In fetal development, the default is being female.
He doesn't support this statement, but unlike every other unsupported statement in this "piece," it is actually true. Until bathed in testosterone at the behest of the Y chromosome, the proto-sexual organs don't differentiate to male. But here is the thing that he doesn't say. Estrogen is not a feminizing hormone so much as testosterone is a masculinizing one. As soon as the primary sexual characteristics are differentiated in the mother's womb, no amount of estrogen can undo the change.
All humans (even in old age) tend toward femininity.
This statement is flat wrong. Male children are soft and rounded because they have not been subjected to the masculinizing effects of normal male levels of testosterone. When they begin sexual maturation (a process timed exclusively by our genetic coding), those differentiated sex organs produce the testosterone that shape men's bodies. Women produce a small and stable quantity of testosterone in their bodies throughout their lives. The effect of that small quantity of testosterone is cumulative, and when the production of female hormones falls off in menopause, women trend towards masculinity. All humans tend towards masculinity as life goes on, interrupted by femininity only during the female sexual maturation and active phase.
The main thing that keeps men from diverging into the female pattern is testosterone, and testosterone is suppressed by an excess of estrogen.
Once the masculinization takes place in the mother's womb, it is permanent and irreversible. Deny a female estrogen and she remains a female, deny a male testosterone and he remains a male. Give a woman normal male quantities of testosterone and her body will become man-like. Give a man normal female quantities of estrogen and he will remain man-like. Testosterone is not suppressed by estrogen. Male to female transsexuals have to ingest vastly more estrogen than a woman produces to counterbalance the effects of their natural testosterone production.
If you're a grownup, you're already developed, and you're able to fight off some of the damaging effects of soy. Babies aren't so fortunate. Research is now showing that when you feed your baby soy formula, you're giving him or her the equivalent of five birth control pills a day. A baby's endocrine system just can't cope with that kind of massive assault, so some damage is inevitable. At the extreme, the damage can be fatal.
You know what's sad? The people that are going to buy into this crap are homophobic "but coping" Moms with gay kids who already blame themselves for their kid's "condition" - since they are exactly the sort of gullible consumers of bad science promulgated by the right and internet chain letters.
Here we get to the real meat of this propaganda. Soy formula is poisoning our babies. It might even kill them! To expand on our unsupported feminization claim, he now adds that soy formula has as much estrogen as 5 birth control pills a day. Here is a real fact: birth control pills don't contain any Estrogen. Some of the older types, but not all, have about 25 micrograms of a steroidal hormone called mestranol to prevent breakthrough bleeding. Menstanol is AN estrogen, which is different from Estrogen itself. Actual Estrogen is technically called Estradiol. The fact that all a family of feminine hormones are called estrogens, one of which (estradiaol) is called estrogen, is is one of those medical terminology issues that frequently trip people up.
So by now you're bound to be asking yourself, if soy is so high in estrogens why is it not used as a source for the extraction of medical hormones? The most common (because it is the most economical) source for medical estrogens is the urine of pregnant horses. Soy is grown in vast quantities worldwide. It will grow just about anywhere and even has the lovely quality of fixing nitrogen in the soil, which makes it a great crop to rotate through your fields even if you don't harvest it. If a baby bottle of soy milk has 5 birth control pills worth of hormones in it (which brings up a secondary question of how those granola crunching, soy drinking, hippie types ever reproduce) and a single soybean plant can produce gallons of the stuff, why does big pharma pay horse breeders for their pee?
Soy is feminizing, and commonly leads to a decrease in the size of the penis, sexual confusion and homosexuality.
Again we repeat the original unsupported claim. But we get a little more outrageous. It COMMONLY causes these things? Now I don't know about you, dear readers, but to me, commonly means: often, usually, everyday. Google to your hearts content, children, but you won't find a single example, even from a pseudo-science study conducted by anti-what-have-you creationist theorist of soy shrinking a penis, causing sexual confusion, or turning someone gay.
Now, I'm not going to waste time on a small penis (which is entirely too frivolous a comment to dispute, in spite of the fact that if you get a lot of spam email, may appear to be the single most pressing issue in America today). But let's take a look at his inclusion of sexual confusion in this litany of horrid consequences. By including sexual confusion, he continues his swipes at transgenders.
The fact is that most, if not all, of what is generally referred to as violence against gays (which he naturally encourages by this propaganda piece) is actually directed at gender transgressors. Whether they are gay or not is immaterial. The message the right always wants to send is that seeming gay is as bad, if not worse, in their eyes, as actually being gay. Which is no different than saying that a woman invited rape because she was scantily dressed. But here is yet another of their authors reinforcing the right's assertion that being gay is just a lifestyle and therefore a choice.
That's why most of the medical (not socio-spiritual) blame for today's rise in homosexuality must fall upon the rise in soy formula and other soy products. (Most babies are bottle-fed during some part of their infancy, and one-fourth of them are getting soy milk!)
In a single sentence, he tries to cloak his rhetoric as a medical fact (an appeal to authority), make a new unsupported and objectively false statement about a rise in homosexuality, while at the same time declaiming any bias against gays because of his social or spiritual beliefs, and then targeting his actual object - soy baby formula.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
