosine.    Although many people assume sufficient iodine will solve this problem, this interference occurs whether or not sufficient or extra iodine is present.   As a result, the body produces useless mono-, di- and tri-iodoisoflavones and not mono, di and tri and quarto forms of thyroid hormone.  In the human body, this interference can cause a drop in thyroid hormone levels, an increase in thyroid stimulating hormone and stress on the thyroid gland.  To put it bluntly, this is a prescription for thyroid trouble. (22, 23)

Drs. Divi and Doerge, top scientists with the National Center for Toxicological Research, pulled no punches in their conclusion:  “The possible association between long-term inhibition of thyroid hormone synthesis (goiter) and induction of thyroid follicular cell hyperplasia and neoplasia underscores the significance of these findings.” (24,25) Follicular cell hyperplasia is a precursor to thyroid tumors and neoplasia is an abnormal proliferation of cells and characteristic of cancer.

We also know soy products pose a special risk to hypothyroid patients treated with Synthroid and other thyroid drugs.   According to Mike Fitzpatrick, PhD, boosting the thyroid with drugs like Synthroid, then depressing it with thyroid inhibitors like soy foods or isoflavone supplements, can put extreme stress on the thyroid.   In fact, this is the classic way that researchers induce thyroid tumor in laboratory animals.   The fact that soy is “natural” does not make it safe or weak. The phytoestrogens in a serving of soy food can provide up to three times the goitrogenic potency of the pharmaceutical thyroid-inhibiting drugs methimazole and 6-propylthiouracil.(26)

Over the past 70 years, numerous studies have linked soy to thyroid disorders, especially hypothyroidism and the autoimmune thyroid disease Hashimoto’s thyroiditis.  These studies are cited and discussed in detail in Chapter 27 of The Whole Soy Story.(27) Less evidence links soy to thyroid cancer, though so many studies proving stress on the thyroid would suggest clear and present danger.   Soy proponents and industry spokespeople, however, prefer to assert soy is protective, and the study cited most most frequently is the Bay Area Thyroid Cancer Study.(28)

THE BAY AREA THYROID CANCER STUDY

The Bay Area Thyroid Cancer Study is described in three articles published by Pamela Horn-Ross, PhD, and colleagues, in the journal, Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers and Prevention (CEBP), in 2001 and 2002.(29-31)

In the 2002 CEBP study, Horn-Ross, Hoggatt and Lee attempted to determine how soy phytoestrogen intake relates to thyroid cancer once other factors such as age, race and other known risk factors were taken into account.   In the results section they reported “ In general, a reduction in thyroid cancer risk of 35 percent to 55 percent was associated with increased consumption of non-fermented traditional and nontraditional soy-based foods and sprouts.” (32)

An astonishing 35 to 55 percent reduction in risk with clear cause and effect certainly seems to support the idea of consuming soy — including  modern industrial soy products — for thyroid cancer prevention.  But what seems to be too good to be true is often the case.   A long, hard look at the study — and not just the headlines publicized by the soy industry — reveals serious flaws in design, methods and analysis, including:

  • This paper describes an observational, case-control, matched study.  As J.M. Utts and R. Heckard write in their textbook, Mind on Statistics, “The most  common  mistake made in reporting research studies is to imply that a cause and effect relationship can be concluded from an observational study.   With an observational study, it is difficult, perhaps impossible, to separate the effects of confounding variables from the  effects of the main explanatory variables of interest.” (33)
  • The study was not a randomized, controlled trial, which is the gold standard for testing an intervention.   Cases were not randomized to treatment groups but drawn from a cancer registry, which was a sample of convenience.   As Utts and Heckard put it, “If the sample does not represent a larger population for the question of interest, and randomization to treatments was not used, no inferences can be drawn.” (34)
  • The data was analyzed using unconditional logistic regression.   When the sample comes from matched pairs — as was the case in this study — conditional logistic regression is the appropriate test, not unconditional logistic regression. As summed up in the Oxford Journal, “A simple rule of thumb is to use conditional logistic regression if matching has been done, and unconditional if no matching has been done.  A second rule of thumb is, when in doubt always used conditional because it always gives unbiased results.” (35)
  • Because the study used unconditional logistic regression, the researchers did not include the matching information in the analysis. (36) This is most interesting in the light of research from the University Graduate School of Public Health in Kyoto, Japan, which examined 507 studies from 1991-2000 that used case control matched data sets.(37)  Of these studies, conditional logistic regression was used in 90.5 percent, and unconditional logistic regression in only 9.5 percent of them  Yet Horn Ross and colleagues chose to use used the unconditional method.
  • Unconditional logistic regression analysis seriously overestimates the odds ratio when there are matching data — as was the case with Horn Ross and colleagues –  and great caution should be taken in interpreting  the results. (38) In Statistical Methods in Cancer Research, a classic text in disease epidemiology, Breslow and Day state: “The unconditional analysis of matched pair data results in an estimate of the odds ratio which is the square of the correct, conditional one: a relative risk of 2 will tend to be  estimated as 4 by this approach” (italic emphasis from Breslow and Day). (39)
  • The spotlighted phytoestrogens included a large number of potentially interrelated variables that could interact with one another.   In a quality study, the researchers should have addressed the possibility of collinearity, and taken care to rule it out.  Collinearity is a bias in statistical procedure due to the correlation of multiple independent variables that influence a single dependent variable.    Collinearity can lead to unstable and untrustworthy results.(40)
  • All the subjects came from the San Francisco Bay Area and many were of Asian ethnicity.  Environmental, climatic and ethnic aspects were not taken into account in the analysis. External validity is a  always key question.   Can these results be applied or generalized to other people?   Given that people from other areas of the United States live under varying conditions and are of many different ethnicities, the results of the study — if valid  — would apply only to the group from which they originated.
  • Reliance on a Food Frequency Questionnaire (FFQ) to determine dietary intake during the year before the diagnosis of thyroid cancer, or for the year prior to the interview for the controls, is suspect.   FFQs require people to remember what they ate, when they ate it,  and how much. (41) Over-estimation is common, particularly for foods eaten less often or for foods perceived as “healthy,” such as fruit, vegetables — and soy.   In her article, Dr. Horn-Ross does not disclose how her FFQ was tested or evaluated prior to use in the San Francisco Bay Area Thyroid Study.   She also admits “phytoestrogen consumption was not a hypothesis of this study when this FFQ was developed.” (42)
  • In Table 1, Selected characteristics of women participating in the multiethnic San Francisco Bay Area Thyroid Study, we see how the cases and controls are similar on many variables such as age and number of pregnancies, but we do not know how many subjects were actually included or whether the Table represent all subjects or just a cherry-picked sample.
  • In Table 2, Consumption of selected phytoestrogen-rich foods and thyroid cancer risk among women participating in the Bay Area Thyroid Cancer Study, the researchers make the dramatic pronouncement of reduced risk of 35 to 55 percent.    However, this Table reports odds ratios but no actual risk data.     Relative Risk, the basis for determinations such as “reduced risk,” cannot be calculated in a case-control study. Odds ratios can be used to represent relative risk if the disease is relatively rare, as is the case with thyroid cancer, but they are usually “bigger in each case” and “around 10 percent larger than Relative Risk.” (43,44)
  • In Table 3, Phytoestrogen consumption and thyroid cancer risk among women participating in the Bay Area Thyroid Cancer Study, the researchers report an “increased consumption of four of the seven specific phytoestrogenic compounds as well as three summary measures were associated with a reduced risk of thyroid cancer  . . .” Just how much reduced risk is never established or explained.
  • The odds ratios  in Table 2 and Table 3, show that many are near or around 1.00 which means that there are no (null) effects.  Many rows –  subgroups –  have too few cases and controls to show statistical value.   For the other rows with subgroups, we have no indication of significance (p value).   P value is given only for “trend across quintiles.”

