Hyvin
A Natural Health and Wellness Blog

Here is a commentary by Dr. Stephen Chaney, professor of nutrition, biochemistry and biophysics at the Univ. of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, medical school. Dr. Chaney is a warm, gracious man (yes, I know him personally ;-)) and a cancer researcher who has published 80 papers in peer-reviewed medical journals as well as two chapters on nutrition for one of the leading biochemistry textbooks for medical students. His informed perspective is always helpful in separating fact from fiction in the news reports about supplements and dietary recommendations.

Part of the Story

You’ve been hearing a lot of negative news stories about supplements and standard dietary recommendations lately. They are what I call “part of the story.” What I’d like to share is what Paul Harvey calls “the rest of the story.” But first a bit of perspective:

You may have noticed lately that the news media never let the facts get in the way of a good story. That’s because the role of a journalist is to sell newspapers or increase the ratings of their radio or TV station. The journalist craves controversy because that generates interest, which leads to follow-up articles and TV reports.

Scientists also crave controversy to a certain extent. There is no fame in being the 10th person to prove a widely accepted belief. The recognition comes from being the first person to disprove a widely held belief and developing an alternative hypothesis. However, scientists know the rules of the game. That is why you always hear scientists saying that “further studies are needed.” We’re not trying to assure job security. We just know that every study is based on underlying assumptions that may ultimately prove to be false.

Therefore, we don’t want to make dietary recommendations to the public until those recommendations are based on at least 5 or 10 independent studies that all come to the same conclusion. Unfortunately, journalists don’t understand the rules of the game and enjoy creating controversy (see above).

With that perspective behind us, I would like to comment on some of the recent news headlines.

Soy doesn’t decrease the risk of heart disease: What the study actually showed is that adding soy protein or soy isoflavone pills to the diet did not significantly reduce cholesterol levels if nothing else in the diet changed. That is not news.

If you took the time to read down to the end of the article (which, of course, was on the inside page of the paper), you would have read that the experts stated that “using soy protein in place of some of the high fat animal protein in a typical American diet does reduce cholesterol.” That is what we have always been saying and, in fact, forms the basis for the American Heart Association and National Institutes of Health recommendations that “soy protein is part of a heart healthy diet.”

The real take-home message of this article and the message that the scientists were trying to get across (before it was distorted by the journalists) is that you won’t lower cholesterol (and thus decrease your risk of heart disease) by simply sprinkling soy protein on your Big Mac or taking a soy isoflavone pill along with your Big Mac.

[…]

Calcium supplements don’t prevent bone fractures due to osteoporosis: These headlines were particularly curious because when you read the article the experts were quoted as saying that calcium supplementation did actually decrease the incidence of hip fractures, but not some of the other fractures tested.

The experts went on to make the point of saying that the calcium supplements were effective at preventing bone fractures in the sub-group of women who were at highest risk and that the inclusion of both high risk and low risk women in the study confounded the results. Loosely translated this means that if you are starting with dense bones entering menopause (usually because of a combination of genetics, good diet and exercise), the addition of calcium supplements may not be necessary, at least in the short run. However, if you are entering menopause with relatively low bone density, calcium supplementation can be very important.

Finally, the experts were quoted as saying that the calcium supplements worked much better for those who took them regularly than for those who didn’t. That comes under the category of “Duh!”

All of the experts concluded by saying that they still recommended that post-menopausal women get at least 1000-1200 mg of calcium per day. Even if you are taking bone-protective medications, the recommendations are still for 1000 mg of calcium per day.

[…]

Saw Palmetto is ineffective at preventing prostate problems: Suffice it to say that the lead author of this study acknowledged that people shouldn’t change their use of saw palmetto based on his study alone, because its results were opposite to those reported by dozens of earlier studies. Clearly more studies are needed (that’s the scientist in me) because this study may be a fluke.

Low fat diets are ineffective at preventing cancer and heart disease in women: Again, even the headlines were misleading because the study did show that low fat diets slightly decreased the risk of breast cancer.

However, the point to be made here is really that the concept of “low fat diet” has always been an oversimplification. When nutrition experts introduced the concept of low fat diets they were visualizing the American population replacing high saturated fat animal foods with more fresh vegetables, fresh fruits, whole grains, seeds and nuts. What many Americans did, however, was replace the fatty foods with wonder bread, pasta and twinkies.

The real take home message from this study should be to reduce the fat content of the diet slightly, focusing on healthy fats (olive oil, fish oils and unmodified vegetable oils) and healthy carbohydrates (vegetables, fruits and whole grains with a high glycemic index).

Stephen G. Chaney, PhD

Perhaps you’ve been exposed to some of the discussion about the propriety of soy for women at risk for breast cancer. There are so many benefits to high-quality soy protein. This recent research provides assurance that consuming soy protein is the right thing.

Soy May Help Prevent Breast Cancer in Older Women
January 16, 2006
The New York Times News Service

A diet rich in soy, with its natural plant estrogens or isoflavones, may help protect postmenopausal women with relatively high levels of estrogen from getting breast cancer, preliminary research suggests.

Women past menopause who have low estrogen levels probably won’t derive the same risk reduction, but they can probably be assured the soy isn’t harmful in terms of breast cancer risk, said Charles E. Wood, an instructor of pathology at Wake Forest University.

“If you have high estrogen, the isoflavones could block the adverse effects of your body’s own estrogen (on the breast tissue),” said Wood, who based his views on his team’s study involving postmenopausal monkeys, published in the Jan. 15 issue of Cancer Research.

Wood’s study adds new fuel to the ongoing debate surrounding soy’s effect on cancer risk. “There’s been a good deal of confusing information, particularly with soy’s effect on (breast) cancer risk,” said Wood.

