Deadly Harvest: The Intimate Relationship Between Our Heath and Our Food (28 page)

Soy is loaded with antinutrients, such as genistein, daidzein, trypsin inhibitors, allergens, and phytoestrogens. The wonders of marketing have turned these drawbacks into advantages: women are sold soy as a remedy for female conditions such as hot flashes and PMS. It is even sold as having anti-cancer properties when in fact it increases the risk of uterine cancer
¹⁷¹
and breast cancer.
¹⁷²
Soy gives you allergies: over 16 allergens have been identified, of which at least three are considered “severe.”
¹⁷³
Soy’s antinutrients genistein and daidzein attack thyroid function,
¹⁷⁴
which can lead to goiter and, in extreme cases, thyroid cancer.

Soy gives you brain atrophy: the more people eat soy bean curds (tofu), for example, the more likely they are to have senile dementia in later life. Dr. Lon White, a researcher on aging, studied Japanese Americans in Hawaii and found that consumption of only two portions of tofu a week raises the chances of getting dementia by 50% compared to those who consume no tofu at all.
¹⁷⁵
Here is a probable explanation why, more than anyone else, the tofu-eating Okinawans lose their mental faculties in old age.

Soy also disrupts gastric function. Trypsin inhibitors disrupt the pancreas, causing it to secrete out-of-control quantities of cholecystokinin (a gastric hormone).
¹⁷⁶
The result is withering of the pancreas and even cancer.

Soy is not good for babies. New Zealand researcher Cliff Irvine finds that babies fed on soy-based formula receive the adult equivalent of five birth control pills per day.
¹⁷⁷
Children of both sexes suffer disproportionately from extreme emotional behavior, asthma, immune system problems, pituitary insufficiency, thyroid disorders, and irritable bowel syndrome.
¹⁷⁸
Soy-fed baby boys sometimes fail to develop proper male traits later in life; girls can enter puberty earlier than normal.
¹⁷⁹
In a study of over 13,000 schoolchildren in Britain, researchers found that children who were fed soy-based formula as babies were 2.5 times more likely to suffer peanut allergy than other children.
¹⁸⁰
The New Zealand Government already issued a warning in 1998 about the use of soy in infant formula. Britain’s Food Standards Agency (FSA) raised the alarm in 2003 about feeding soy to babies.
¹⁸¹
It calls upon the Department of Health to revise its guidelines to say that soy-based infant formulas be fed to infants only when the doctor says it is safe to do so. They cite one study where such babies were five times more likely to have genital abnormalities.

The peanut is now one of the most prevalent allergenic foods, having shown a notable increase in recent years.
¹⁸²
It is probably not a coincidence that mothers have been increasingly using soy formula over recent years. It is now estimated that 6% to 8% of children, and 2% of adults, suffer from these allergies. About 30,000 cases of anaphylaxis (extreme sensitive reaction) occur annually, resulting in 2,000 hospitalizations and 200 deaths.
¹⁸³

Because of their antinutrients, legumes—and soy, in particular—are not miracle foods. They are beans to which humans have never become naturally adapted, and it matters. Their anti-nutrients are diverse kinds of poisons or toxins that disrupt many bodily processes, undermining our health in ways never before suspected. Since they work slowly and in the background, it is only recently that these harmful properties are being uncovered.

Sugar

In just the last three centuries, humans have dramatically increased consumption of this totally new food—sugar. Sugar consumption contributes to dysfunctional blood sugar control and all the degenerative diseases that follow: obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, stroke, arthritis, osteoporosis, and many more. Dr. William Grant estimates that sugar is killing 150,000 Americans a year.
¹⁸⁴
In addition, sugar is empty calories—it provides nothing in the way of micronutrients and it displaces traditional nutritious foods.