In conclusion, this paper should not be accepted as a serious study of thyroid cancer risk related to phytoestrogen intake.    The researchers failed to provide details concerning the number of models, the parameters included in each of the models, construction of composite variables (Table 3), and trend tests used to produce the statistical results (p values) in Tables 2 and 3.    We don’t even know the statistical software used to fit the models.  The article’s clearest and most powerful statement: “ . . .  a reduction in thyroid cancer risk of 35 percent to 55 percent was associated with increased consumption of non-fermented traditional and nontraditional soy-based foods and sprouts” –  comes without explanation out of the blue.

  1. CBS News. http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-501715_162-57354512/docs-argentine-leaders-thyroid-wasnt-cancerous/
  2. American Cancer Society: http://www.cancer.org/acs/groups/cid/documents/webcontent/003144-pdf.pdf
  3. National Cancer Institute, SEER-Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results. Stat Facts Sheet.  http://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/thyro.html
  4. USA Today. http://yourlife.usatoday.com/health/story/2012-01-15/Doctors-try-to-explain-increase-in-thyroid-cancers/52584788/1
  5. http://www.radiation.org/reading/pubs/091116Thyroidcancer.pdf. Accessed January 11, 2012.
  6. http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/43475479/ns/today-today_news/t/radioactive-tritium-leaks-found-us-nuke-sites/#.TyQKuVw5Knm
  7. Nuclear Reactors in Earthquake Zones in the US. http://www.treehugger.com/corporate-responsibility/nuclear-reactors-in-earthquake-zones-in-the-us-map.html. Accessed January 24, 2011.
  8. Horn-Ross, P et al.  Why Are Thyroid Cancer Rates So High in Southeast Asian Women Living in the United States? The Bay Area Thyroid Cancer Study. Cancer Epidem Biomar. 2003, 12, 144-150.
  9. http://www.activistpost.com/2012/01/thyroid-cancer-fracking-and-nuclear.html. Accessed January 23, 2012.
  10. Ananda, Rady. Food Freedom, Thyroid Cancer, Fracking and Nuclear Reactors. http://foodfreedom.wordpress.com/2012/01/18/thyroidcancer-fracking-nuclear-power. Accessed January 19, 2012.
  11. http://www.buffalo.edu/news/11885. Accessed January 24, 2012
  12. Golden RJ, Noller KL, Titus-Ernstoff L, et al. Environmental endocrine modulators and human health: an assessment of the biological evidence. Crit. Rev. Toxicol, 1998,28, 2, 109–227. doi:10.1080/10408449891344191. PMID 9557209.
  13. Connett, Paul. Beck, James. Micklemp, HS. The Case Against Fluoride. (White River Junction, VT, Chelsea Green Publishing Company, 2010) 183-185.
  14. National Research Council of the National Academies, Fluoride in Drinking Water: A Scientific Review of  EPA’s Standards (Washington, DC, National Academies Press, 2006) 266, chapter 8, http://www.actionpa.org/fluoride/nrc/NRC-2006.pdf.
  15. Iodine Deficiency.  http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/122714-overview. Accessed January 23, 2012.
  16. US Soyfoods Directory. http://www.soyfoods.com/nutrition/AbsorptionMetabolism.html. Accessed January 23, 2012.
  17. Brownstein, D. Iodine. Why You Need It (West Bloomfield, MI, Medical Alternative Press, 2008). 73-79.
  18. Yao R, Chiu CG, Strugnell SS,et al. Gender Differences in Thyroid Cancer. Expert Rev Endocrinol Metab, 2011, 6, 2, 215-243.
  19. Manole D, Schildknecht B, Gosnell B, Adams E, et al. Estrogen Promotes Growth of Human Thyroid Tumor Cells by Different Molecular Mechanisms.  J Clin Endocr Metab, 2001, 86, 3, 1072-1077.
  20. Kumari A, Klinge CM and Goldstein GM. Estradiol-induced proliferation of papillary and follicular thyroid cancer cells is mediated by estrogen receptors a and ß.  Int J of Oncology 2010, 36,1067-1080.
  21. Daniel, K.T. The Whole Soy Story: the Dark Side of America’s Favorite Health Food. (Washington, DC, New Trends Publishing, 2005) .
  22. Doerge DR. Inhibition of thyroid peroxidase by dietary flavonoids. Chem Res Toxicol,1996, 9, 16-23.
  23. Divi RL, Chang HC, Doerge DR.  Anti-thyroid isoflavones from soybean. Biochem Pharmacol, 1997, 54, 1087-1096.
  24. Doerge DR, Inhibition of thyroid peroxidase by dietary flavonoids. Chem Res Toxicol,1996, 9, 16-23.
  25. Divi RL, Chang HC, Doerge DR.  Anti-thyroid isoflavones from soybean. Biochem Pharmacol, 1997, 54, 1087-1096.
  26. Fitzpatrick Mike. Soy Formulas and the effects of isoflavones on the thyroid. NZ Med J. 2000, 1131-1103 24-26.
  27. Daniel, KT, The Whole Soy Story: The Dark Side of America’s Favorite Health Food (Washington, DC, New Trends, 2005).
  28. Syd Baumel, at http://eatkind.net/wholesoystory.htm. Accessed January 22, 2012.
  29. Sakoda LC and Horn-Ross PL. Reproductive and menstrual history and papillary thyroid cancer risk: the San Francisco Bay Area thyroid cancer study. Cancer Epidem Biomar, 2002, 11, 51-57.
  30. Horn-Ross PL, Hoggatt  KJ and Lee MM. Phytoestrogens and thyroid cancer risk: the San Francisco Bay Area thyroid cancer study. Cancer Epidem Biomar, 2002, 11, 43-49.
  31. Horn-Ross PL, Morris JS, Lee M, West DM, et al. Iodine and thyroid cancer risk among women in a multiethnic population: the Bay Area thyroid cancer study. Cancer Epidem Biomar, 2001,10,979-985.
  32. Horn-Ross PL, Hoggatt KJ and Lee MM. Phytoestrogens and thyroid cancer risk: the San Francisco Bay Area thyroid cancer study. Cancer Epidem Biomar, 2002,11, 44.
  33. Utts, J. M, Heckard, R. Mind on Statistics, 3rd edition. (Belmont, CA, Thomson-Brooks/Cole, 2007). 136.
  34. Utts, J. M, Heckard, R. Statistical ideas and methods (Belmont, CA, Thomas Brooks/Cole, 2006) 669.
  35. Journal of Tropical Pediatrics. Mother and Child Health: Research Methods. Research Methods II. Analysis of Case-control studies. Logistic Regression 11,www.oxfordjournals.org/tropej/online/ma_chap11.pdf 122
  36. Agresti, Alan. Categorical Data Analysis. (New York, Wiley-Interscience, 2002) sections 6.7.1, 10.2.
  37. Rahman, M et al. Conditional versus unconditional logistic regression in the medical literature. Letter to the Editor.  J Epidem. 56, 2003, 101–102. (Kyoto University Graduate School of Public Health, Kyoto, Japan).
  38. Rahman, M et al. Conditional versus unconditional logistic regression in the medical literature. Letter to the Editor.  J Epidem. 56, 2003, 101–102. (Kyoto University Graduate School of Public Health, Kyoto, Japan).
  39. Breslow, NE and Day, NE, Statistical Methods in Cancer Research. Volume 1- The analysis of Case-Control Studies (Switzerland, IARC, 1980) 249-251.
  40. Analysis of case control studies.  Logistic Regression, 121-122.   www.oxfordjournals.org/our_journals/tropej/online/ma_chap11.pdf
  41. Willett, Walter. Nutritional Epidemiology (Oxford University Press, New York, 1990) 69-126.
  42. Horn-Ross PL, Hoggatt KJ and Lee MM. Phytoestrogens and thyroid cancer risk: the San Francisco Bay Area Thyroid Cancer Study. Cancer Epidem Biomar, 2002, 11, 48.
  43. Motulsky, Harvey, .Intuitive Statistics (New York, Oxford University Press, 1995) 82-84.
  44. Jewell, NP. Statistics for Epidemiology (CRC Press, New York, 2003) 31-34, 41.
Posted in WAPF Blog | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Researchers who Lie, Cheat and Steal . . . and the Journal that Exposes Them

