5 ms·

What strong link? "[...] might decrease [...] might increase [...] may impact [...] it's not yet understood [...] there may be slight changes" does not suggest

by mftrhu 4y ago

What strong link? "[...] might decrease [...] might increase [...] may impact [...] it's not yet understood [...] there may be slight changes" does not suggest any sort of strong nor obvious link. > That an Asian persons body has had the time to adapt to Soy does not mean it's safe for westerners immediately, it could be, but it equally could not be. I'm sorry, what? I do not keep up with the research, so I must have missed the papers which proved that Asian people's bodies process phytoestrogens - which, I might add, usually act as estrogen antagonists if they even do anything - in a radically different way than westerners.

dijit 4y ago
Argument: “western people drank dairy for 10,000 years and soy for 50” To which someone adds: “Asian people at soy for 10,000 years and milk for 100” So my Response: “Asian people seem to be physiologically intolerant to milk, is it possible that Asian people are more tolerant to soy than western people in the same way that the inverse is true?” You: “MILK BAD SOY GOOD WHERE PROOF” Not trolling, really, But I feel like we’re following different interpretations of this thread.
- mftrhu 4y ago
  > “Asian people seem to be physiologically intolerant to milk, is it possible that Asian people are more tolerant to soy than western people in the same way that the inverse is true?” > You: > “MILK BAD SOY GOOD WHERE PROOF” While I'm sure that your skill at logical leaps must be impressive, and bring you a lot of joy, I would caution against relying on it overmuch: you just took a series of logical tumble-off-a-cliff. The very premise - "beware of soy, for it might be to blame for low T in the west!" - is nonsensical, like using old papers loaded with "might" and "we don't understand things yet" to assert the existence of a strong and obvious link between the two. "Western people have only been drinking soy for 50 years" is also an incredibly weak argument, and jumping from that to "maybe Asian people just tolerate soy more" is - absent even minimal research that would at least suggest the possible existence of such a phenomena - just a way to castle up, and to refuse admitting that the argument(s) that led to this were flawed.
  - dijit 4y ago
    I’m asking that we don’t exclusively feed a diet of soy to developing people until we understand it better. I’m not saying soy is bad, I’m saying I have an anecdote in my life very recently that indicates it can mess with hormones of adults and that the science doesnt seem to be very conclusive yet. That this is controversial is really scary; people really want soy to be without fault, and that’s fine, but I want to understand the health impact before we give it to developing humans. I’m not against soy as a premise, I even eat a serious amount of soy in my own diet. However we understand the impact of dairy (not saying it’s better, but at least understand, which was my only positive point about dairy)

by mftrhu 4y ago

dijit 4y ago

Argument: “western people drank dairy for 10,000 years and soy for 50” To which someone adds: “Asian people at soy for 10,000 years and milk for 100” So my Response: “Asian people seem to be physiologically intolerant to milk, is it possible that Asian people are more tolerant to soy than western people in the same way that the inverse is true?” You: “MILK BAD SOY GOOD WHERE PROOF” Not trolling, really, But I feel like we’re following different interpretations of this thread.

mftrhu 4y ago
> “Asian people seem to be physiologically intolerant to milk, is it possible that Asian people are more tolerant to soy than western people in the same way that the inverse is true?” > You: > “MILK BAD SOY GOOD WHERE PROOF” While I'm sure that your skill at logical leaps must be impressive, and bring you a lot of joy, I would caution against relying on it overmuch: you just took a series of logical tumble-off-a-cliff. The very premise - "beware of soy, for it might be to blame for low T in the west!" - is nonsensical, like using old papers loaded with "might" and "we don't understand things yet" to assert the existence of a strong and obvious link between the two. "Western people have only been drinking soy for 50 years" is also an incredibly weak argument, and jumping from that to "maybe Asian people just tolerate soy more" is - absent even minimal research that would at least suggest the possible existence of such a phenomena - just a way to castle up, and to refuse admitting that the argument(s) that led to this were flawed.
- dijit 4y ago
  I’m asking that we don’t exclusively feed a diet of soy to developing people until we understand it better. I’m not saying soy is bad, I’m saying I have an anecdote in my life very recently that indicates it can mess with hormones of adults and that the science doesnt seem to be very conclusive yet. That this is controversial is really scary; people really want soy to be without fault, and that’s fine, but I want to understand the health impact before we give it to developing humans. I’m not against soy as a premise, I even eat a serious amount of soy in my own diet. However we understand the impact of dairy (not saying it’s better, but at least understand, which was my only positive point about dairy)