Hormonal Imbalance

[TheJester]

I've read in many places that gynecomastia could be caused by a hormonal imbalance.  Is it possible then, that eating entirely too many soy products and drinking entirely too much soy milk could be a cause due to all the estrogen?  I drink nearly a half gallon of soy milk a week and eat a lot of soy products so I know I'm getting a ton of estrogen.  I recently discovered a hard lump behind my left nipple and all signs point towards gynecomastia.  Assuming I am taking in too much estrogen, would stopping my estrogen intake (i.e. my soy intake) help get rid of the gynecomastia?

Thanks guys, I appreciate it.

[skyhawk]

Jester,

Soy has a mild estrogen effect.

Soy is very controversial. The people who have a financial interest in soy will tell you how wonderful it is. But other nutritional experts caution us on soy. I read labels and avoid it whenever possible.

Why do you consume so much soy? Whats the benefit? If you are consuming too much soy then It may be possible that it induced your gyne. Its been blamed for early puberty in girls, so why not gyno? You may be right.

If you avoid soy, you will still be getting considerable amounts in processed food. Its as difficult to avoid as high fructose corn syrup. Its in everything!

[TheJester]

I love cereal and eat at least 1 bowl every single day.  I am lactose intolerant so I've been drinking soy for years in milks place.  I also enjoy all the Boca products and such.  So I imagine I've been consuming a ton of estrogen for years now.  It really makes me think that's the problem.  I'd quit eating so much cereal and so much soy if I knew it would help.  Otherwise, I don't think I could stop! 

[skyhawk]

It appears you are aware you are consuming too much of something. Moderation is the key. Too much commercial cereal is not good for anyone. Try cutting back on this and the soy. Replace them with other foods so you won't go hungry. That way you won't miss it as much.

It won't make the gyne go away. That will require surgery. But if over consumption of soy is the problem, then cutting it out may keep it from getting worse.

If you haven't already, I would suggest you google soy and read all the good, bad, and ugly with this product. That might give you the willpower to skip it. 

[skyhawk]

You might also want to visit an endo and get your Testosterone and Estradiol levels checked. If Estradiol is high, then you could be right that the soy did this, provided there are not other factors present that may have given you gyne.

[Paa_Paw]

Someone comes up with a similar question from time to time.

Soy is often a common target because it contains phyto-estrogens, Plant compounds that are similar to estrogen.

Less well known generally is the fact that many common vegetables also contain Phyto-Estrogens.

I am of the belief that if we eat a varied diet we are best off.

Phyto-Estrogens are really quite weak and I am not convinced that they would be an issue if your hormones are otherwise normal.

Orientals consume way more soy that western peoples and the do not have a higher rate of Gynecomastia.

[merle]

Unless your particularly body/genetics has a very sensitive response to soy, soy its self does not cause gyne any more than pot does.

If you are concerned, switch to rice milk and see what happens. I am allergic to milk in all forms. I happen to prefer rice milk to soy milk but I also eat a lot of soy products as well.

Merle

[headheldhigh01]

the “estrogen” you hear about is actually phytoestrogens which are actually good for you, they have about 1/500th the effect of regular estro, they compete for chemical  receptors and can therefore actually inhibit the estro effect.

this always smells like scare tactics from the frightened boys in the dairy and beef industry who i think are the REAL culprits.  since this comes up from time to time, excuse me if i quote from a past post on the subject. i left out the parts on recent studies of arsenic in chicken, pcb's in fish, etc., though that was nasty too.  for the record, i'm also  vegan, meaning pure vegetarian, no eggs or dairy (for ethics reasons more than the health, though that's a plus too), so see if you find this interesting.  from the 2/04 monthly newsletter of dr. michael greger:

V. MAILBAG: "Why did the Ukraine ban our meat?"
 
I just got an email from someone who read the hilarious column in Friday's San Francisco Chronicle (online at http://tinyurl.com/2b2qr) . Her questions was "I've heard about bovine growth hormone in the milk supply, but I didn't know that we used hormones in meat."
 