Posted on January 27, 2012 by Dr Kaayla Daniel

The latest news from the British Medical Journal is bad but hardly surprising.   A survey of 2,700 doctors and scientists revealed 13 percent have witnessed colleagues altering or fabricating data during their research.   That manipulation has included “inappropriately adjusting, excluding, altering or fabricating data.”

The BMJ further revealed that 6 percent of scientists and doctors think their own institutions are not properly investigating possible misconduct.   In many cases, junior academics who might object are told  to keep concerns to themselves if they wish to protect their careers, bullied into not publishing their findings, or had their contracts terminated when they spoke out.

Given that a 2001 BMJ study reported similar  “misconduct,”  the problem clearly isn’t going away on its own.

The findings were presented January 12 in the UK at a meeting cosponsored by the BMJ and by the International Committee on Publications Ethics (COPE).   It included senior representatives from academia, government, funding agencies, and journals, who agreed individual researchers should have high ethical standards, but employing institutions have the prime responsibility of ensuring research conducted within their walls is honestly performed and reported.

Flagrant cases of fraud — such as the case of resveratrol researcher Dipak Das, who was exposed earlier this month after a University of Connecticut investigation revealed he had faked data on 145 different occasions over a seven year period  —  make the news headlines, but the delegates agreed that the greater problem is the “lesser offenses.”  These include the  selective publishing of research to avoid publishing disappointing results or the complete failure to publish any results from a study.   Sadly, this is considered by many researchers today to be “business as usual.”

Why does so much of this happen?    In today’s “publish or perish” culture, some researchers will do almost anything needed to get ahead.   Another common reason is  “checkbook research” in which data and conclusions are manipulated, massaged or omitted to please sponsors.   Whatever the reason or reasons, junior academics who might object are advised to keep concerns to themselves if they wish to protect their careers, bullied into not publishing their findings, or fired for speaking out.

Liz Wager, PhD, a freelance writer and editor who serves as chair of COPE, concluded in her BMJ Blog that “problems in reporting research studies distort the scientific literature and provide an unreliable base for the development of systematic reviews and clinical practice guidelines. ”   Furthermore, while “plagiarism may be a nasty symptom of a sick system, it has probably never killed anybody while unreliable guidelines and misguided research undoubtedly have.”

BMJ Editor in Chief Dr. Fiona Godlee believes, “UK science and medicine deserve better,” and “doing nothing is not an option.”   Although she conceded the survey fails to provide a full estimate of how much research misconduct takes place in the UK, it  proves there are a “substantial number of cases” and institutions are “failing to investigate adequately if at all.”

In their BMJ editorial, Dr. Richard Lehman of Oxford University, and Dr. Elizabeth Loder, the journal’s clinical epidemiology editor, added, “A large proportion of evidence from human trials is unreported and much of what is reported is done so inadequately.  We are not dealing here with trial design, hidden bias, or problems of data analysis — we are talking simply about the absence of data.  And this is no academic matter, because missing data about harm in trials can harm patients, and incomplete data about benefit can lead to futile costs to health systems.   Moreover, researchers or others who deliberately conceal trial results have breached their ethical duty to trial participants.”   The two called for an end to what they called the “culture of haphazard publication and incomplete data disclosure” and proposed more robust regulation and full access to the raw trial data, not just what ends up being published.

These are all excellent suggestions, especially the last.    Those of us who review studies need to be able to look at raw data to judge the quality of a study and and the accuracy of its conclusions for ourselves.    As public watchdogs, we too can help journals and researchers stay honest and accountable.

That said, it’s most interesting that the BMJ — a respected whistleblower on research misconduct for many years –  itself chose to play a primary role in the smearing of Dr. Andrew Wakefield, whose controversial research connecting vaccinations and autism has proved highly troubling for the future profits of Big Pharm

Given that numerous independent researchers and doctors have found troubling links, high-quality, independent research is clearly needed.   That, of course, is exactly what Dr. Wakefield recommended.   Media accusations to the contrary, he never claimed to have established clear cause and effect.    As he wrote in the Discussion section of the Lancet paper,”We did not prove an association between measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine and the syndrome described” and the last paragraph of the study he adds, “We have identified a chronic enterocolitis in children that may be related to neuropsychiatric dysfunction.  In most cases, onset of symptoms was after measles, mumps, and rubella immunisation. Further investigations are needed to examine this syndrome and its possible relation to this vaccine.”

In fact a substantial body of credible research published since 1998 — listed on Dr. Mercola’s website and available at medical libraries  –  suggests the validity of Dr. Wakefield’s concerns.

Yet another reason to mistrust the BMJ expose is its failure to disclose that since 2008 both BMJ and The Lancet have been in lucrative partnerships with Merck.  This is clearly a serious conflict of interest and breach of ethics.

Truth cannot be suppressed so BMJ may well find itself in the embarrassing position of having boldly pointed one finger at disreputable researchers with three other fingers pointing back  at itself.

*  *  *  *  *

Tavare A.  Institutions must do more to eliminate research misconduct, meeting hears. BMJ. 2012 Jan 16;344:e446. doi: 10.1136/bmj.e446. No abstract available.

http://www.bmj.com/rapid-response/2012/01/07/re-research-misconduct-uk

http://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/category/liz-wager/

Wakefield’s article linking MMR vaccine and autism was fraudulent, BMJ 2011; 342:c7452 (Published 5 January 2011). http://www.bmj.com/content/342/bmj.c7452

“BMJ & Lancet Wedded to Merck CME Partnership,”  Alliance for Human Research Protection,
14 February 2011      http://www.ahrp.org/cms/content/view/766/9/

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2011/02/07/new-research-shows-link-between-mmr-vaccine-and-autism.aspx

Posted in WAPF Blog | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

iVegetarian2: The Eating Disorders of Steve Jobs

Posted on December 27, 2011 by Dr Kaayla Daniel

Steve Jobs died October 5, and the animal rights organization PETA stepped right up to honor him as a vegetarian who was deeply committed to animal welfare and the environment.  PETA, of course,  has yet to acknowledge the role that Jobs’s near vegan diet may have played in his death, and continues to maintain that their particular brand of “right eating” will virtually guarantee freedom from cancer and other major health problems.

When I blogged about this topic in October,  I promised I would follow up once I learned more about Jobs’s dietary habits from Walter Isaacson’s biography Steve Jobs (Simon & Schuster, 2011).   This column delivers on that promise.

