Their "soy leghemoglobin" doesn't come from soy though. It comes from GMO Algae. Presumably they could reprogram that algae to produce a different hemoglobin-like molecule.
>Full Ingredient List:
>Water, Textured Wheat Protein, Coconut Oil, Potato Protein, Natural Flavors, 2% or less of: Leghemoglobin (soy), Yeast Extract, Salt, Soy Protein Isolate, Konjac Gum, Xanthan Gum, Thiamin (Vitamin B1), Zinc, Niacin, Vitamin B6, Riboflavin (Vitamin B2), Vitamin B12.
>Contains:
>Soy, Wheat
This contains soy. My comment stands.
Notice that all the "soy" falls in the "2% or less of" bucket. This is not the same as a soy burger. Have you eaten one?
> Those labels are because the compounds could trigger a soy allergy
...because it contains soy, which has negative effects on fertility. That was my whole point. So why change the subject?
From https://academic.oup.com/humrep/article/23/11/2584/2913898/S...:
This association was stronger at the higher end of the sperm concentration distribution suggesting that soy food intake may have stronger associations among men with normal or high sperm concentrations than among men with low sperm concentration. Also, soy food intake was more strongly inversely related to sperm concentration among overweight and obese men. Intake of soy foods or isoflavones was unrelated to the remaining semen analysis parameters examined.
>But high-temperature processing has the unfortunate side effect of so denaturing the other proteins in soy that they are rendered largely ineffective.23 That's why animals on soy feed need lysine supplements for normal growth.
>Nitrites, which are potent carcinogens, are formed during spray-drying, and a toxin called lysinoalanine is formed during alkaline processing.24 Numerous artificial flavorings, particularly MSG, are added to soy protein isolate and textured vegetable protein products to mask their strong "beany" taste and to impart the flavor of meat.25
>In feeding experiments, the use of SPI increased requirements for vitamins E, K, D, and B12 and created deficiency symptoms of calcium, magnesium, manganese, molybdenum, copper, iron, and zinc.26 Phytic acid remaining in these soy products greatly inhibits zinc and iron absorption; test animals fed SPI develop enlarged organs, particularly the pancreas and thyroid gland, and increased deposition of fatty acids in the liver.27
http://www.mercola.com/article/soy/avoid_soy.htm
I shouldn't even have to post about "Textured Wheat Protein" but it's essentially another denatured protein, one that is completely doused in glyphosate right before harvest..
Check out the chart on page two...
http://people.csail.mit.edu/seneff/ITX_2013_06_04_Seneff.pdf
These "vegan" foods are nowhere near healthy.
There's conflicting evidence about soy's health benefits, which is a sentence that is, generally speaking, just as true after a "s/soy/any_damn_food" operation. Nitrites are highly toxic in quantity, but in small quantity, they've been used in food processing since the Middle Ages. It's what you cure meat with. Most of the nitrites in your diet, though, are naturally occurring.
And while no one claims MSG has massive health benefits, it's been extremely well established that it's harmless. It's just a salt. I'm sure Doc Mercola will tell me the decades of tests that show it's safe are simply a sign that every first world health agency is in the pocket of Big Umami, but y'know, color me skeptical.
>When I say he's one of the folks who believe that fluoridation is a nefarious government conspiracy, I am not kidding.
Fluoride lowers IQ in children an average of 15 points, per Harvard meta-analysis.
https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/features/fluoride-children...
>researchers from Harvard School of Public Health (HSPH) and China Medical University in Shenyang for the first time combined 27 studies and found strong indications that fluoride may adversely affect cognitive development in children.
So... what exactly is he wrong about when it comes to fluoride?
You are blinded by your bias against this one Doctor, enough to miss the main points regarding why these foods are total shit.
No. Aside from the fact that meta-analyses are primarily a means of identifying areas for direct research because they have a strong tendency to magnify publication bias (among other problems), that's not what the cited piece concludes. Your own quote shows that the conclusion is much weaker, noting that the meta-analysis “found strong indications that fluoride may adversely affect cognitive development in children.”
Finding strong indications that it has a possibility (“may” ≠ “does”) of causing some adverse reaction is not the same as concluding that it does have any adverse impact, and even farther from any particular quantification of that impact. And the actual average result (which isn't a study conclusion on the actual impact) was 7, not 15 IQ points for “high flouride content”; to quote your source: “The average loss in IQ was reported as a standardized weighted mean difference of 0.45, which would be approximately equivalent to seven IQ points for commonly used IQ scores with a standard deviation of 15.”
You acknowledge that you got the number wrong, which is good, but the smaller problem. The bigger problem is that the number was not, in either case, an impact concluded by the meta-analyses, it was merely the average impact of high flouridation in the studies included.
> However, that means there are still considerable issues (both medical and ethical) with the mass-ingesting of fluoride
No, it doesn't. Again, the source you cite does not conclude that there is any adverse effect. The meta-analysis, according to it's authors, indicates only that there may be an adverse effect.
Even the follow-up study by the authors (linked from your source; meta-analyses rarely support strong conclusions about fact, but often provide direction for further research) seems to indicate some effect, especially at high dosage levels but again, mostly is an indicator for further research, not a basis for concluding a clearly quantified effect.
Without a qauntifiable effect tied to actual flouride levels, it's not clear if there is any probl with the actual flouridation practice in the United States. Almost every substance is harmful in excess, even ones where moderate amounts are better than none.
http://fluoridealert.org/studies/brain01/
If not, what would be?
While it's true that MSG is well-studied and about as well-established as safe as can be, “It’s just a salt” is, well, not support for it’s safety; potassium cyanide is also just a salt, and no one (sane, at least) is going to argue that it is safe to ingest.