Soy

[Anonymous No.14601565]

Does it or does it not increase estrogen or reduce testosterone?

[Anonymous No.14601593]

>>14601565
there is more to it than just that. Chinese diets for males historically was low portioned and high in onions but yet the most fertile in terms of population growth

[Anonymous No.14601599]

>>14601593

^
*high in onions

[Anonymous No.14601669]

>>14601565
Plastics + Porn Use + Unhealthy Diet + No Exercise + Drugs + Over Consumption have contributed to much of the decrease of testosterone and child like women behavior we see in men today. There is no direct evidence that onions causes decrease in testosterone. There is direct evidence that the above factors do. I'd be more worried about them.

[Anonymous No.14601676]

>>14601669
where's your direct evidence?

[Anonymous No.14601881]

>>14601565
It doesnt.
Estrogen enriched cow milk might, but even that seems doubtful

[Anonymous No.14601955]

>>14601565
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phytoestrogen

[Anonymous No.14602282]

>>14601565
It does not. It contains "phytoestrogen", not true estrogen. It's harmless. The biggest source of estrogen is milk. Cow milk is so fucking high in estrogen I'm surprised that "men" who drink a lot of it haven't all turned into trannies yet.

[Anonymous No.14602344]

>>14601565
>Does it or does it not increase estrogen or reduce testosterone?
Yes.

[Anonymous No.14602347]

>>14602282
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18650557/
>Conclusions: These data suggest that higher intake of onions foods and onions isoflavones is associated with lower sperm concentration.

[Anonymous No.14602548]

>>14602347
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19819436/
>Conclusion(s): Consumption of s o y protein of low or high isoflavone content does not adversely affect semen quality in a sample of healthy adult men.
Inconclusive data, needs more study. Simple as.

[Anonymous No.14602560]

>>14602548
>Inconclusive data, needs more study. Simple as.
But >>14602282 said it was harmless. Now we're at "we don't know"?

[Anonymous No.14602570]

>>14602548
Did you look at the numbers from that study? Sperm volume, concentration, and motility fell significantly in both s o y groups, but especially in the high s o y group.

https://www.fertstert.org/article/S0015-0282(09)03594-8/fulltext

[Anonymous No.14602582]

>>14602560
Phytoestrogen is not the same as isoflavones. Completely different issue. Phytoestrogens have enough data to indicate they are most probably not analogous enough to mammalian estrogen to cause disruptions. Nothing in science is known for a fact with 100% certainty, we only have best guesses so far with backing evidence. But that evidence can be nullified by even better, newer evidence. Besides all of this is pointless. If you're concerned for your health because of s o y, don't look up what grilling food does to you. It's a confirmed class 1 carcinogen, any amount of it. Literally only steamed food is safe-ish to consume. And don't look up what higher CO2 levels, smog and pollution in cities does to your health as well. There are many many far more dangerous things to you than s o y. So just eat it if you like it.
>>14602570
I honestly don't care either way. I just linked that study to show it's inconclusive for now. Unless you can find a couple of meta studies, then it might be more interesting.

[Anonymous No.14602600]

>>14602582
>I just linked that study to show it's inconclusive for now.
Fair enough, but authors tend to fudge their statements based on the reason they were investigating something. It's why you need to look at the data to see if their statements agree with the data.

>If you're concerned for your health because of s o y, don't look up what grilling food does to you. It's a confirmed class 1 carcinogen, any amount of it. Literally only steamed food is safe-ish to consume. And don't look up what higher CO2 levels, smog and pollution in cities does to your health as well.
I steam almost everything that I don't consume raw, and I avoid living in cities. The bigger issue with s o y is it's now being included in almost all packaged foods. I doubt it's bad when traditionally prepared as tofu or natto or miso.

[Anonymous No.14602619]

>>14602600
>It's why you need to look at the data to see if their statements agree with the data.
True, I just don't care enough about this issue to spend that much time on it. Also on your pic the results in both at day 57 are extremely close. I don't think the difference is big enough to draw the conclusion of s o y being bad for sperm health.
>it's now being included in almost all packaged foods
Why are you eating packaged foods if you're concerned about your health? I get my s o y straight from the farmer and cook with it myself.

[Anonymous No.14602647]

>>14601565

Onions contains the same nutrients as beef & milk and is a direct threat to the cattle industry because onions is more efficiently farmed. That is what is behind the meme. It's that simple.

[Anonymous No.14602660]

>>14602619
>Also on your pic the results in both at day 57 are extremely close.
There's a 20-30% drop in some of them (from 330 to 265, and from 204 to 131). The control group didn't have more than a 5% change in any category. And to your point about packaged food, I don't consume it, but most of the population does.

[Anonymous No.14603018]

[Anonymous No.14603020]

>>14601676
Studies have been done on infants exposed to the shit in plastics and they found strong evidence that it shrinks their dicks and balls

[Anonymous No.14603145]

>>14603020
>the
What is your excuse for your small dick? You were trying to fuck your Ken Doll when you were a wee babbby the plastics shrunk your micro penis to a nano penis

[Anonymous No.14603244]

>>14602660
That drop is irrelevant. It got high at day 1 because they started to eat a shitload of it all of a sudden, but over time the body got accustomed to it. Only the results at day 57 are relevant. That's like measuring blood levels of B12 right after taking an injection of 5,000mcg. Ofc the level will be sky high. But that data is irrelevant, you want to know how the body adapts to it long term. And long term s o y has no effect, according to that table.

[Anonymous No.14603707]

>>14603244
>It got high at day 1 because they started to eat a shitload of it all of a sudden
No. Initial measurements were taken while fasted, prior to eating a shitload.

>Fasting body weight was measured on study days 1, 15, 29, 43, and 57 of each treatment period using a digital scale. Body composition was measured on days 1 and 57 of each treatment period using bioelectrical impedance analysis (BodyStat 1500; BodyStat Ltd., Detroit, MI).

>Only the results at day 57 are relevant.
>That's like measuring blood levels of B12 right after taking an injection of 5,000mcg.
Except, as established, the first measurements were prior to consuming the isoflavones.

>And long term s o y has no effect, according to that table.
According to that table, it caused a significant drop in several parameters, and the drop was dose-dependent. The fact that the control group had lower starting numbers isn't relevant, they maintained stable numbers throughout the 57 days, but the experimental groups did not. The change is what's relevant.