The bullet points below include every reference to diet in the entire book, followed by page numbers.  My brief comments are found at the very end.

  • Jobs came to appreciate organic fruits and vegetables as a teenager when a neighbor taught him how to be a good organic gardener and to compost. (14)
  • Between his sophomore and junior hear of high school, he began smoking marijuana regularly and by his senior year was dabbling in LSD as well as exploring the mind bending effect of sleep deprivation (18-19)
  • Toward the end of his senior year in high school, he began his “lifelong experiments with compulsive diets, eating only fruits and vegetables so he was as lean and tight as a whippet”  (31)
  • He attended the love festivals at the local Hare Krishna temple, and went to the Zen center for free vegetarian meals. (35)
  • He  was greatly influenced by the book Diet for a Small Planet by Frances Moore Lappe.   At that point he swore off meat for good and began embracing extreme diets, which included purges, fasts or eating only one or two foods , such as carrots or apples for weeks on end.  (36)
  • For awhile at college, Jobs lived on Roman Meal cereal.   He would buy a box, which would last a week, then flats of dates, almonds and a lot of carrots.   He made carrot juice with a Champion juicer, and at one point turned “a sunset-like orange hue.”  (36)
  • His dietary habits became more obsessive when he read the Mucusless Diet Healing System by Arnold Ehret.     Jobs then favored eating nothing but fruits and starchless vegetables, which he said prevented the body from forming harmful mucus, and determined to regularly cleanse his body through prolonged fasts.   That meant no more Roman Meal cereal — or any bread, grains, or milk for that matter.   At one point, he spent an entire week eating only apples, and then began to try even purer fasts.  He started with two day fasts and eventually stretched them out to a week or more, breaking them with large amounts of water and leafy vegetables.    “After a week, you start to feel fantastic,” he said.  “You get a ton of vitality from not having to digest all this food.  I was in great shape  I felt I could get up and walk to San Francisco anytime I wanted.”   (36)
  • As a $5 an hour technician at Atari, he was known as “a hippie with b.o.” and “impossible to deal with.”   He clung to the belief that his fruit-heavy vegetarian diet would prevent not just mucus but also body odor.   As Isaacson writes “It was a flawed theory.” (43)
  • “He was doing a lot of soul-searching about being adopted .  . .  (with) the primal scream and the mucusless diets, he was trying to cleanse himself and get deeper into his frustration about his birth.”  (51)
  • He was a fan of the Whole Earth Catalog and particularly taken by the final issue, which came out in 1971 when he was still in high school.   On the back cover it said “Stay Hungry.  Stay Foolish.” (59)
  • The name Apple Computers came to him when he was on one of his fruitarian diets.  “I had just come back from the apple farm.  It sounded fun, spirited and not intimidating.   Apple took the edge off the word ‘computer.’”  (63)
  • His mother Clara Jobs didn’t mind losing most of her house to piles of computer parts and house guests, but she was frustrated by her son’s increasingly quirky diets.  She would roll her eyes at his latest eating obsessions.  She just wanted him to be healthy, and he would be making weird pronouncements like, “I’m a fruitarian and I will only eat leaves picked by virgins in the moonlight.”  (68)
  • He was still convinced against all evidence that his vegan diet meant that he didn’t need to use a deodorant or take regular showers.   . .  .   At meetings people had to look at his dirty feet.  Sometimes to relieve stress, he would soak his feet in the toilet.  (82)
  • A colleague who recommended he bathe more often was told that “in exchange” he would have to read fruitarian diet books.  “Steve was adamant that he bathed once a week, and that was adequate as long as he was eating a fruitarian diet.” (82-83)
  • In 1979 or so he “put aside drugs, eased away from being a strict vegan, and cut back the time he spent on Zen retreats.”   (91)
  • He decreed that the sodas in the office refrigerator be replaced by Odwalla organic orange and carrot juices.”   (118)
  • The kitchen was stocked daily with Odwalla juices (142)
  • At the launch of the Lisa computer in 1983, he ate a special vegan meal at the Four Seasons restaurant  (152)
  • He had edged away from his strict vegan diet for the time being and ate vegetarian omelets. (155)
  • In 1984 in Italy, Jobs demanded a vegan meal and became extremely angry when the waiter very elaborately proceeded to dish out a sauce filled with sour cream.  (185)
  • The meal for his 30th birthday celebration included goat cheese and salmon mousse. (189)
  • He had a lot of mannerisms.  He bit his nails.   His hands were “slightly and inexplicably yellow” and in constant motion. (223)
  • At a meal with Mitch Kapor,  the chairman of Lotus software, Jobs was horrified to see Kapor slathering butter on his bread, and asked, “Have you ever heard of serum cholesterol?”   Kapor responded, “I’ll make you a deal. You stay away from commenting on my dietary habits, and I will stay away from the subject of your personality.”  (224)
  • At a 1988 NeXT product launch, the lunch menu included  mineral water, croissants, cream cheese, bean sprouts. (233)
  • Jobs was a vegetarian and so was Chrisann, the mother of his daughter Lisa.  Lisa was not vegetarian, but Jobs was fine with that.   “Eating chicken became her little indulgence as she shuttled between two parents who were vegetarians with a spiritual regard for natural foods.”  Jobs’s “dietary fixations came in fanatic waves,” and he was “fastidious”  about what he ate.  Lisa watched him “spit out a mouthful of soup one day after learning that it contained butter.” (259-260)
  • “Even at a young age Lisa began to realize his diet obsessions reflected a life philosophy, one in which asceticism and minimalism could heighten subsequent sensations.  He believed that great harvests came from arid sources, pleasure from restraint.  He knew the equations that most people didn’t know:  Things led to their opposites.”   (259-260)
  • Once he took Lisa on a business trip to Tokyo and they stayed at the Okura Hotel.   At the elegant downstairs sushi bar, Jobs ordered large trays of unagi sushi, a dish he loved so much that he allowed the warm cooked eel to pass muster as vegetarian.    Lisa later wrote, “It was the first time, I’d felt with him, so relaxed and content, over those trays of meat; the excess, the permission and warmth after the cold salads, meant a once inaccessible space had opened.  He was less rigid with himself, even human under the great ceilings with the little chairs with the meat and me.”  (260-261)
  • Jobs had hired a hip young couple who had once worked at Chez Panisse as housekeepers ands vegetarian cooks (264)
  • At his wedding to Laurene Powell, the cake was in the shape of Yosemite’s Half Dome.  It was strictly vegan and more than a few of the guest found it inedible.  (274)
  • “Since his early teens, he had indulged his weird obsession with extremely restrictive diets and fasts.  Even after he married and had children, he retained his dubious eating habits.   He would spend weeks eating the same thing — carrot salad with lemon, or just apples — and then suddenly spurn that food and declare that he had stopped eating it.  He would go on fasts, just as he did as a teenager and he became sanctimonious as he lectured others at the table on the virtues of whatever eating regimen he was following.”  (477)
  • Jobs’s wife, Laurene Powell, had been a vegan when they first married, but after her husband’s first cancer operation, the partial Whipple procedure, she began to diversify the family meals with fish and other proteins.  Their son, Reed, who had been a vegetarian, became a “hearty omnivore.”  They knew it was important for Steve to get diverse sources of protein. (477)
  • Early in 2008, Jobs’s eating disorders got worse.   On some nights he would stare at the floor and ignore all of the dishes set out on the long kitchen table.  He lost 40 pounds during the spring of 2008.
  • Dr James Eason “would even stop at the convenience store to get the energy drinks Jobs liked.” (485)
  • He remained a finicky eater, which was more of a problem than ever.  He would eat only fruit smoothies and he would demand that seven or eight of them be lined up so he could find an option that might satisfy him.  He would touch the spoon to his mouth for a tiny taste and pronounce  ‘That’s no good.  That one’s no good either.’”   His doctor  lectured him: “You know this isn’t a matter of taste.  Stop thinking of this as food.  Start thinking of it as medicine.” (486)
  • Early in 2010, Jobs went to dinner and ordered a mango smoothie and plain vegan pasta.  (505)
  • At the launch of the  iPad2, Isaacson reported “For a change he was eating, though still with some pickiness.  He ordered fresh squeezed juice, which he sent back three times, declaring that each new offering was from a bottle, and a pasta primavera which he shoved away as inedible after one taste.   But then he ate half of my crab Louise salad and ordered a full one for himself followed by a bowl of ice cream.”  (527)
  • “Jobs’s eating problems were exacerbated over the years by his psychological attitude toward food.  When he was young, he learned that he could induce euphoria and ecstasy by fasting.   So even though he knew that he should eat — his doctors were begging him to consume high-quality protein –lingering in the back of his subconscious, he admitted was his instinct for fasting and for diets like Arnold Ehret’s fruit regimen that he had embraced as a teenager.  Powell kept telling him it was crazy. ‘I wanted him to force himself to eat,’ she said ‘and it was incredibly tense at home.’”  (548-549)
  • Bryar Brown, their part-time cook, would prepare an array of healthy dishes, but Jobs would touch his tongue to one or two dishes and then dismiss them all as inedible.  One evening he announced, “I could probably eat a little pumpkin pie,” and the even-tempered Brown created a beautiful pie from scratch in an hour.  Jobs ate only one bite, but Brown was thrilled.”  (549)
  • During the final years of his life, Powell talked to eating disorder specialists and psychiatrists to try to get help, but her husband shunned them.   (549)

