The author's argument is that soy products are damaging to people, especially children. His evidence includes that soy has added estrogen and babies cannot handle that kind of overload. He also claims that the estrogen reduces penis size, adds feminine feelings, and can be the cause of homosexuality. Furthermore, he says that because of the extra boost of estrogen found in soy, it can delay puberty. As a source, I do not feel that this man is credible. First, there is no listing on why he is a valid person to listen to. What knowledge does he have about soy and the chemicals found in it? Secondly, he jumps to conclusions. He goes from saying soy is damaging by the overload of estrogen to the body to saying that it will make boys turn gay. That is just ridiculous and it completely ignores other studies proving otherwise. Finally, even when he does say "research shows" to site a fact, he has no works cited or references to show where he found that information so that it can be checked to be credible.
The author basically talks about the substance soy, and how it's not nearly as good for you as once thought. He goes on to explain how it messes with hormones, particularly estrogen, the female hormone. It causes defects in both boys and girls, depending on the circumstances and the severity, they are usually about the same. Formerly, as stated in the article, soy was thought to prevent cancer, reduce hot flashes, and prevent heart disease. However, with recent research, the only thing that soy does infact do is feminize. It leats to sexual confusion and homosexuality, so the author says. The evidence is kind of unclear, because he doesn't state sources or site any information. So I am slightly skeptical reading this, not knowing where the information came from. He sounds fairly credible, but at the same time, this is the absolute first I've heard of this concept, so I'm not sure what to believe.
In the article, his argument is that soy is ok for most adults but is "feminizing" our youth. He is saying that it provides the body with estrogen, and at an early age, this can change many things about a person. He is saying that we should feeding soy products to children because our nation is going to have problems with "over-feminite" men and women with natural estrogen production problems. In the article he uses evidences like the fact that soy provides estrogen to the body and gives statistics. As a source I can necessarily say that I would automatically take what he is saying as fact because he himself does not show where he got his statistics from. It could be something that he has researched over a long period of time, but on quick review I would like to see a source list before I consider him credible.
The author clearly believes that, although soy is a "health food", it is actually quite bad for us in many ways. His main argument is that soy contains estrogen...a lot of it. However, I find the article to be odd. Though, as mentioned before, he does talk about the large amounts of soy in food products, he also talks about other harmful effects of soy. After reading the short bio of him on the bottom of the page, and seeing he's part of a church group, which is "anti-gay", it could be understandable why he chose to name the article the way he did. The author also mentions that soy can lead to cancer in both children and adults. He talks about a 27% leukemia cancer jump in children. But how does he know that soy is the reason for this? He doesn't say. While he does bring up many points for why soy is dangerous, he fails to mention why or how it's dangerous in some cases.
The author of the article states that eating or drinking too much soy will give the body too much estrogen. Because of this, he blames soy intake on the rise of homosexuality. He also states that excess soy can lead to a weak thyroid which in turn will cause a person to become fat and to have heart problems. By comsuming soy, a girl can jump start her way to purberty while a boy will postpone his development. The only statistical evidence throughout the article is a research done in 2000 that states the increase of a weaker thryroid is due to excess soy. Also, he pionts out a recent research project with rats. I do not believe that the author is credible. He is not familar with this kind of topic. At the bottom of the webpage it says he has written books about religion. Religion and the effects of soy are two completely different things. There isn't any citations throughout the article and, therefore, the author's arguments and stated facts seems questionable.
The author's tries to make the arguement that by eating and drinking soy it makes you gain estrogen. He goes on to say that this gained estrogen is the reason why homosexuality is increasing. He says that soy is making boys gay. He tells of medical studies that prove soy is dangerous for babies and that it prolongs puberty in males. I don't think he is a credible source because he uses alot of his own opion in the statement. He is bias to one side so he is skewwing the facts to that side.
This author argues that the amount of soy products given to children at infantcy is cousing an imbalance between testosorone and estrogen levels and causing the new generation to be of homosexual decent. He goes on to explain that it is sort of the parents fault for giving their children so much soy milk at birth and during infantcy. He also critsizes and blames the FDA for part of this mess. His article sounds convincing and he has a good argument, but there were no sources cited in his article so that makes you wonder if he really found this info somewhere or did he just pull it out of the sky. So I guess in my opinion he would be a good source to mention in your paper if soy was the subject, but I probably wouldn't base my whole paper one this source. I would try and find a more credible source for the backbone of my paper and maybe use this source as a secondary or supporting source.
According to Jim Rutz, soy is the cause of almost every "problem" America is facing today. Cancer, homosexuality, and obesity are all apparently being caused by the increasing amounts of soy people are taking in or being fed at infancy. The large amounts of estrogen in soy are supressing masculinity in men and causing male children who were given soy milk while younger to become homosexual.
This is absolutely ridiculous. He has no sources whatsoever in his article. He just states "according to a study" or "doctors have claimed" but doesn't actually tell us which studies have given out this information or which doctors are stating these facts. I suppose if you were for this argument you could consider him credible as he is writing for an online news journal, but just reading through the article i can't see how anyone would actually believe this. We might as well blame the extinction of the dinosaurs on soybeans.
Soy is making kids 'gay': The author is arguing that food products with lots of soy is increasing the amount of estrogen in a person's body, male and female. This estrogen increase may lead to increase femininity in males and early development in females. Soy products are even worse for babies, because of their inexperienced endocrine system, their bodies can't fight of the damaging effects. In the end, the authors ends by mentioning that soy product could possibly double in the next few years. To sum up "soy is feminizing." The author does provide evdience although he does not show his sources. He mention statistics and research but does not mention how credible they are. He seems to be unbiased about the user as he explains the male side and female side, and the adult side and infant side. While this author makes a good argument, he is not very credible.