“Most population-based studies have found that women who consume lots of soy are less likely to develop breast cancer,” he said. “A number of studies have been done, and they generally show a positive effect or no effect.”

But in lab studies, Wood said, isoflavones from soy — which have a structure similar to estrogen — have been found to stimulate breast cancer cells grown in a petri dish and induced estrogen-like effects.

“Our hypothesis was that the amount of estrogen in the body may help determine whether soy was having good or bad effects,” he said. “If you have very low estrogen, high doses of soy could have adverse estrogen-like effects on your reproductive tissue. If you had high estrogen, the isoflavones could block the adverse effects of your body’s own estrogen. That was our working hypothesis.”

Wood and his team used a postmenopausal monkey model. They first selected out a high-estrogen group of monkeys and a low-estrogen group. Next, they fed each group four different diets for 16 weeks each, along with a high or a low dose of estrogen. The diets included either no isoflavones; 60 milligrams of isoflavones (similar to the typical Asian diet); 120 milligrams (highest amount that can be obtained via diet alone); or 240 milligrams (levels that must be obtained via supplements).

Next, Wood’s team measured how the diets affected so-called “markers” for breast cancer risk, such as breast cell proliferation. “No effect of the isoflavones was seen in the low-estrogen animals,” he said.

In contrast, among the high-estrogen groups the researchers observed more breast cell proliferation when isoflavones were NOT added to the diet, and when they were added in smaller doses. High levels of the isoflavones tended to block the effect of estrogen on breast tissue in the high-estrogen animals. The strongest effects were seen at 240 milligrams daily, Wood said.

“In the postmenopausal period, women with high natural estrogen levels have higher breast cancer risk,” he said. So the isoflavones may help reduce risk in those who need it most. These women with high estrogen levels may get the most benefit from isoflavones in soy in terms of cancer risk reduction, Wood said.

“Isoflavones may connect with cell receptors normally reserved for estrogen,” he speculated, thus reducing the breast’s exposure to estrogen, thereby decreasing cancer risk.

Wood stopped short of giving dietary advice, only noting that the topic warrants further study in humans.

Another expert praised the study and said it gives women reassurance. “This study is basically coming down on the side of, ‘Do not worry about the effect of estrogen on the breasts of postmenopausal women,”‘ said Mindy Kurzer, a professor of nutrition at the University of Minnesota, who has published on the topic of soy intake. “I think it’s an excellent study.”

The study does have its limitations, she said — most notably the fact that it was conducted in animals, not humans. However, “the monkey is the absolutely best animal model for this kind of study,” Kurzer said, because its physiology is so close to that of humans.

The finding that there was virtually no effect of soy in the low-estrogen group is also good news when it comes to breast cancer risk, she added. “The concern was that the phytoestrogens (isoflavones) might mimic estrogen when estrogen is not around.”

Soy is considered good for building bones and good for heart health, Kurzer said, as well as for relieving hot flashes during menopause.

Copyright 2006 The New York Times News Service. All rights reserved.

One of my four sons fancies himself a would-be vegetarian. I sometimes think that if I enjoyed cooking and being creative in the kitchen, I would consider his position more seriously. This information certainly makes me think…

Here are 7 interesting did-you-know facts about soy and animal protein I’ve come across from various sources:

• A complete protein containing all of the 9 essential amino acids is essential for long-term human health. It’s not the protein that is important; it’s the amino acid content of the protein that is important. If one essential amino acid is missing, the immune system can be depressed 30%, and many important body functions are delayed or stopped.
• Animal protein does not contain all of these essential amino acids in any one serving. And not all soybeans are created equal: quality and amino acid content will vary based on soil conditions, and variable growing and harvest conditions. Therefore, the benefits provided by the nine essential amino acids is dependent on the verification of amino acid content in each batch of soybeans by the manufacturers of our soy foods.
• Amino acids are very sensitive to heat. In some studies, cooking protein has been shown to destroy up to 50% of some essential amino acids. Meat has to be cooked to be safe to eat, of course. Raw soybean foods, however, retain these amino acids, and enzymes in the food essential for protein utilization.
• Phytochemical compounds called isoflavones, which are essential for maximum human health, are not found in animal protein. Although they are not vitamins or minerals, scientists believe these plant compounds show much promise in cancer prevention, bone health, cholesterol reduction and balancing hormones. These elements are present in soy protein products that have been processed in such a way as to preserve them. For instance, crushed soy flakes need to be water washed; alcohol washing, which is commonly used, destroys isoflavone content up to 88%!
• Animal protein is much harder to digest than vegetable protein. Since many people have digestive difficulties, protein that is not thoroughly digested is very challenging to the kidneys. Tip: Powdered protein is in a predigested state and is the best overall protein source to choose.
• Meat contains a more-than-desirable amount of saturated fat and cholesterol. A soy protein drink mix, on the other hand, is easily digestible, very low in saturated fat, contains no cholesterol, and quickly absorbs into the blood.
• Whole soy beans are high in plant fat. If soybeans are roasted to eat as soy nuts, the heat alters the fat and makes it a trans-fatty acid, which causes both cancer and heart disease. As roasted soy nuts sit on the shelf or in the cupboard in storage, the oils are becoming more and more rancid and carcinogenic. AVOID roasted soy beans.

Thankfully, there’s an easy way to make sure you receive all the benefits of soy protein. My family uses and recommends a soy drink mix which provides all nine essential amino acids, is water-washed, and uses low-heat processing. Plus, it’s easy and quick to mix up for myself or the kids, it tastes good, and it truly does give us, as the name says, energy!