That’s it.    Not a lot to work with, but more than enough to show a longstanding pattern of eating disorders.

On the plus side, Jobs’s diet seems to have been consistently organic and high quality.    He employed chefs who’d worked at Chef Panisse, and his wife Laurene Powell founded Terravera, a company that produces ready-to-eat organic meals for stores in northern California.    Jobs does not appear to have ever been a junk-food vegan who indulged in all-American junk foods such as soda, chocolate, cookies and crackers.

Soy is not mentioned at all in Isaacson’s biography.   Although the Apple culture was soy friendly with soy milk readily available in vending machines and at coffee stations, Jobs himself may well have rejected it.   Jobs had a longstanding fascination with the book The Mucusless Diet Healing System by Arnold Ehret (1866-1922), who claimed the human body is an “air-gas engine” that runs well only on fruits, starchless vegetables and edible green leaves.   Soy and other legumes, according to Ehret’s way of thinking, were to be disdained as mucus-producing forbidden foods.   Ehret not only condemned protein and fat as “unnatural” but said they could not be used by the body.   Inspired by such theories, Jobs appears to have eaten a diet low in both fat and protein for most of his life.  And what did he eat instead?  Carbs high in fructose.

Whether or not Jobs was in one of his fanatic fruitarian phases, he favored a lot of fruit and fruit juice.   These are not only high on the glycemic index, but loaded with fructose.   Fruits and fruit juices greatly stress the liver and pancreas, contribute to diabetes and many other blood sugar disorders, and have been linked to pancreatic cancer.   Jobs suffered from a type of pancreatic cancer known as islet cell carcinoma, which originates in the insulin-secreting beta cells.

Research published in the November 2007 issue of American Journal of Clinical Nutrition concluded there was “evidence for a greater pancreatic cancer risk with a high intake of fruit and juices but not with a high intake of sodas.”   More recently, in the August 2010 issue of Cancer Research, Dr. Anthony Healy of UCLA’s Jonsson Cancer Center proposed that aberrant fructose metabolism — and not just aberrant glucose metabolism — might be involved in the pathogenesis of pancreatic cancer.   Seems fructose provides the raw material cancer cells prefer to use to make the DNA they need to divide and proliferate.    Although the UCLA findings are preliminary and more research needs to be done, the Reuters headline “Cancer Cells Slurp Up Fructose” is fair warning to all of us addicted to fruit and fruit juices, organic or otherwise.

Clearly Jobs broke away from strict veganism from time to time to indulge in a few eggs, salmon and unagi sushi.   The words of his daughter Lisa (quoted above) provide a moving testimony to how well Jobs’s body and mind responded to eating eel, a fish rich in protein and fat.   That said, vegans who would like to think Jobs became sick because he failed to be “perfect vegan” now have evidence to support that belief.

Posted in WAPF Blog | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Happy New Year. No Soy to the World!

Posted on December 26, 2011 by Dr Kaayla Daniel

Will the soy industry toast its success this holiday season with Soy Nogs?   Perhaps, but the atmosphere won’t be wildly celebratory.

Soy has been losing its luster in the marketplace since 2009.   Seems consumers are just nog so much into soy!    While the data for 2011 are not yet in, advance buzz has it that soy milk sales are declining while tofu and soy infant formula have managed only lackluster growth.   As for sales of isoflavones and other soy supplements, they’ve been plummeting, with a 26 percent drop in 2009, a 15 percent drop in 2010, and no signs of a turnaround anytime soon.    That’s particularly significant, given the overall robust growth of the U.S. supplement market.

What’s to blame?   People like you and me, according to the industry spokespeople quoted in the newsletters and reports issued from www.NutraIngredients.com and www.FoodNavigator-usa.com.

To wit:

  • “Soy supplement sales have been declining for some time,” says Kerry Watson, manager at SPINS, an industry reporting and consulting service.  “I think in general consumers are confused about whether soy and good or bad for them.  There are concerns amongst consumers regarding the possible affects soy may have on hormones in the body.”

  • “We include negative publicity and consumer confusion among the trends that have been contributing to flatter soyfoods/supplements sales in the past few years,”  says Sarah Day LeVesque, an analyst at Soyatech, a research and consultancy firm

  • “Non-organic soy runs the risk of being genetically modified,” says Watson, “and consumers have no way to know whether a product does or doesn’t contain GMO unless they choose to state that information on the label.”

  • David Browne, a senior analyst for Mintel, another market research firm also blames “negative publicity surrounding soy’s impact on hormones and the GMO factor. . .” and adds “We’re seeing some companies actively promote the fact that they don’t use soy.”

  • All the negative publicity is “frustrating” says Laurent Leduc, vice president at Frutarom, a leading flavor and fragrance company.    However,  he thinks “the negative press on soy is down and we are now starting to see a positive trend with new studies on safety and bone health.”

Sounds to me like the decade-long campaign by the Weston A. Price Foundation is finally paying off.  Our warnings have helped consumers recognize marketing hype, question the value of  industry-sponsored  studies,  decide “better safe than sorry” in the face of confusing, contradictory messages, and perceive “soy free” as a possible asset.

We’ve been greatly helped in our “Soy Alert” campaign by Dr. Joseph Mercola, who has reached millions through his website  www.mercola.com, the world’s leading health and dietary website.  Numerous other websites and Facebook pages have also helped this message go viral.   Sales of The Whole Soy Story: The Dark Side of America’s Favorite Health Food have remained steady after six years.

Clearly, the soy controversy’s not going away anytime soon.   Soy’s still in more than 60 percent of processed and packaged food products and in nearly 100 percent of  fast foods, but the tide seems to have finally turned.

