I love how he proves his case by stating " research shows" if this guy hopes to have any credibility at all instead of being seen as a laughing stock, he needs to cite his sources.
Now, obviously this is a stretch at best. But, just to clarify things a bit:
Soy contains chemicals called phytoestrogens. These mimic the properties of endogenous estrogens, except they are weaker than natural estrogens. Now in women, who we all know are loaded to the brim with estrogens, the result is a decreased level of activity of estrogen. Since estrogens are linked to breast cancer there is some evidence of lower rates of breast cancer in soy consumers. In Japan for instance, there are lower rates of breast cancer and that has in part been attributed to soy. This I know for sure, I was taught this in one of my classes this year.
This next part is just pure speculation, guided by reason and my schooling of course. The problem is when you put phytoestrogens in a male, where there isn't very much estrogen at all, phytoestrogens will increase the overall level of activity.
It's your classic 'agonist + partial agonist' relationship. Estrogen is the agonist, phytoestrogens are the partial agonist.
Now, you couple this with theories of the development of homosexuality being related to inappropriate levels of the sex hormones and there you have it. Due to the fact that soy is found in infant formula, and the vulnerability of the infant to any chemicals that may harm their developing brain, you get this theory.
Hope that made sense.
For the record I am not advocating what was said by wnd, just arguing that it is remotely feasible and that homosexuality has not been arbitrarily assigned to soy.
but we both know that sex hormones causing homosexuality is quite the stretch.
Actually, all the evidence I've ever seen (and I've been reading about this subject for many years) seems to suggest that hormones have a direct relationship to sexual orientation.
5 Comments:
I love how he proves his case by stating " research shows" if this guy hopes to have any credibility at all instead of being seen as a laughing stock, he needs to cite his sources.
Now, obviously this is a stretch at best. But, just to clarify things a bit:
Soy contains chemicals called phytoestrogens. These mimic the properties of endogenous estrogens, except they are weaker than natural estrogens. Now in women, who we all know are loaded to the brim with estrogens, the result is a decreased level of activity of estrogen. Since estrogens are linked to breast cancer there is some evidence of lower rates of breast cancer in soy consumers. In Japan for instance, there are lower rates of breast cancer and that has in part been attributed to soy. This I know for sure, I was taught this in one of my classes this year.
This next part is just pure speculation, guided by reason and my schooling of course. The problem is when you put phytoestrogens in a male, where there isn't very much estrogen at all, phytoestrogens will increase the overall level of activity.
It's your classic 'agonist + partial agonist' relationship. Estrogen is the agonist, phytoestrogens are the partial agonist.
Now, you couple this with theories of the development of homosexuality being related to inappropriate levels of the sex hormones and there you have it. Due to the fact that soy is found in infant formula, and the vulnerability of the infant to any chemicals that may harm their developing brain, you get this theory.
Hope that made sense.
For the record I am not advocating what was said by wnd, just arguing that it is remotely feasible and that homosexuality has not been arbitrarily assigned to soy.
but we both know that sex hormones causing homosexuality is quite the stretch.
Actually, all the evidence I've ever seen (and I've been reading about this subject for many years) seems to suggest that hormones have a direct relationship to sexual orientation.
So in a round about way, you agree with this theory?
That soy makes children gay?
No.
Post a Comment
<< Home