Soy-based shakes help lower weight, cholesterol

Quoted message said:

"Soy is not real food.

http://www.westonaprice.org/mythstruths/mtsoy.html
http://www.westonaprice.org/soy/complaints.html
http://www.westonaprice.org/soy/dangersisoflavones.html
http://www.westonaprice.org/soy/ploy.html
westonaprice.orgsoy studies.html"Open ↗

This is the danger of giving up science for following a guru type
thinking. Every point made in those pages can be countered by research
showing the exact oppisite, which is normal in science but not "guru
studies". Such conflicts in science are resolved by doing more research
to sort out differences, in "guru studies" "truth" is known and taught and
cast in concrete, in which is also stuck the feet of the guru's followers.

OK. That does not refute the science being presented by this supposed
"guru". It just says that there is other science that contradicts it.
Fine.

Here is your challenge, and it is an insurmountable one. Find a study
or studies, any study(ies), that says something good about soy, that is
done by a completely independent researcher that is not affiliated with
the soy industry or did not get funded by the soy industry. Good luck.
I dare say that you will not find it.

Regarding the "guru" comment:

----
gu·ru ( P ) Pronunciation Key (gr, g-r)
n. pl. gu·rus
Hinduism & Tibetan Buddhism. A personal spiritual teacher.

A teacher and guide in spiritual and philosophical matters.
A trusted counselor and adviser; a mentor.

A recognized leader in a field: the guru of high finance.
An acknowledged and influential advocate, as of a movement or idea:
"In a culture that worships slimness, he was the Guru of Lean"
(Erica Abeel).
---

If he is a "guru", that is fine. His credibility as a researcher and
the value of his research is invaluable. More people would benefit by
following the teachings of this particular "guru".

Interesting use of words. Many vegetarians are vegetarians because they
follow the teaching of various Hindu and eastern religious gurus. These
gurus do not base their nutritional recommendations on attaining
physical health, on any physical or nutritional science, but strictly
on spiritual and philosophical concerns. That may be good for your
karma but is not so good for nutritional health.

If Weston Price is a guru in the field of nutrition, then we could not
select a better guide. He wrote a book entitled "Nutrition and Physical
Degeneration". It is about actual scientific obervations of the
physical condition of various groups of people and it relates their
physical condition directly to their nutrition. If you are considering
learning about nutrition, this is information that one must have. So,
Weston Price is a guru. As he should be.

TC

TC said:

Quoted message said:

"Soy is not real food.

http://www.westonaprice.org/mythstruths/mtsoy.html
http://www.westonaprice.org/soy/complaints.html
http://www.westonaprice.org/soy/dangersisoflavones.html
http://www.westonaprice.org/soy/ploy.html
westonaprice.orgsoy studies.html"Open ↗

This is the danger of giving up science for following a guru type
thinking. Every point made in those pages can be countered by research
showing the exact oppisite, which is normal in science but not "guru
studies". Such conflicts in science are resolved by doing more research
to sort out differences, in "guru studies" "truth" is known and taught and
cast in concrete, in which is also stuck the feet of the guru's followers.

OK. That does not refute the science being presented by this supposed
"guru". It just says that there is other science that contradicts it.
Fine.

Here is your challenge, and it is an insurmountable one. Find a study
or studies, any study(ies), that says something good about soy, that is
done by a completely independent researcher that is not affiliated with
the soy industry or did not get funded by the soy industry. Good luck.
I dare say that you will not find it.

Regarding the "guru" comment:

----
gu·ru ( P ) Pronunciation Key (gr, g-r)
n. pl. gu·rus
Hinduism & Tibetan Buddhism. A personal spiritual teacher.

A teacher and guide in spiritual and philosophical matters.
A trusted counselor and adviser; a mentor.

A recognized leader in a field: the guru of high finance.
An acknowledged and influential advocate, as of a movement or idea:
"In a culture that worships slimness, he was the Guru of Lean"
(Erica Abeel).
---

If he is a "guru", that is fine. His credibility as a researcher and
the value of his research is invaluable. More people would benefit by
following the teachings of this particular "guru".

Interesting use of words. Many vegetarians are vegetarians because they
follow the teaching of various Hindu and eastern religious gurus. These
gurus do not base their nutritional recommendations on attaining
physical health, on any physical or nutritional science, but strictly
on spiritual and philosophical concerns. That may be good for your
karma but is not so good for nutritional health.

If Weston Price is a guru in the field of nutrition, then we could not
select a better guide. He wrote a book entitled "Nutrition and Physical
Degeneration". It is about actual scientific obervations of the
physical condition of various groups of people and it relates their
physical condition directly to their nutrition. If you are considering
learning about nutrition, this is information that one must have. So,
Weston Price is a guru. As he should be.

TC

I often agree with you TC. But here, no; I am sorry. Price's so called
findings were informed by his racism. He found what he wanted to find:
the noble savage.

This is my opinion. If you ask me for citations of proof I can only
suggest you go back and read his work. It's all there.

Zee

"Fine.