Time to celebrate with a real egg nog!

Posted in WAPF Blog | Tagged , , , , , | 5 Comments

Sex and the Soybean: A Cautionary Tale

Posted on October 13, 2011 by Dr Kaayla Daniel

Can soy be used as an aid to celibacy?    Is it true that Zen monks eat soy because naughty behavior goes down when tofu consumption goes up?  Do Japanese wives feed unfaithful husbands extra helpings of soy?    Could politicians with the “zipper problem” better control their errant behavior if they consumed enough soy?

Anecdotally, the answer is, yes, and a fair amount of science backs it up.  To date, many studies show that soy’s estrogenic isoflavones interfere with the production and usage of testosterone in the body.   Some evidence points to soy as a feminizing influence that can lead to  gynecomastia (man breasts).   And there’s massive evidence of reproductive toxicity.

The latest news is a case study in the journal Nutrition.  The subject is a 19-year-old heterosexual man who become vegan, began consuming a lot of soy,  and, soon after, experienced loss of libido and erectile dysfunction.   Prior to adopting veganism, he had an active sex life with no reported problems.

Lab assessment revealed low levels of free and total testosterone with increased levels of DHEA.   During the year prior to this workup, the young man’s diet had packed a whopping punch of soy isoflavones, averaging 360 mg per day, from soy milk, soy crisps, tofu, soy sauce, soy nuts and edamame.   This level of soy consumption is far above average, yet increasingly common these days as people quit meat and dairy products for soy substitutes.   Prior to becoming vegan, the man had been on a Standard American Diet (SAD).  After discontinuing his vegan diet and eliminating soy foods altogether, he noticed a gradual improvement in  sexual function over the course of a year and his lab tests revealed  gradual normalization of testosterone and DHEA levels.

The researchers conclude with the usual caveat “more studies are needed.”  Yes, indeed, and as soy consumption increases, doctors and other health practitioners will most likely report many such cases.   Let’s hope future studies focus on women as well as men, and include a study on the link between sex, soy and vulvodynia.   What to do now?   The science may not be entirely in, but the message is already clear:  “If you love and respect your naughty bits, Practice Safe Soy.”

To read the study:

Hypogonadism and erectile dysfunction associated with soy product consumption.Siepmann T, Roofeh J, Kiefer FW, Edelson DG.Nutrition. 2011 Jul-Aug;27(7-8):859-62. Epub 2011 Feb 25.

For more about soy and reproduction, including citations, read chapter 29 of  The Whole Soy Story: The Dark Side of America’s Favorite Health Food. For information on how much soy is safe to eat read “Soy Alert” articles and blogs on this website, and also visit:   www.naughtynutritionist.com/naughtynutritionist.com/Practice_Safe_Soy.html

Thanks to Sylvia Onusic for alerting me to this article.


Posted in WAPF Blog | Tagged , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

iVegetarian: PETA Honors Steve Jobs

Posted on October 9, 2011 by Dr Kaayla Daniel

Steve Jobs died this week, and PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) is lifting a tall glass of carrot juice to his memory.   That’s what Jobs gave out to trick or treaters one Halloween, and PETA reminds us not only of that, but of some of the many  other positive steps Jobs took for health and the environment.   Jobs played a role in Disney’s 2006 decision not to renew its Happy Meal toy deal with McDonalds, for example, and more recently decided to “green up” Apple’s manufacturing operations in China and elsewhere.

Sadly PETA and other vegetarian groups have chosen to honor Jobs’s commitment to animal welfare and the environment without acknowledging the role that his vegan or near vegan diet may have played in his death.

I say “may have played” because none of us knows what caused the  pancreatic cancer that led to Steve Jobs’s  death.   Diet doubtless played a role, but lifestyle factors, environmental toxicity and genetic proclivities would have contributed as well.  Certainly, Jobs was exposed over the years to massive bombardment from WiFi and other electromagnetic fields (EMFs).   Medical treatments involving radiation, chemotherapy, a modified Whipple surgery, a liver transplant and immuno-suppressive drugs may also have contributed to his demise.

It’s human nature to look for something, or someone, to blame whenever someone dies too young, but the answers are rarely clear cut.   At best, blaming provides simplistic answers, and at worst can be a juvenile “I told you so.”   Not long after Jobs’s death on Wednesday, readers began asking me to comment on Jobs’s death and how his diet — and especially soy — might have contributed to it.  In fact, I never met Jobs and have no first hand knowledge of what he ate.

Based on media reports in Forbes and Fortune, however, Jobs seems to have favored organic foods and a plant-based diet.   A Google search turns up lots of claims that he was “vegan,” one reference to “fruitarian leanings,” the possibility that he tried healing  through macrobiotics, a few people saying he was “pescatarian,” and a satire of his vegan ways on  www.MacComedy.com.   A posting this week on  www.scienceblog.com, by “Mike” says: “There might be some truth to Jobs being a vegan .  .  .   I was at Apple during the time Jobs came back to Apple in 1996/1997.  The company cafeteria within weeks of his returning dramatically expanded and improved its vegetarian and vegan menus.”   Finally, Jobs was often reported dining at The Greens restaurant in San Francisco with Dean Ornish, MD, bestselling author and promoter of extremely low-fat, plant-based dietary regimens.

None of the articles and websites I’ve seen talk about Jobs’s soy consumption, but Sean Glazier, a programmer from the Netherlands who often consulted in the Silicon Valley, contacted me Thursday.   Glazier reports that the Apple environment was extremely vegan friendly, with soy milk flowing freely at coffee stations, Silk soymilk for sale in vending machines, and soy meats served up in company cafeterias.  Jobs ordered catered meals for meetings and there were always soy options.   “During the 90’s especially, I am sure Steve ate plenty of soy products.”

With the timely release of Walter Isaacson’s authorized biography Steve Jobs on October 24, we may learn more about Jobs’s dietary and lifestyle preferences.

Presuming Jobs ate a fair amount of soy, the question is, how might it have affected his health?   Again, hard to say, given our  lack of information about dose and duration.  If we look to science, the studies on soy and cancer development are inconsistent and often contradictory.  Soy sometimes prevents cancer but also can cause, contribute to or accelerate the growth of cancer.   Soy isoflavones have been proven to be mutagenic, clastogenic and teratogenic, and are listed as “carcinogens” in many toxicology textbooks, including the American Chemical Society’s 1976 Chemical Carcinogens. In addition, modern industrial soy processing techniques used to make soy protein isolate, textured vegetable protein and other modern soy products create toxic and carcinogenic residues   Finally, soybeans naturally contain goitrogens, allergens, protease inhibitors and other antinutrients and toxins that damage the digestive, immune and neuroendocrine systems, putting consumers at increase risk for many health problems, including cancer.   These facts led the Solae Company in 2005 to withdraw a petition to the FDA, in which the company had requested  a soy/cancer health claim.  (To read WAPF’s request for denial, go to: http://www.westonaprice.org/2004-action-alerts/2004jul11). Yet the soy industry and vegan proponents persist in touting soy as a safe, proven and all-natural cancer answer.

In terms of pancreatic cancer, the protease inhibitors in soy protein interfere with protein digestion, put stress on the pancreas and cause hyperplasia and hypertrophy.   Animal studies indicate soy-heavy diets can cause pancreatic cancers that originate in the exocrine cells that produce digestive enzymes.  About 95 percent of pancreatic cancers are exocrine cancers, the type that felled actors Michael Landon and Patrick Swayze.   Steve Jobs, however, suffered from a much rarer, neuroendocrine form of pancreatic cancer.    Known as islet cell carcinoma, this type represents only about five percent of pancreatic cancers, and originates in the insulin-secreting beta cells.

