I would caution any strong responses to this study along the lines of "soy is child abuse".
>The researchers say the differences, measured in the months after birth, were subtle and not a cause for alarm, but reflect a need to further investigate the long-term effects of exposure to estrogen-like compounds found in soy-based formulas.
This study found that there is a small difference, *for girls*, between soy and non-soy. The researchers do not know what (if any) impact long-term consequences for health and development this has, which is why they are calling for further study. They hope to follow this cohort throughout their adolescence as a continuation of this research.
ughhh this is making my first world life hard.
they say cow's milk is bad for you because of hormones. Soy milk is bad for babies because of estrogen-like reactions.
but what if the mother does not have the ability to breast feed?
My mother did not produce breast milk.
Is there any help for those mothers?
Is it helpful to studies like this if older people fed exclusively on soy formula as babies volunteer? I would fit that category so just curious if studies like this look for other subjects.
I honest to god read the title as "barbies" and thought this was something from r/atetheonion.
Isn't there a solid amount of evidence that shows that the phytoestrogens in soy are possibly endocrine dysruptors? I'm just a layperson but I had heard that it's less bad with fermented soy.
If science shows us that Cows milk products are unhealthy, isn't it unethical to give milk-based formula to babies in a scientific study?
Is there an ELI5 method of finding who's funding a study, and of finding if any of the scientists involved recieved compensation and from whom? TIA