Here is your challenge, and it is an insurmountable one. Find a study or
studies, any study(ies), that says something good about soy, that is done
by a completely independent researcher that is not affiliated with the soy
industry or did not get funded by the soy industry. Good luck. I dare say
that you will not find it."

And scientifically how is this relevant? A counter question, equally
irrelevant, find one anti soy that is not the child of anti vegetarian
cults by the meat industry and related lifestyle cults.

Science advances by concensus. every anti soy article one can find can be
countered by one showing the claims are groundless. This will all sort
itself out over time, as is normal in science. One question that arises
is way deffering results seems to be appearing, so people will start to
look at the methods used and the variables involved to establish what is
really important and causal and not merely in connection as a sub
variavble. This stage of contending studies is usual and is normal in all
areas of biology when complex systems are involved, welcome to the real
world where conspiracy and cultic zeal need not be evoked in the least for
good science.

"The soy they eat is not the same soy that is marketted to americans.
The okinawans eat properly fermented soy. American soy is not properly
fermented. And there are plenty of recent studies that dispute the
wisdom of consuming soy with its high levels of phyto-estrogens.

Chances are that they live long in spite of eating soy, not because of
it."

Gosh, even to serve up speculative hokum about soy can cause so much gas,
who wudda thunk, maybe it's the fiber. But we must bow before such
demonstrated scientific dexterity and grouding in research as is so often
displayed here.

"the quality, the comprehensiveness, the meticulous data collection, the
intelligence applied, the effort, the sheer volume of data collected by Dr
Price must be given some weight in the field of nutrition. His findings
cannot be ignored. In fact it would qualify as the starting point for all
future science in the field of nutrition. Any scientist doing research in
nutrition who is unaware of Dr Prices studies is trying to re-invent the
wheel in darkness. And unless a similar approach is undertaken, most
research is a waste of resources."

All his qualities must be taken into account, and having seen what
they are, dismissed as an interesting exercise. His methods were
poor, except where he is counting numbers of decayed teeth in
different areas where differing amounts of sugar were consumed.
Outside that quality data is absent. The reasons for his method of
approach is not explained and the quality of locations and very
suspect sampling a failure.

To give an example, when the questions of the east asian diet comes up,
someone will always point to the Okinawans as an counter example where
large amounts of fatty pork were consumed, using price as their source.
Pork was traditionally a food eaten mostly at feasts and other special
occasions. So get this picture, an american drops out of the sky and is
taken to the headman of a few villages. So on this special occasion to
honor the visiting high status person what do they serve, lots of fatty
pork of course. And price records this as some kind of typical meal to
support his pet idea about the special role of fat in diets.

His curious anthropometric observations are useless. The methods for
doing such quality measurements was easily at hand and even that long
ago the statistical methods to evaluate results were common, but both
are completely absent. His cross cultural comparison has been easily
equaled and greatly surpassed during and since his time. At best what
he informally observed in various places can only support the broadest
kind of speculative conclusions about nutrition, a science which in
his time was only just beginning to come of age in any respect and to
which his book contributes little about developments since.

Quoted message said:

"the quality, the comprehensiveness, the meticulous data collection, the
intelligence applied, the effort, the sheer volume of data collected by Dr
Price must be given some weight in the field of nutrition. His findings
cannot be ignored. In fact it would qualify as the starting point for all
future science in the field of nutrition. Any scientist doing research in
nutrition who is unaware of Dr Prices studies is trying to re-invent the
wheel in darkness. And unless a similar approach is undertaken, most
research is a waste of resources."

All his qualities must be taken into account, and having seen what
they are, dismissed as an interesting exercise. His methods were
poor, except where he is counting numbers of decayed teeth in
different areas where differing amounts of sugar were consumed.
Outside that quality data is absent. The reasons for his method of
approach is not explained and the quality of locations and very
suspect sampling a failure.

To give an example, when the questions of the east asian diet comes up,
someone will always point to the Okinawans as an counter example where
large amounts of fatty pork were consumed, using price as their source.
Pork was traditionally a food eaten mostly at feasts and other special
occasions. So get this picture, an american drops out of the sky and is
taken to the headman of a few villages. So on this special occasion to
honor the visiting high status person what do they serve, lots of fatty
pork of course. And price records this as some kind of typical meal to
support his pet idea about the special role of fat in diets.

The noble savage; cultures defined by the western norm. Price's ideas
are as passe as the museum displays of his era which had taxidermied
animals tortured into unlikely postures, depicting behaviour impossible
for their species. His writings are nothing more than an interesting
historial antrhroplogical browse. The fact that he happened to hit it
right a couple times ie) grass fed animals not industrial husbandry,
isn't enough.

Zee

Quoted message said:

His curious anthropometric observations are useless. The methods for
doing such quality measurements was easily at hand and even that long
ago the statistical methods to evaluate results were common, but both
are completely absent. His cross cultural comparison has been easily
equaled and greatly surpassed during and since his time. At best what
he informally observed in various places can only support the broadest
kind of speculative conclusions about nutrition, a science which in
his time was only just beginning to come of age in any respect and to
which his book contributes little about developments since.