Slashdot Mirror

Vegetarians often have peculiar delusions about protein content. I see this kind of crap about soy all the time.

Tho I should have ended that paragraph after "delusions". ;)

Speaking of soy:
http://www.soyonlineservice.co.nz/

Note: Newly-popular flaxseed meal has 3 times the phytoestrogens of soy, at far greater digestibility. (Sufficient to cause infertility [50% vs the natural 15%] and birth defects in dogs, whereas soy, which absorbs poorly due to mucus generation, does not.)

[I can't find the list offhand, but the content was something like 300,000 units for flaxseed, 100,000 units for soybean meal, and the next highest was 25,000 units, I think per kg of edible product. Average for most typical human-consumed foods was about 2,000. Well, if it prevents vegetarians from reproducing, I'm all for it. ;) ]

Actually, someone did the math on that, and in a vegan system, the world population would have to *shrink* by at least 2/3rds to be sustainable on the available level of food production. The reason is twofold:

1) Crop agriculture largely depends on animal ag (which is to say, manure) for *fixed nitrogen* to fertilize crops. Most crop plants are NOT nitrogen fixers and rely entirely on fertilizer or on existing nitrogen compounds in the soil (which are rapidly depleted if not replaced; this nitrogen goes into making the proteins in the crop). This is actually the most important limiting factor in crop yields. -- Without manure, you have to rely on industrial ammonia, as several posters detail above -- a fairly costly process in terms of energy use. The only reason our crop yields are as good as they are today is because manure, never in sufficient supply, is being supplemented by industrial ammonia. To get off that dependency on industrial ammonia for fertilizer, we'd need to approximately DOUBLE manure production (which is to say, animal ag).

2) Getting rid of animal agriculture actually pulls a lot of land OUT of food production, since only about a quarter of the ag-utilized land is suitable for crops. Livestock are grazed mainly on land that CANNOT grow food crops, either for soil being too poor or terrain being unsuitable (thin, rocky, steep) or for not having enough evenly-distributed water (e.g. most of the American west, most of central Asia, etc.) Cattle can drink at a trough; plants need water distributed to their roots, and irrigation uses a lot of fuel, since most irrigation water needs to be pumped. (And irrigation pipe is hideously expensive, presently over $100 for a 20 foot piece of 4" pipe. That's right, it's over 5 bucks per FOOT.) With population growth using more and more water for urban survival, or water being pulled away from crop use (like the debacle in central California) water itself is rapidly becoming another limiting factor, and in some areas is actually too expensive to use on crops at all.

Crop-producing plants, especially those that produce a lot of protein, need a LOT of nitrogen and water, compared to graze and fodder useful for feeding animals. This animal fodder is not at all useful for feeding humans. (Unless you can figure out how to grow multiple stomachs or another 20 yards of intestine, so you can digest grass.) Animals serve as a very efficient means of converting NON-FOOD CROPS (mostly grass) from NON-ARABLE LAND (ie. pasture) into HUMAN-USABLE PROTEIN.

The other problem is that strict veganism is actually a recipe for human extinction, since it is not possible to raise healthy children on a vegan diet. It is catastrophically deficient in vit.B-12 (which leads to a variety of problems in children, from retardation to death), plus you need to eat about 3x the calories to get the required level and balance of animo acids, and even then it will be deficient in some of them.

Soy is actually not a very good or efficient protein, is processing-intensive to get it to the point where it is human-digestible, and has some other negative impacts; there is a lot of good research (with citations) compiled at http://www.soyonlineservice.co.nz/

[BTW my background is biochemistry, and I'm from farm and ranch country, so I actually do know what I'm talking about. Unlike the average urbanite who has no real idea what it takes to produce the food he eats.]

Try looking at their diets first. Phytoestrogen content in flaxseed meal and soy products are much more likely to blame.

http://www.soyonlineservice.co.nz/04malehealth.htm

Flaxseed meal has THREE TIMES as much phytoestrogen as soy, and is MUCH more biologically available (being far more digestible than soy).

You may find this site interesting:

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

Some of it is a little overblown, but my background is biochem, and I'd say that in the whole, they are right. (See note from a skeptic at http://snhbw.blogspot.com/2009/02/update-on-soy-online-service.html)

Dr.Mercola is a snake-oil salesman, but even so lists a number of good studies: http://www.mercola.com/article/soy/index.htm

Soy-based baby formula is probably a major cause of plant allergies in adults (and likely of colic in babies); soy protein is known to be a broad-spectrum allergen. I personally know someone who, after a binge on toasted soy nuts, became allergic to practically all plant proteins. It happened almost immediately after the only time she ever ate lots of soy nuts, so there's little doubt about the trigger.