Sugar (sucrose) is, of course, a naturally occurring substance. Nevertheless, many health-conscious people think that there is something unnatural about it and choose to sweeten with “natural” honey or maple syrup. But consumption of these sources of sweetness is tiny compared to that of sugar. However, even here there is no escape: maple syrup is at least 90% sucrose
¹⁸⁵
and has a “bad” glycemic index.
¹⁸⁶
The composition of honey is different and varies more widely. It is composed mainly of the sugars fructose (48% to 67%), glucose (38% to 48%) and maltose (3% to 15%). Commercial, blended honey has a “bad” glycemic index of 62 to 72.

However, Professor Jennie Brand-Miller has studied Australian eucalyptus honey, where the bees collected the nectar only from specific flowers. She finds an extreme case of a low–glycemic index honey obtained from the yellow box flower: it has a GI of only 35 and an insulin index of only 40.
¹⁸⁷
This honey is particularly rich in the low-glycemic sugar, fructose. As such, it hovers on the borderline of “favorable” carbohydrate and has a “normal” insulin index. This is the way of the future, where foods like honey from particular flowers will be labeled with their glycemic index, enabling the consumer to make informed choices.

Beverages

Beer is brewed using the sugars from malted barley, so there is a percentage of the highly glycemic sugar, maltose. There is usually about 4 grams per 100 ml, which translates to about 3 teaspoons of sugar per 12 ounce can. Beer is in itself a “bad” carbohydrate with a high glycemic index. That is why big beer drinkers tend to suffer from the various sugar diseases—and put on a beer belly—when wine drinkers do not.

Dry wine, such as Bordeaux, is not glycemic. In particular, red wine contains a number of antioxidants like tannins and resveratrol. Dr. Serge Renaud, after numerous studies and analyses, came to the conclusion that it was these antioxidants in red wine that preserved the Toulousains from heart disease. So, this is perhaps the final element in explaining the French Paradox.

Regular carbonated drinks contain high levels of sugar: a can of cola contains 5 teaspoons of sugar. Carbonated drinks of this nature are “bad” carbohydrates. There is a further drawback with colas—they are rich in phosphoric acid, and high phosphoric acid consumption upsets the normal functioning of the parathyroid gland. Because parathyroid hormone regulates bone building, cola consumption has the net effect of demineralizing the bones.

Tea, whether black or green, contains a wide range of “background” micronutrients. Many studies have shown that tea helps combat cancer,
¹⁸⁸
heart disease,
¹⁸⁹
heart attacks,
¹⁹⁰
hardening of the arteries,
¹⁹¹
and many other conditions. Coffee, particularly the weak American coffee, has no particular virtues or vices. Fruit juices are almost always glycemic, which is their big drawback.

PUTTING THE SCIENTIFIC CLUES TOGETHER

We have looked at various extremes of lifestyle around the world, from the Eskimo to the Okinawan. We learn from the Eskimo that a low–plant food diet is harmful but one high in essential fatty acids (particularly with the omega-6 to omega-3 ratio in balance) is healthful. The Eskimo does not suffer from cardiovascular diseases, but he does suffer from osteoporosis and premature aging due to his highly acidic, low-micronutrient diet. The Japanese, Cretans, and Okinawans are getting a lot right. The pointers are all toward a low calorie intake, a low fat intake (but sufficient intake of essential fatty acids), a low starch intake, a good intake of plant food, but low or zero intake of dairy products and red farmed meat.

In the biochemistry section, we saw how foods that spike blood sugar are bad for our bodies. They lead to high cholesterol, poor bone-building, cardiovascular disease, and cancers. We saw how the essential fatty acids omega-3 and omega-6 produce powerful hormones that affect the proper working of our bodies. Salt and its relationship to potassium intake is a fundamental factor affecting the efficiency of our very cells. In the segment on acid/alkali balance, we saw how acid-forming foods now dominate our Western diets. This too provides problems for our bodies, leading to kidney stones, bone demineralization, and stressed-out organs, such as the lymphatic system, liver, and pancreas.

We have learned the lesson, too, that it is impossible to second guess the way our bodies work. It would be wise to avoid the temptation to micromanage its internal processes—just give it the right fuel and let it manage matters for itself.

