Soy is not just recommended for women!  Scientific consensus supports soy as a part of a healthful lifestyle, and experts agree that soy is safe and healthy for men to consume in moderate amounts each day (2-3 servings daily).  Soy is a rich source of isoflavones, substances that mimic the effects of the female hormone estrogen — leading to concerns of whether or not this will have adverse effects on the male hormone.  Not only do researchers say there is no evidence of this when soy is eaten in moderation, but there are numerous studies showing the positive effects of soy on men’s health. 

Soy doesn’t just reduce cholesterol, but according to studies done at Tulane University, by bulking up on soy protein, you can lower your blood pressure. Soy may help by providing amino acids (isoleucine, leucine, lysine, methionine, phenylalanine, threonin, tryptophan and valine) that expand blood vessels. Researchers from several Universities have concluded that adding 25 grams of soy protein to your daily diet helps lower the most damaging form of blood cholesterol — low-density lipoprotein (LDL) — by up to about10 percent.

In addition, Researchers from Japan’s National Cancer Center found that increased intake of soy isoflavones significantly reduced the risk of prostate cancer by as much as 50 percent. If all this isnt enough to convince you to bite into a soy burger, there has been evidence that soy can minimize hair loss, keep blood sugar levels stable and help with overall digestive health.

Soy is a must have for everyone. Soy is good for the heart because it is high in soy protein and fiber, contains heart-healthy fats, and is low in saturated fat. Soy is an all natural nutrient-rich food delivering high-quality protein, carbohydrates and fiber. It is also full of essential vitamins and minerals such as zinc, magnesium, iron and bone-building calcium.

With soy’s increase in popularity, manufacturers have been producing more soy products to receive these amazing health benefits. Below are some ways to incorporate soy into your daily diet:

Breakfast: Breakfast is the most important meal of the day, so start your morning off right. Soy milk  enhances any cereal or oatmeal. If that doesn’t do it for you, combine a low-fat soy yogurt with a high-fiber cereal and berries for a breakfast that will leave you satiated throughout the day.

Lunch: You don’t have to clog your arteries with a high-fat meal like pizza or cheeseburgers. Enjoy a whole grain veggie sandwich with melted soy cheese or soy burgers on whole-wheat buns with all the fixings. You can also toss soy-filled edamames into your salad for some added soy protein.

Snack: When you’re on-the-go, avoid the mid-afternoon crash with some soy nuts. Smear a tablespoon or two of soy nut butter on an apple or whole-wheat crackers. These snacks will fill you up without filling you out.

Dinner:  Start your meal off with a soy-based miso soup, which will help keep you full until you get to your main dish. Try opting for a tofu stir fry which will tantalize your taste buds. Get creative and add soy cheese crumbles to your favorite pasta dishes.

Tanya Zuckerbrot, MS, RD is a nutritionist and founder of www.Skinnyandthecity.com.    She is also the creator of The F-Factor Diet™, an innovative nutritional program she has used for more than ten years to provide hundreds of her clients with all the tools they need to achieve easy weight loss and maintenance, improved health and well-being.  For more information log onto www.FFactorDiet.com.

Stem cells are cells which haven’t yet differentiated and become specialized into organs or people. Stem cell research is a complex and controversial topic, too complex to analyze effectively in a blog entry, or even a thick textbook. But given all the hysteria, hype and distortion surrounding the issue, I wanted to make a few points for the sake of clarity.

*  President Obama’s order this week does not change legality — it is already legal to conduct research on embryos. It is still not legal to create embryonic stem cells for the purpose of research, nor should it be. What is involved here is conducting research on embryos that have been produced privately for the purpose of in vitro fertilization, but have not ended up being used. Previously the funding was mostly private, now there will be increases in federal funding. At a time when private research money is shrinking, this may help the research to continue.
*  At the same time, advances in treatments have come not in embryonic stem cells, but in adult stem cells that have been manipulated genetically to regain their earlier potential before they began to differentiate. Embryonic stem cells hold promise because they haven’t yet differentiated and may be manipulated to do so in therapeutic directions. But this potential hasn’t been realized in part because the body tends to reject these cells as foreign. In contrast, using a body’s own stem cells or umbilical cord blood circumvents the risk of rejection, since a body won’t reject its own cells.
*  The current debate reminds me of the waste in creating excess embryos for no real medical purpose in the first place. We need stricter regulations on in vitro fertilization, not only so that no more pathetic stories like Octomom occur, but also because life is precious and should not be initiated only to be wasted in this spirit of excess.  IVF for an otherwise childless couple can be a wonderful thing, but it must be well monitored and carefully regulated.
*  It is preferable for embryos to be used for research rather than discarded, even with limited potential to lead to cures, and only with the understanding that no embryos should be created for research purposes.

When you unwrap the real science from the politics and postering, there is less controversy, and less negative emotion.

Dr. Marc Siegel is an internist and associate professor of medicine at the NYU School of Medicine. He is a FOX News medical contributor and writes a health column for LA Times, where he examines TV and movies for medical accuracy. Dr. Siegel is the author of “False Alarm: The Truth About the Epidemic of Fear“ and “Bird Flu: Everything You Need to Know About the Next Pandemic.”  Read more at www.doctorsiegel.com

Well that got your attention, didn’t it?

I remember a time when scientific studies were analyzed, discussed and reproduced in the scientific community before they ever entered the streamlined media world. Why? Because we wanted the results to be looked at and to determine whether or not the research was well-designed and had clinical applications. But nowadays, it doesn’t matter how small the study or how poorly designed the research is — if it has a catchy headline, the media can’t wait to throw it out there for all the world to see.

Now I do not totally blame the media — after all I am part of the problem, too. But these days it seems many medical journals, in an effort to get more recognition and readability, are all but glad to inform media outlets of their “breaking news” stories.

Yes — as they say in the media world — good content is priceless, and if it has a good headline, even better! That is why many people feel confused about the reports they read on a daily basis. One day coffee is good for you; the next day it’s not! Are these preliminary studies really helping our readers?

Here are some of today’s favorites:

• Woman’s Leg Won’t Quit Growing
• Chemical in Gut May Help Fight Obesity
• Pig Organs: Ready for Humans at Last?
• Top 4 Foods to Boost Your Memory
• 21st Century Plague Discovered by Scientists

Now don’t these headlines make you want to read more?

Often, writers even have the same standard formula for reporting these studies prematurely. They usually ask an expert and the classic response goes something like this: “We’re all excited about the findings, but more research needs to be done.”

So I guess tomorrow I’ll talk about a new exciting study, but I’ll try to get all the facts first.

The disclosure of hidden tobacco money behind a big study suggesting that lung scans might help save smokers from cancer has shocked the research community and raised fresh concern about industry influence in important science.

Two medical journals that published studies by Weill Cornell Medical College researchers in 2006 are looking into tobacco cash and other financial ties that weren’t revealed. The studies reported benefits from lung scans, which the Cornell team has long touted.

It’s a crucial public health issue: Dozens of groups, including such anti-smoking crusaders as the American Cancer Society, have given the Cornell team money to see if routinely screening smokers with CT scans can spot the world’s most lethal cancer in time to prevent deaths.