For more than fifty years, U.S. farmers have used both natural and artificial hormones to increase the growth rates of livestock. Just like bodybuilders can bulk up on steroids, these steroid hormones make cattle grow bigger and faster. Of course the USDA doesn't like to call them growth hormones, they call them "meat quality enhancers," which they note is a "more consumer friendly term."
 
According to the USDA, these hormones can eliminate as many as 21 days of feeding time-same weight, 21 days earlier-which saves lots of money. But Europe in the eighties had just gotten over this thing where little babies started growing breasts and menstruating after eating baby food made from veal calves pumped with the hormone DES and then there were all these cancers and genital deformities and so January 1st, 1989 Europe banned the production and consumption of hormone laden meat.
 
Major beef exporters such as Argentina. Australia, New Zealand, Brazil all agreed to ship hormone free meat to Europe, but the U.S. was not going to be stopped. Not only would the profits of the beef industry suffer (and we know how much the beef industry doesn't like to see things suffer Wink, but the profits of the hormone manufacturers- Monsanto, Eli Lilly, Upjohn-would take a hit. And as powerful as the beef lobby is, you do not mess with the pharmaceutical industry.
 
The US took the European Union before the World Trade Organization demanding that Europe drop its ban on American beef. And of course, the World Health Organization struck down Europe's public health law, and demanded Europe drop the ban or face stiff penalties. And Europe decided to maintain the ban and stomach the financial consequences, which it has for years now.  They are willing to pay $50 million dollars a year to protect their citizens from American beef.
 
Growth promoting hormones, with names like "Steer-oid" are fed, implanted or injected into more than 95% of U.S. cattle. They implant estrogen, progesterone, testosterone, and a number of synthetic steroids.[/color] The FDA insists that, when properly used, these sex steroids pose no risk to humans.  This is the same agency, though, that, under pressure from the poultry industry, took 20 years to ban DES, the hormone that caused all the v@ginal cancers in the daughters of mothers exposed to it.
 
The European Union commissioned their own panel of scientists review the available research on the hormones in American meat and concluded that they "may cause a variety of health problems including cancer, developmental problems, harm to immune systems, and brain disease.  Even exposure to small levels of [hormone] residues in meat and meat products carries risks."
 
The European Commission identified one hormone in particular as a "complete carcinogen," acting as both a tumor initiator and a tumor promoter. They explained, "In plain language, this means that even small additional doses of residues of this hormone in meat, arising from its use as a growth promoter in cattle, has an inherent risk of causing cancer." The French Agriculture Minister simply declared that the United States had the, "worst food in the world." Even research done here by National Cancer Institute has found that some of the synthetic estrogen-like hormones U.S. ranchers continue to implant can indeed stimulate the growth of human breast cancer cells.
 
The U.S. government was not happy with Europe's report. The U.S. Agriculture Secretary held a press conference and said 'The European Commission has issued yet another misleading report."
 
In response the European Union replied, "The commission is deeply concerned about the US attempt to belittle the risk which scientists have identified. [We] cannot understand why the US has not reacted in a more responsible way to the conclusive findings of the scientific committee. It is all the more incomprehensible as pre-pube[scent] children are the population group most at risk from the hormones."
 
Indeed, because children they have such low baseline levels, an 8 year boy, for example, eating two burgers increases his level of sex hormones by almost 10%. And lifelong exposures like that might increase the risk of developing cancer.
 
The incidence of reproductive cancers has skyrocketed since U.S. farmers started using these sex steroids in meat. Compared to 1950, we have 55% more breast cancer, 120% more testicular cancer, and 190% more prostate cancer here in the United States. Now that's not to say that the hormones in meat are the cause, but as one prominent cancer researcher noted, "The question we ought to be asking, is not why Europe won't buy our hormone-treated meat, but why we allow beef from hormone-treated cattle to be sold [here in America]..."

so instead of being a culprit, i bet soy would keep people safer from gyne that i suspect has skyrocketed in the last half century specifically because of the same meat and dairy industry, who time might just prove are to blame for this curse instead. 

[RickWalia007]

i got a admit i use to drink 3 glasses from milk every day and eat meat like maniac :O