Foundation for Advancement in Cancer Therapy
Non-Toxic Biological Approaches to the Theories,
Treatments and Prevention of Cancer

2024
Our 53rd Year

Soy – Too Good to Be True By Brandon Finucan and Charlotte Gerson

In the Summer 1998 Cancer Forum (Vol. 15, No. 11112) we published an article from the November/December issue of Gerson Healing Newsletter on the negative aspects of soy called, “Are Soy Products Dangerous?” The following’ is another article from the Gerson Healing Newsletter on the subject because even though there has been “considerable research on the harmful substances within soybeans, you’ll be hard pressed to find articles today that claim soy is anything short of a miracle-food. As soy gains more and more popularity through industry advertising, we are moved once again to raise our voice of concern.” FACT shares this deep concern.

The Soybean Industry in America

In 1924 soybean production in the U.S. was only at 1.8 million acres harvested, but by 1954, the harvested acres grew to 18.9 million. Today, the soybean is America’s third largest crop (harvesting 72 million acres in 1998), supplying more than 50 percent of the world’s soybean demand.

Most of these beans are made into animal feed and are manuFACTured into soy oil for use as vegetable oil, margarine and shortening. Of the traditional uses for soy as a food, only soy sauce enjoys widespread consumption in the American diet. Tofu, measuring 90 percent of Asia’s use of the soybean, has gained more popularity in the U.S., but soy is still nowhere near a measurable component, of the average American dietor is it?

For more than 20 years now, the soy industry has concentrated on finding alternative uses and new markets for soybeans and soy byproducts. At your local supermarket, soy can now be found disguised as everything from soy cheese, milk, burgers and hot dogs, to ice cream, yogurt, vegetable oil, baby formula and flour (to name just a few). These are often marketed as low-fat, dairy-free, or as a high protein meat substitute for vegetarians. But soy isn’t always mentioned on the box cover. Today, an alarming 60% of the food on America’s supermarket shelves contains soy derivatives (i.e., soy flour, textured vegetable protein, partially hydrogenated soy bean oil, soy protein isolate). When you look at the ingredients list, and really look at the contents of the “Average American Diet,” from snack foods and fast foods to prepackaged frozen meals, soy plays a major role.

Where Does the Soybean Go Wrong?

Here at the Gerson Institute, we feel that any claimed positive aspects of the soybean are overshadowed by their potential for harm. Soybeans in FACT contain a large number of dangerous substances including potent enzyme inhibitors. These inhibitors block uptake of trypsin and other enzymes that the body needs for protein digestion. Normal cooking does not deactivate these harmful “antinutrients,” that can cause serious gastric distress, reduced protein digestion and can lead to chronic deficiencies in amino acid uptake.

Soy contains high amounts of phytic acid, also called phytates. This organic acid is present in the bran or hulls of all seeds and legumes, but none have the high level of phytates that soybeans do. These acids block the body’s uptake of essential minerals like calcium, magnesium, iron and especially zinc Adding to the high-phytate problem, soybeans are very resistant to phytate reducing techniques, such as long, slow cooking.

print(bar()); ?>

Beyond these, soybeans also contain hemagglutinin, a clot promoting substance that causes red blood cells to clump together. These clustered blood cells are unable to properly absorb oxygen for distribution to the body’s tissues, and cannot help in maintaining good cardiac health. Hemagglutinin and trypsin inhibitors are both “growth depressant” substances. Although the act of fermenting soybeans does deactivate both trypsin inhibitors and hemagglutinin, precipitation and cooking do not. Even though these enzyme inhibitors are reduced in levels within precipitated soy products like tofu, they are not altogether eliminated.

Only after a long period of fermentation (as in the creation of miso or tempeh) are the phytate and “antinutrient” levels of soybeans reduced making their nourishment available to the human digestive system. The high levels of harmful substances remaining in precipitated soy products leave their nutritional value questionable at best, and in the least, potentially harmful.

What About the Studies?

In recent years, several studies have been made regarding the soybean’s effect on human health. The results of those studies, largely underwritten by various FACTions of the soy industry, were of course overwhelmingly in favor of soy. The primary claims about soy’s health benefits are based purely on bad science. Although primary arguments for cancer patients to use soy focus on statistics showing low rates of breast, colon and prostate cancer among Asian people, there are obvious FACTs being utterly ignored.

While the studies boast that Asian women suffer far fewer cases of breast cancer than American women do, the hype neglects to point out that these Asian women eat a diet that is dramatically different than their American counterparts. The standard Asian diet consists of more natural products, far less fatty meat, greater amounts of vegetables and more fish. Their diets are also lower in chemicals and toxins, as they eat far fewer processed (canned, jarred, pickled, frozen) foods. It is likely these studies are influenced by the FACT that cancer rates rise among Asian people who move to the U.S. and adopt Americanized diets. Of course, this change of diet goes hand-in-hand with a dramatic shift in lifestyle. Ignoring the remarkable diet and lifestyle changes, to assume only that reduced levels of soy in these Americanized Asian diets is a primary FACTor in greater cancer rates is poor judgment, and as stated above, bad science. The changes of diet and lifestyle must be considered to reach the correct conclusion.

A widely circulated article, written by Jane E. Allen, AP Science Writer, titled “Scientists Suggest More Soy in Diet,” cites in the course of a symposium, numerous speakers discussing the probable advantages of soy under the title “Health Impact of Soy Protein.” However, the article states that the $50,000 symposium “was underwritten by Protein Technologies International of St. Louis, a DuPont subsidiary that makes soy protein!” In the course of the same symposium, Thomas Clarkson, professor of comparative medicine at Wake Forest University, states, “Current hormone replacement therapy has been a dismal failure from a public health point of view,” not because Premarin is known to cause uterine or other female organ cancers, but “because only 20 percent of the women who could benefit from it are taking it.”