Soy couldn’t possibly have helped Jobs, and may have contributed to his cancer’s development, but without additional information it would inappropriate to blame his cancer on soy.  But it is fair to say that years before diagnosis he would probably have suffered from subclinical malnutrition if, in fact, he’d been on a low-fat, plant-based diet that included a lot of soy.   Lab testing likely would have turned up deficiencies in vitamins A, D, K, B2, B6 and B12; the sulfur-containing amino acids, methionine, cysteine and taurine; DHA and EFA fatty acids; and calcium, zinc, carnitine and CoQ10.  Such deficiencies are commonly found in vegan and near-vegan clients.  They neither build the body nor allow detoxification, and so  set the stage for the development of cancer and other chronic illnesses.

Most alternative MDs and health practitioners find serious illness among vegans in their clinical practices, yet PETA and other vegan groups dismiss the idea that non-junk food vegan diets cause nutritional deficiencies and blame animal products alone for the ills of civilization.   PETA also wildly, nakedly and bloodily –many would say crudely and offensively — promotes the myth of healthy, sexy vegans.

Similar ideas — more soberly presented — come from the  Physicians Committee on Responsible Medicine,  whose “Cancer Project”promotes cancer prevention via a low-fat, high-soy vegan diet.   The fact that this perfect prescription didn’t work for Jobs, Linda McCartney or many other prominent vegetarians does not seem to stop these “responsible physicians” from continuing to make irresponsible health guarantees.

Could anything have saved Steve Jobs?   No way to know, but I think he would have had his best shot at recovery with Dr. Nicholas Gonzalez in New York City.   Dr. Gonzalez has an impressive track record of helping people recover from pancreatic and other cancers.  He prescribes specific diets and supplement programs based on extensive interviews and labwork.    To learn more about his programs, listen to this fascinating interview with Dr Joseph Mercola and Dr. Gonzalez:  http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2011/10/09/dr-nicholas-gonzalez-on-steve-jobs.aspx?e_cid=20111009_SNL_Art_1

Would Jobs  have been best served by a WAPF diet that contained ample amounts of fat, cholesterol and even red meat?   Would a more modest amount of animal foods have better suited him?   Might he have been one of the few people who thrives on a carefully designed diet high in fruit and vegetables and low in animal foods?    Had he been a patient of Dr. Gonzalez, Jobs would have learned the code to a well-designed, high-functioning iJobs diet.   As it stands, the one thing we know for sure is Steve Jobs is dead.   Sadly, his diet did not save him.

*  *  *  *  *

This blog was written on my iMac desktop.   I am deeply grateful for its sleek and functional design as well as the beauty of my  iphone.   Steve Jobs has also inspired me over the years.   My favorite quote is:  

For more great quotes by Jobs visit: www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/05/the-best-steve-jobs-quote_n_997300.html#s338869

To read my article “George Clooney Declines to be the Scent of Mr. Tofu,” the tale of a truly tasteless PETA campaign visit: www.naughtynutritionist.com and click “Articles.”

* *  *  *  *


Posted in WAPF Blog | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Heart of the Matter: Plant-Based Diets Lead to High Homocysteine, Low Sulfur and Marginal B12 Status

Posted on September 26, 2011 by Dr Kaayla Daniel

The World Health Organization (WHO) reports that 16.7 million deaths occur worldwide each year due to cardiovascular disease, and more than half of those deaths occur in developing countries where plant-based diets high in legumes and starches are eaten by the vast majority of the people.

Yet “everyone knows” plant-based diets prevent heart disease.  Indeed this myth  is repeated so often that massive numbers of educated, health-conscious individuals in first world countries are consciously adopting third world style diets in the hope of preventing disease, optimizing health and maximizing longevity.   But if the WHO statistics are correct, plant-based diets might not be protective at all.   And today’s fashionable experiment in veganism could end very badly indeed.

A study out August 26 in the journal Nutrition makes a strong case against plant-based diets for prevention of heart disease.  The title alone  –  “Vegetarianism produces subclinical malnutrition, hyperhomocysteinemia and atherogenesis” — sounds a significant warning.   The article establishes  why subjects who eat mostly vegetarian diets develop morbidity and mortality from cardiovascular disease unrelated to vitamin B status and Framingham criteria.

Co-author Kilmer S. McCully, MD, “Father of the Homocysteine Theory of Heart Disease,” is familiar to WAPF members as winner of the Linus Pauling Award, WAPF’s Integrity in Science Award, and author of numerous articles published in peer-reviewed journals as well as the popular books The Homocysteine Revolution and The Heart Revolution.   In 2009 Dr. McCully was one of the signers of the Weston A. Price Foundation’s petition to the FDA in which we asked the agency to retract its unwarranted 1999 soy/heart disease health claim.  (http://www.westonaprice.org/soy-alert/soy-heart-health-claim)

Dr. McCully teamed up with Yves Ingenbleek, MD, of the University Louis Pasteur in Strasbourg, France, which funded the research.   Dr. Ingenbleek is well known for his work on malnutrition, the essential role of sulfur to nitrogen, and sulfur deficiency as a cause of  hyperhomocysteinemia.

The study took place in Chad, and involved 24 rural male subjects age 18 to 30, and 15 urban male controls, age 18-29.   (Women in this region of Chad could not be studied because of their animistic beliefs and proscriptions against collecting their urine.)

The rural men were apparently healthy, physically active farmers with good lipid profiles.  Their staple foods included cassava, sweet potatoes, beans, millet and ground nuts.   Cassava leaves, cabbages and carrots provided good levels of carotenes, folates and pyridoxine (B6).  The diet is plant-based there because of a shortage of grazing lands and livestock, but subjects occasionally consume  some B12-containing foods, mostly poultry and eggs, though very little dairy or meat.   Their diet could be described as high carb, high fiber,  low in both protein and fat, and low in the sulfur containing amino acids.    In brief, the very diet recommended by many of today’s nutritional “experts” for overall good health and heart disease prevention.

The urban controls were likewise healthy and ate a similar diet, but with beef, smoked fish and canned or powdered milk regularly on the menus.  Their diet was thus higher in protein, fat and the sulfur-containing amino acids though roughly equivalent in calories.

Dr. McCully’s research over the past 40 years on the pathogenesis of atherosclerosis has shown the role of homocysteine in free radical damage and the protective effect of  vitamins B6, B12 and folate.   Indeed, many doctors today recommend taking this trio of B vitamins as an inexpensive heart disease “insurance policy.”

In Chad, both groups showed adequate levels of B6 and folate.  The B12 levels of the vegetarian group were lower, but the difference was only of “borderline significance.”   However, as the researchers point out, ”A previous study undertaken in the same Chadian area in a larger group of 60 rural participants did demonstrate a weak inverse correlation between B12 and homocysteine concentrations in the 20 subjects most severely protein depleted .  .  .  It is therefore likely that the hyperhomocysteinemia status of some of our rural subjects in the present survey might have resulted from combined B12 and protein deficiencies.   The correlation of B12 deficiency with hyperhomocysteinemia could well reach statistical significance if a larger groups of subjects were studied.”

