Soy bran?

"John Graeme" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]

Quoted message said:

Does anyone know of any data on the composition of soy bran? It's
not listed in the USDA or any other database I can find. One of the
supplement companies claims that its soy bran tablets have 6 times the
fiber of wheat bran, but this can hardly be right, since wheat bran is
nearly 50% fiber. I'm looking for a high-fiber supplement that does
not produce much gas.

Rice and oat bran are excellent and have lots of soluble
fiber which is good for lowering cholesterol . Wheat bran
is mostly insoluble fiber which produce flatulence and heaviness .

Kam

--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

Quoted message said:

John Graeme said:

Does anyone know of any data on the composition of soy bran? It's
not listed in the USDA or any other database I can find. One of the
supplement companies claims that its soy bran tablets have 6 times the
fiber of wheat bran, but this can hardly be right, since wheat bran is
nearly 50% fiber. I'm looking for a high-fiber supplement that does
not produce much gas.

I read somewhere that, unlike wheat and rice brans, soy bran has a high
glycemic index rating. Rather surprising for a high fiber product.

High carbohydate bran? I thought fiber was indigestable?
Get my point?

soy is not real food.

http://www.westonaprice.org/soy/soy_studies.html

TC

John Graeme said:

Does anyone know of any data on the composition of soy bran? It's
not listed in the USDA or any other database I can find. One of the
supplement companies claims that its soy bran tablets have 6 times the
fiber of wheat bran, but this can hardly be right, since wheat bran is
nearly 50% fiber. I'm looking for a high-fiber supplement that does
not produce much gas.

Here we go again, some people are uncapable of learning in the face of
counter facts, which is easy to understand as most members of lifestyle
food cults suffer from the malady. For each and every item noted in the
link below there are multiple sources of research to show the exact
contrary. This is normal in science where a concensus is still forming.
In place of cherry picking research as this lifestyle food cult does, the
fair and much more useful approach would be to do a survey of all the
research. In the absence of that this can only be seen as propaganda for
the cultists to mummer about, it is not science where counter facts
change minds:

"soy is not real food.

westonaprice.orgsoy studies.html"Open ↗

Quoted message said:

Here we go again, some people are uncapable of learning in the face of
counter facts, which is easy to understand as most members of lifestyle
food cults suffer from the malady. For each and every item noted in the
link below there are multiple sources of research to show the exact
contrary. This is normal in science where a concensus is still forming.
In place of cherry picking research as this lifestyle food cult does, the
fair and much more useful approach would be to do a survey of all the
research. In the absence of that this can only be seen as propaganda for
the cultists to mummer about, it is not science where counter facts
change minds:

"soy is not real food.

westonaprice.orgsoy studies.html"Open ↗

Soy is and never will be REAL FOOD!

TC

TC said:

Quoted message said:

Here we go again, some people are uncapable of learning in the face of
counter facts, which is easy to understand as most members of lifestyle
food cults suffer from the malady. For each and every item noted in the
link below there are multiple sources of research to show the exact
contrary. This is normal in science where a concensus is still forming.
In place of cherry picking research as this lifestyle food cult does, the
fair and much more useful approach would be to do a survey of all the
research. In the absence of that this can only be seen as propaganda for
the cultists to mummer about, it is not science where counter facts
change minds:

"soy is not real food.

westonaprice.orgsoy studies.html"Open ↗

Soy is and never will be REAL FOOD!

TC

Here is some more interesting reading on soy:

http://www.soyonlineservice.co.nz/home.htm

TC

TC said:

TC said:

Quoted message said:

Here we go again, some people are uncapable of learning in the face of
counter facts, which is easy to understand as most members of lifestyle
food cults suffer from the malady. For each and every item noted in the
link below there are multiple sources of research to show the exact
contrary. This is normal in science where a concensus is still forming.
In place of cherry picking research as this lifestyle food cult does, the
fair and much more useful approach would be to do a survey of all the
research. In the absence of that this can only be seen as propaganda for
the cultists to mummer about, it is not science where counter facts
change minds:

"soy is not real food.

westonaprice.orgsoy studies.html"Open ↗

Soy is and never will be REAL FOOD!

TC

Here is some more interesting reading on soy:

http://www.soyonlineservice.co.nz/home.htm

TC

more reading about soy:

http://www.mothering.com/articles/growing_child/food/soy_story.html

TC

"> > > > Soy is and never will be REAL FOOD!"

links snipped

It only adds to my comments, the anti soy web pages cherry pick from the
broad range of research to form their propaganda. Where are the easy to
find research studies showing the contrary, which in a normal scientific
survey would be covered as well? If soy is not "real" food, what is it?
The greatest use of soy products is as animal food which shows up on the
table in meat and dairy products. This only continuing evidence of the
mindset non-science propaganda of the lifestyle food cults.

TC said:

TC said:

TC said:

[email hidden] wrote:
> Here we go again, some people are uncapable of learning in the face of
> counter facts, which is easy to understand as most members of lifestyle
> food cults suffer from the malady. For each and every item noted in the
> link below there are multiple sources of research to show the exact
> contrary. This is normal in science where a concensus is still forming.
> In place of cherry picking research as this lifestyle food cult does, the
> fair and much more useful approach would be to do a survey of all the
> research. In the absence of that this can only be seen as propaganda for
> the cultists to mummer about, it is not science where counter facts
> change minds:
>
> "soy is not real food.
>
> http://www.westonaprice.org/soy/soy_studies.html"

Soy is and never will be REAL FOOD!