We looked at our digestive system and featured a much neglected area: colon health. By understanding what foods nourish friendly gut flora, we obtain strong clues to the kinds of residues we should be sending down there. Nature intended the incredibly delicate lining of the gut to resist a great deal of wear and tear, but the gut is defenseless against some of the residues we send down. They are highly aggressive to the gut lining and destroy its ability to keep bad agents out of the bloodstream.

We also looked at two other interesting aspects: the immature or baby digestive system and the phenomenon of food combining. Babies have digestive arrangements which nature designed to work on mother’s milk; adult digestive systems are not designed to handle milk. We found that the digestive system works fine on the two food groups present in our ancestral food supply. The introduction of new foods groups, notably starchy foods, dairy, and many modern fruits poses digestive problems both when they are eaten in combination with each other and also with the ancestral groups.

We also looked at our modern food supply. Until very recently, we ignored many straws in the wind because they did not fit into our Western cultural preconceptions. For instance, we think most peoples around the world are abnormal because milk makes them feel bad. The milk sugar, lactose, gives them allergic reactions, such as diarrhea, rashes, and headaches, and doctors say that they are “lactose intolerant.” This is a looking-glass view of the world. Most peoples of the world are lactose intolerant because it is
normal
; even the San bushmen are lactose intolerant. In spite of the blandishments to consume milk “to build strong bones,” milk consumption actually destroys bones.

Celiac disease is an allergic reaction to gluten, a compound found in cereals. We think that it is a “disease” because we cannot imagine that humans are not supposed to be eating grains. However, we now know that it is
normal
to react badly to cereal gluten.

Many plants contain poisons that the human body does not know how to handle. This fact gives us strong clues as to the kinds of foods that are right for humans. This leads to another surprise: legumes such as lentils, soy, and other beans contain antinutrients that undermine our health in many subtle ways; the same applies to potatoes and grains. Nature did not design humans to consume legumes, potatoes, or grains.

On the other hand, the body does need a good supply of micronutrients: not just the few dozen “classic” micronutrients, but tens of thousands of “background” micronutrients. Non-starchy plant foods and fruits supply these in abundance, in the variety needed and in ways where they pull together as a team.

This overview of the science gives us the main signposts, but when it comes to food choices, we need to have a knowledge of the details as well. Our ancient ancestors had the skills to survive in the jungle. They knew which mushrooms were poisonous and when a tree would be fruiting. We will need to learn the same level of skill when navigating our way through the supermarket jungle today. However, we can finally declare that we have enough evidence to describe the basic specification for the diet that is right for the human species. That is, we can now write the “Owner’s Manual.”

Chapter 6

The Owner’s Manual

At the beginning of this book, we painted a picture of our naturally adapted lifestyle. We saw how our ancient environment conditioned our bodies—and our very natures—for life on the savannas of east Africa. We called this lifestyle the “Savanna Model” and outlined how our ancient ancestors fed themselves for thousands of generations. This outline gives us the key to how we should be feeding ourselves today.

It’s as if our bodies are an incredibly complex machine for which we have lost the operating instructions or “Owner’s Manual.” We can visualize the Owner’s Manual as an ancient parchment that generations of scribes have overwritten many times. By carefully clearing away the more recent layers, we can rediscover the original scripture. The purpose of subsequent chapters was to explore these newer layers and find out how they came to be there. By this means, we reveal the underlying message.

In chapter 2, we saw how the naturally adapted feeding pattern changed dramatically with the farming revolution 11,000 years ago. Governments intervene to regulate our food supply with the laudable intention of keeping it “fit” for “human consumption,” but they’ve only had partial success. Governments also took it upon themselves to advise us how and what to eat, but much of this advice is flawed. In chapter 3, using our own, redefined food groups as a framework, we looked at the history of our current food supply. This examination highlighted just how far we have distanced ourselves from our ancestral origins and the consequences of this departure. In chapters 4 and 5, we looked at how other populations (Eskimos, Japanese, Cretans) around the world fare with their different diets. We put the microscope on how our bodies and biochemistry operate. By seeing what works well—and what works badly—we get strong pointers to the ideal feeding patterns for the human organism.