Clearly it’s wise for people on plant-based diets to supplement their diets with B12, but protein malnutrition must also be addressed.   And the issue is not just getting enough protein to eat, but the right kind.   Quality, not just quantity.   The bottom line is we must eat  protein rich in bioavailable, sulfur-containing amino acids — and that means animal products.   (Vegans at this point will surely claim the issue is insufficient protein and trot out soy as the solution.   Soy is indeed a  complete plant based protein, but notoriously low in methionine.  It does contain decent levels of cysteine, but the cysteine is bound up in protease inhibitors, making it largely  biounavailable. (For more information, read  my book The Whole Soy Story: The Dark Side of America’s Favorite Health Food, endorsed by Dr. McCully, as well as our petition to the FDA noted above.)

So what did  Drs. Ingenbleek and  McCully find among the study group of protein-deficient people?   Higher levels of homocysteine, of course.  Also significant alterations in body composition,  lean body mass, body mass index and plasma transthyretin levels.  In plain English, the near-vegetarian subjects were thinner, with poorer muscle tone and showed subclinical signs of protein malnutrition.   (So much for popular ideas of extreme thinness being healthy. )

The plant-based diet of the study group was low in all of the sulfur-containing amino acids.   As would be expected, labwork on these men showed lower plasma cysteine and glutathione levels compared to the controls.  Methionine levels, however,  tested comparably.   The explanation for this is  “adaptive response.”   In brief, mammals trying to function with insufficient sulfur-containing amino acids will do whatever’s necessary to survive.   Given the essential role of methionine in metabolic processes, that means deregulating the transsufuration pathway, increasing homocysteine levels, and methylating homocysteine to make methionine.

Ultimately, it all boils down to our need for sulfur.   As Stephanie Seneff, PhD, and many others have written in Wise Traditions and on this website, sulfur is vital for disease prevention and maintenance of good health.   In terms of heart disease, Drs. Ingenbleek and McCully have shown sulfur deficiency not only leads to high homocysteine levels, but is the likeliest reason some clinical trials using B6, B12 and folate interventions have proved ineffective for the prevention of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases.    Over the past few years, headlines from such studies have led to widespread dismissal of Dr. McCully’s  “Homocysteine Theory of Heart Disease” and renewed media focus on cholesterol, c-reactive protein and other possible culprits that can be treated by statins and other profitable drugs.   In contrast, Drs. McCully and Ingenbleek research suggests we can better prevent heart disease with three inexpensive B vitamins and traditional diets rich in the sulfur-containing amino acids found in animal foods.

In the blaze of publicity surrounding Forks Over Knives and other blasts of vegan propaganda, few people are likely to hear about this study.   That’s sad, for it provides an important missing piece in our knowledge of heart disease development, a strong argument against the plant-based fad, and a bright new chapter in what the New York Times has called “The Fall and Rise of Kilmer McCully.”

*  *  *  *  *

Thanks to Sylvia Onusic PhD who was able to access a full text copy of this article to share with  me.

Posted in WAPF Blog | Tagged , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Lose Your Veganity!

Posted on September 13, 2011 by Dr Kaayla Daniel

Veganism’s had major play in the media this year, and many of us have faced pesky questions from friends, family and acquaintances about the vegan propaganda movie Forks Over Knives starring T. Colin Campbell and Caldwell Esselstyn.  This blog is for WAPF members who have asked us for comebacks and replies.

Our WAPF website, of course, is bursting with science rebutting and refuting those vegan claims, and our “Vegetarian Tour” tackles the key issues nicely.   Another good option is to encourage people to read Lierre Keith’s The Vegetarian Myth, a compelling and compassionate discussion by a well-educated and articulate ex vegan.  Yet another great resource is Denise Minger’s recent talk “How to Win An Argument with a Vegetarian” found at  http://vimeo.com/27792352    We definitely needed this one, as there are zillion hits on the internet on how to argue with a meat eater.   Minger’s perkiness and smarts could be just what’s needed for young people hopped up on vegan “science” spouted from the foul-mouthed babes who wrote Skinny Bitch.

As for me, I’ve got my own edu-taining way to set people straight.   As per the script that follows, start with a question, use mild shock techniques to leave your adversary speechless, and then quickly lay out the issues.

Think a vegan diet is the ticket to personal and planetary health?   Then it’s time to lose your veganity!

Yes,  lose your veganity.   Let go of the wishful thinking that pervades vegan myths and open up to the complex truths.  Yes, it might be painful at first, but it’s a crucial step to adult knowledge of how we really can honor animals, promote personal health and healing, sustain the environment and bring about world peace.

To start with, humans are omnivores with a mixed feeder’s teeth and digestive system.    If we were meant to be herbivores, we’d have a mouth designed to chew cud and four big stomachs to hold and process it.  Grazing all day not only wastes the time and energy omnivores need to live passionate and productive lives, but can lead to indigestion, bloated bellies, stupendous gas and prodigious poops.   Worse still, herbivores put on weight like cows, allow themselves to be herded and act like good sheeples.

The anthropological evidence is also clear.  An oft heard joke — but one with a lot of truth in it — is that the word vegetarian means “poor hunter.”    In fact, cultures from all over the world traditionally thrived on diets rich in animal fats and proteins, and not just fruits, vegetables, nuts, seeds and grains.   As omnivores, we are blessed to be able to enjoy these delicious foods, but must not rely solely on them.   Vegans who try, tend to come up deficient in vitamins A, D, K, B2, B6 and B12; the sulfur-containing amino acids, methionine, cysteine and taurine; DHA and EFA fatty acids; and calcium, zinc, carnitine and CoQ10.  Although the human body is theoretically capable of converting beta carotene into true vitamin A and omega 3 fatty acids into DHA and EPA, few people are healthy enough to do so.  Sunlight might produce sufficient vitamin D — provided we are naked and live in the topics!

As to that vegan myth that animal foods cause the diseases of modern civilization, you gotta be kidding!  The 20th century saw a decline in the consumption of meat, dairy and butter but  a sharp increase in the consumption of sugar, corn syrup, white flour, liquid and partially hydrogenated vegetable oils, artificial flavorings, preservatives and other known health hazards of processed, packaged and fast foods.   All health problems associated with animal products — as well as cruelty to animals and threats to the environment – are the result of factory farming and other commercial and non-sustainable farming practices.   In other words, The Naughty Nutritionist is not recommending factory farms or supermarket products.

But what of planetary health?   Isn’t veganism the solution to world hunger and saving the environment?    Sadly, it’s not.   The true threat to our environment is not animals — which have been covering the earth with manure and emissions for tens of thousands of years — but the globalization and industrialization of agriculture with its unconscionable factory farming practices; toxic uses of pesticides, herbicides and commercial fertilizers;  plundering of natural resources; draining of aquifers;  depletion and eventual deadening of topsoil; and bankrupting of small farmers and cottage industries.

Vegan mythology to the contrary, only 11 percent of the land on earth can be farmed, a percentage that cannot be increased without severe environmental consequences.   Old-fashioned, organic, mixed-use farms, and eating locally and population control are the only real solutions.   Although vegan mythology holds we can somehow eat without killing, that’s an idea that can only be held by gardening virgins who haven’t dealt first hand with predators.   And even vegetable gardens need animals for the  manure, bone meal and other soil replenishments needed to keep soil alive and well.   Furthermore, grains, soybeans and other foods grown by Big Ag lead to the death of billions of small mammals, birds, bees and other life.

To lose your veganity is to become an adult, a grownup with a full bred understanding of our living, breathing planet and its dependence on the cycle of life and death.

And if this talk doesn’t work, let them smell bacon, the gateway meat!

*  *  *  *  *

Posted in WAPF Blog | Tagged , , , , , , | 1 Comment