Other popular arguments in support of soy state that fermented products, like tempeh or natto, contain high levels of vitamin B-12. However, these supportive arguments fail to mention that soy’s B-12 is an inactive B-12 analog, not utilized as a vitamin in the human body. Some researchers speculate this analog may actually serve to block the body’s B-12 absorption. It has also been found that allergic reactions to soybeans are far more common than to all other legumes. Even the American Academy of Pediatrics admits that early exposure to soy through commercial infant formulas, may be a leading cause of soy allergies among older children and adults.

In his classic book, A Cancer Therapy Results of 50 Cases (p.237), Dr. Gerson put “Soy and Soy Products” on the “FORBIDDEN” list of foods for Gerson Therapy patients. At the time, his greatest concerns were two items: the high oil content of soy and soy products, and the rather high rate of allergic reactions to soy. Soybeans can add as much as 9 grams of fat per serving, typically adding an average of 5 grams of fat per serving to an average American diet.

print(bar()); ?>

The Extraction Process

The processes which render the soybean “edible” are also the processes which render it “inedible.” In fermenting soybeans, the process entails that the beans be pureed and soaked in an alkaline solution. The pureed mixture is then heated to about 115°C (239°F.) inside a pressure cooker. This heating and scalding process destroys most, but not all, of the anti-nutrients. At the same time, it has the unwelcome effect of denaturing the proteins of the beans so they become very difficult to digest and greatly reduced in effectiveness. Unfortunately, the alkaline solution also produces a carcinogen, lysinealine, while it reduces the already low cystine content within the soybean. Cystine plays an essential role in liver detoxification, allowing our bodies to filter and eliminate toxins. Without proper amounts of cysteine, the protein complex of the soybean becomes useless, unless the diet is fortified with cystine-rich meat, egg, or dairy products and an option for Gerson patients.

To the soybean’s credit, they do contain large amounts of beneficial omega-3 fatty acids, but these are particularly susceptible to rancidity when subjected to high pressures and temperatures. Unfortunately, high pressure and temperature are required to remove soybean oil from the soybean.

Before soybeans are sent to your table, they undergo a rigorous process to strip them of their oil. Hexane or other solvents are first applied to help separate the oil from the beans, leaving trace amounts of these toxins in the commercial product Hexane by definition is: “any of five colorless, volatile, liquid hydrocarbons C6F114 of the paraffin series,” and cannot be the least bit beneficial in anyone’s diet After the oil is extracted, the defatted flakes are used to form the three basic soy protein products. With the exception of full-fat soy flour, all soybean products contain trace amounts of carcinogenic solvents.

Personal Experiences

The following letter was received in November 1998: “I have used soy milk for 12 years with no problems. About 9 months ago, I started to have heart palpitations. I thought maybe that I was in menopause, but I wasn’t. I added more potassium to my diet and magnesium and vitamin E. No change. I am already decaffeinated, but I also took all sugar out of my diet. I lost 25 pounds and felt great except for the palpitations. I tried hawthorn and garlic but nothing was helping. Recently I came down with acute bronchitis and could only drink water because even the soy milk made me have horrendous bouts of coughing. I realized that after a few days my heart palpitations had stopped. I didn’t think anything of it because it never occurred to me that soy was the culprit.

As soon as I started drinking it again, my heart went crazy. I went off it for a week and then changed brands. Within 30 minutes of drinking only 4 ounces of soy milk my heart was all over the place. I’ve noticed that it takes about 24 to 36 hours for my heart to settle down. I wondered if your research turned up anything like this in regard to soy. I know it is not within the definition of an allergy, but something is definitely going on. I called the manuFACTurer of the soy milk, but they were of no help. I am very upset because I only drink soy milk and water. I also use the soy milk to make protein shakes (with what else …but soy protein).”

In our November/December 1996 issue of the Gerson Healing Newsletter we described another case: a pregnant lady who looked very ill and was terribly deficient! She also described her son, age five, who had many allergies and infections both were using a good deal of soy in their diet I recommended that they discontinue the use of all soy products. At the time, I had only just run across this situation. However, a year later, I was in the same area for a lecture, and the lady invited me to dinner. She had cut out all soy products: her skin was now rosy, her face filled out, her sunken eyes normal, her black circles gone and her little boy, now six, was in greatly improved health.

Just last week, another interesting story carne to our attention. A patient at the Gerson Certified Hospital in Mexico told us of her son, now 25, who has total lack of hair (Alopecia) with the exception of eyebrows and eyelashes. She added that this started when he was just three years old. Since the mother asked me about this situation, I considered the problem for a moment. Then, looking at the parents who both have normal hair, I figured that the boy’s problem was most probably not genetic. So, I asked the mother if he used a lot of soy. She said, no. But then, after thinking about the question for a moment, she said that at about one year of age, the boy had many allergies, so she regularly fed him soy milk! I explained to her about the enzyme and nutrient blocking ability of soy and the likelihood of the soy milk being the cause of his condition starting at age three. Since we had just witnessed the case of a patient whose hair grew back on his bald pate after being bald for some 20 years, I cautiously suggested that a complete change of diet accompanied by intensive detoxification, may be able to overcome the problem.