At an ag-educated guess, the black pigment for "soy-based toner" comes from burnt soybean *hulls*.

As to the phytoestrogens, some interesting reading that is backed by considerable research:
http://www.soyonlineservice.co.nz/04birthdefects.htm
(Be aware that flaxseed meal has 3 to 4 TIMES as much phytoestrogen as soy, and is sufficient to be somewhat effective as a contraceptive, and to cause birth defects, when used in dog food.)

Look at phytoestrogens instead. The most common sources are soy products and flaxseed meal (which has about twice as much as soy does).

http://www.soyonlineservice.co.nz/04phytoestrogens.htm
http://www.soyonlineservice.co.nz/articles/phyto1.htm

Anecdote: flaxseed meal is increasingly used in pet food. When I was feeding my kennel a diet with a significant amount of flaxseed meal, I had a marked increase of certain types of birth defects (mainly some degree of failure of midline closure) AND a 50% miss rate on breedings. Since I've gone to a flax-free diet, the birth defects have gone away, and my conception rate is back to the species norm of 85-90%.

(Credential: I have almost 40 years professional experience in dogs.)

Actually, phytoestrogens are fairly harmless while a female animal is pregnant. Namely, their body is pumping out tons of estrogen to begin with. Thus, it's unlikely to be the cause of the teratogenic effects that you were seeing.

However, phytoestrogens can significantly impact the sperm levels in male animals. This is because estrogens are antagonists for testosterone. If you dump enough estrogenic potential into a male, they won't be able to produce enough testosterone to allow for normal sperm production.

What exactly do you mean by "failure of midline closure"? I'm intrigued in what this refers to... lol God, I'm turning into such a medical geek >_

Look at phytoestrogens instead. The most common sources are soy products and flaxseed meal (which has about twice as much as soy does).

http://www.soyonlineservice.co.nz/04phytoestrogens.htm
http://www.soyonlineservice.co.nz/articles/phyto1.htm

Anecdote: flaxseed meal is increasingly used in pet food. When I was feeding my kennel a diet with a significant amount of flaxseed meal, I had a marked increase of certain types of birth defects (mainly some degree of failure of midline closure) AND a 50% miss rate on breedings. Since I've gone to a flax-free diet, the birth defects have gone away, and my conception rate is back to the species norm of 85-90%.

(Credential: I have almost 40 years professional experience in dogs.)

Actually, phytoestrogens are fairly harmless while a female animal is pregnant. Namely, their body is pumping out tons of estrogen to begin with. Thus, it's unlikely to be the cause of the teratogenic effects that you were seeing.

However, phytoestrogens can significantly impact the sperm levels in male animals. This is because estrogens are antagonists for testosterone. If you dump enough estrogenic potential into a male, they won't be able to produce enough testosterone to allow for normal sperm production.

What exactly do you mean by "failure of midline closure"? I'm intrigued in what this refers to... lol God, I'm turning into such a medical geek >_

I suggest you check out this good site on the issues with phytoestrogens and male feminization:

http://www.soyonlineservice.co.nz/04malehealth.htm

Flaxseed meal has about twice the phytoestrogens that soy does. You've Been Warned.

Look at phytoestrogens instead. The most common sources are soy products and flaxseed meal (which has about twice as much as soy does).

http://www.soyonlineservice.co.nz/04phytoestrogens.htm
http://www.soyonlineservice.co.nz/articles/phyto1.htm

Anecdote: flaxseed meal is increasingly used in pet food. When I was feeding my kennel a diet with a significant amount of flaxseed meal, I had a marked increase of certain types of birth defects (mainly some degree of failure of midline closure) AND a 50% miss rate on breedings. Since I've gone to a flax-free diet, the birth defects have gone away, and my conception rate is back to the species norm of 85-90%.

(Credential: I have almost 40 years professional experience in dogs.)

Look at phytoestrogens instead. The most common sources are soy products and flaxseed meal (which has about twice as much as soy does).

http://www.soyonlineservice.co.nz/04phytoestrogens.htm
http://www.soyonlineservice.co.nz/articles/phyto1.htm

Anecdote: flaxseed meal is increasingly used in pet food. When I was feeding my kennel a diet with a significant amount of flaxseed meal, I had a marked increase of certain types of birth defects (mainly some degree of failure of midline closure) AND a 50% miss rate on breedings. Since I've gone to a flax-free diet, the birth defects have gone away, and my conception rate is back to the species norm of 85-90%.

(Credential: I have almost 40 years professional experience in dogs.)