TC

Here is some more interesting reading on soy:

http://www.soyonlineservice.co.nz/home.htm

TC

more reading about soy:

http://www.mothering.com/articles/growing_child/food/soy_story.html

TC

Canary in a coalmine? How about a parrot in the real world?

http://www.theparrotsocietyuk.org/genarticle22.shtml

TC

TC said:

TC said:

TC said:

TC wrote:
> [email hidden] wrote:
> > Here we go again, some people are uncapable of learning in the face of
> > counter facts, which is easy to understand as most members of lifestyle
> > food cults suffer from the malady. For each and every item noted in the
> > link below there are multiple sources of research to show the exact
> > contrary. This is normal in science where a concensus is still forming.
> > In place of cherry picking research as this lifestyle food cult does, the
> > fair and much more useful approach would be to do a survey of all the
> > research. In the absence of that this can only be seen as propaganda for
> > the cultists to mummer about, it is not science where counter facts
> > change minds:
> >
> > "soy is not real food.
> >
> > http://www.westonaprice.org/soy/soy_studies.html"
>
> Soy is and never will be REAL FOOD!
>
> TC

Here is some more interesting reading on soy:

http://www.soyonlineservice.co.nz/home.htm

TC

more reading about soy:

http://www.mothering.com/articles/growing_child/food/soy_story.html

TC

Canary in a coalmine? How about a parrot in the real world?

http://www.theparrotsocietyuk.org/genarticle22.shtml

TC

Keep on reading:

http://www.shirleys-wellness-cafe.com/soy.htm

TC

Quoted message said:

"> > > > Soy is and never will be REAL FOOD!"

links snipped

It only adds to my comments, the anti soy web pages cherry pick from the
broad range of research to form their propaganda. Where are the easy to
find research studies showing the contrary, which in a normal scientific
survey would be covered as well? If soy is not "real" food, what is it?
The greatest use of soy products is as animal food which shows up on the
table in meat and dairy products. This only continuing evidence of the
mindset non-science propaganda of the lifestyle food cults.

Show me one study that found something positive about soy as a food for
humans that wasn't funded by the soy industry. One.

TC

On the soy question I have suggested a survey of all the science would be
a much better resource for someone wanting to learn about the topic as can
be known scientifically. In place of the lifestyle food cultist cherry
picking articles, here is one such example written in lay language:

"Soy: Health Claims for Soy Protein, Questions About Other Components"

http://www.fda.gov/fdac/features/2000/300_soy.html

"The FDA is hardly the epitome of scientific integrity and honesty. They
are just salespeople from the industry they are supposed to regulate. If
you are trying to make a case based on the science, you had better"

I'm making no scientific poit, only an example of a source that surveys
all the science about soy and how it came to make guidelines for use in
food. Your opinion of the fda is irrelevant, if there is error in their
survey then show it, otherwise who cares about your reaction. If you
would care to provide another source which surveys all the research, let's
see it.

Quoted message said:

On the soy question I have suggested a survey of all the science would be
a much better resource for someone wanting to learn about the topic as can
be known scientifically. In place of the lifestyle food cultist cherry
picking articles, here is one such example written in lay language:

"Soy: Health Claims for Soy Protein, Questions About Other Components"

http://www.fda.gov/fdac/features/2000/300_soy.html

The FDA is hardly the epitome of scientific integrity and honesty. They
are just salespeople from the industry they are supposed to regulate.
If you are trying to make a case based on the science, you had better
find a better source than the FDA.

TC

Quoted message said:

"The FDA is hardly the epitome of scientific integrity and honesty. They
are just salespeople from the industry they are supposed to regulate. If
you are trying to make a case based on the science, you had better"

I'm making no scientific poit, only an example of a source that surveys
all the science about soy and how it came to make guidelines for use in
food. Your opinion of the fda is irrelevant, if there is error in their
survey then show it, otherwise who cares about your reaction. If you
would care to provide another source which surveys all the research, let's
see it.

You are using a proven corrupt arm of the food industry to provide
"science" to prove your point. You can't build a house on a foundation
of sand and expect it to hold up. It doesn't stand up to even cursory
scrutiny.

TC

"You are using a proven corrupt arm of the food industry to provide
"science" to prove your point. You can't build a house on a foundation
of sand and expect it to hold up. It doesn't stand up to even cursory
scrutiny."

I'm presenting that page that happenes to be a fda one to show an example
of how a survey of all of the research on soy can be done. It is in
contrast to the lifestyle food cult pages you present which cherry pick
only those which agree with themselves. Again, if you have another
example of a source which reviews all the research then let us see it.
This smear by association is irrelevant. If their science is flawed then
show us how by counter examples from sources not devoted to a lifestyle
food cult propaganda mill. The science done on soy is independent of the
fda, we need not even mention it to make the scientific case for its
health benefits, and cautions as well. Your opinion of the fda is proof
of nothing but what it says about you and how you reach non scientific
conclusions. If one wants opinions, go to the nearest tavern any night of
the week.

Nick said:

Quoted message said:

John Graeme said:

Does anyone know of any data on the composition of soy bran? It's
not listed in the USDA or any other database I can find. One of the
supplement companies claims that its soy bran tablets have 6 times the
fiber of wheat bran, but this can hardly be right, since wheat bran is
nearly 50% fiber. I'm looking for a high-fiber supplement that does
not produce much gas.

I read somewhere that, unlike wheat and rice brans, soy bran has a high
glycemic index rating. Rather surprising for a high fiber product.

High carbohydate bran? I thought fiber was indigestable?
Get my point?

Bran is the outer hull of grains; it is not all fiber. My question is
what percentage fiber soy bran contains, and, if known, the types of
fiber. Wheat bran, for example, is about 43% fiber, and contains a
higher percentage of cellulose (an insoluble fiber), while oat bran is
only about 15% fiber. But I can't find any data for soy bran.