This article describes the affects of soy in a person's diet. The article argues that soy contains gives off estrogen and is the reason that a lot of men are turning out homosexual. The evidence that the author is using is research he found by looking at what soy produces. I feel that the author is not a credible source because he doesn't give enough evidence proving his theory of soy/homosexualality. I personally feel that he is just searching for a reason to prove why people choose to be who they want to be. If the author were to have been researching this topic from the birth of a baby and when he/she was drinking the formula with soy, up until the child's adulthood then i would be more likely to take his theory into consideration. But, since he didn't show this, I feel that this article is more opinionated.
As he makes very clear that soy contains too much estrogen for our own good, which could be a big problem. I couldn't help but notice how he handled the topic of homosexuality. At jimrutz.com his biography states he is all of these things,"...Author, advertising copywriter, columnist, teacher, pioneer thinker, chronicler of the miraculous, and spokesman for the worldwide House Church community."
Out of those Advertising copywriter and Spokesman for the Worldwide House Church community stick out. He is not valid to be talking about these things with no scientifuc background. His credentials screem out he is somebody we shouldn't take too seriously.
"Soy is making kids 'gay' " by Jim Rutz concentrates on the estrogenical features of soy and it's effects on children of both genders. I checked out his background on his website and he has absolutely no medical credentials that would prove the points in his article valid. He also does not state sources of his information in his article, suggesting that he made up the points based on mental bias instead of science.
Rutz believes that the enormous amount of estrogen in soy will cause male children to become more feminine. He believes that they will reach puberty later, and have irreversible side effects from the soy. According to Rutz, soy also leads to problems with the thyroid which could cause obesity.
But why should we listen to Jim Rutz? His credentials only include writing several books and for several magazines, mostly on religious topics. Personally, I don't trust his background well enough to think anything of this article.
Evidence that this article uses are past experiments. "Research in 2000 showed that a soy-based diet at any age can lead to a weak thyroid, which commonly produces heart problems and excess fat." This shows that he has done research on the topic, but has kind of faded away from the main topic. Although some of his facts may be true I would not consider this article to be credible. You can't say that making a younger child eat something, or drink something is going to make them gay. That just doesn't sound very credible to me.
Rutz, Jim. "Soy is making kids 'gay'." 12 December 2006. The Big Picture. 26 March 2007. http://wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53327
The author is this article argues that soy effects the hormone system. Soy has estrogen in it, so when eating it, it puts this hormone into your body. For males, this isnt good, becasue it masks over the testosterone that keeps a male from showing female-like qualities mentally adn physically. He says that it can be extremely harmful for babies, because it like feeding a baby 5 birth control pills a day. He says that its even bad for women, because a womans bodya can only handle so much of that hormone. I would say this source is not creditable, and i wouldnt use it in a paper, because this is a personal opinion article.
The author is trying to show the effects of soy on younger people. He claimed that because of the large amount of estrogen in the soy, it is overtaking the other hormones and turning kids gay. Grown-ups don't have to worry because they have counter hormones such as testosterone helping to disable the effects of estrogen. However, considering 60% of refined objects contain soy it is turning into a problem. I believe that the author is not credible because he did not show a lot of evidence, although it did sound like he researched well. If he had told us where the information came from he could be considered credible but in this case he is just stirring ideas.
In this article James Rutz is trying to convince people that soy products lead to homosexuality, as well as other health problems. He says that the estrogen in soy products counters the testosterone on males, causing homosexuality and defects in sexual development. He also tries to link the intake of soy with widespread problems such as cancer, lukemia, heart disease, infertility, and obesity.
This article doesnt seem credible. It is not peer reviewed, and is a popular source. Rutz is a minister, not a doctor or scientist, and is probably not well enough informed to make these assumptions.
Use of soy products in infants raises estrogen levels so high that it can induce menarche in girls as young as seven and make boys more feminine, and therfore more prone to homosexual tendencies.
He tries to sound scientific in his presentation, making reference to biological and chemical evidence as well as human development.
He doesn't really try to reconcile the three fields. It might have been a more credible arguement if he had presented what the normal estrogen and testosterone levels in humans were, and how much extra hormones would be needed to produce the changes that he argues happens.
He is not a particularly credible source. He is a religious leader and therfore has a preconcieved agenda against homosexuality.
And last I heard cough cough ethanol was the "fuel of the future." Anyway, the writer states that he has a bias, that he states openly he's a health food guy. He claims that soy beans are making us, the human race, after thousands of years of consumption, making males like their female counterparts just from eating soybeans. I'm sorry, but this guy just sounds like he read some report and was bored so he had to write something to get attention. This writer has no scientific backround, and did not cite anything to back him up, so I find it as credible as reading some article on how great ethanol is from an everyday consumer. It is not this "new" thing regarding soy beans as in asia it has been used for a very very long time. Do soy beans contain some small amount of a form of estrogen, yes, but maybe signs may pop up if u eat pounds of it a day which really if you are doing that, you have a more serious problem. It is like eating any one thing only, you just don't get enough of everything else. To sum it up really, this guy needs to find somehting better to do rather than rant on about something he doesn't know about.
The author's argument is that soy products contain large amounts of estrogen that our bodies cannot handle normally. I would say that from his title he is most likely a credible source. He does seem to know what he is talking about, however he does not cite anything within the work or have a works cited after. His most blatent claim is that because soy contains high amounts of estrogen it is making children (boys) much more feminine. He claims that increased estrogen reduces penis size, causes sexual confusion, and delays puberty overall. The problem here is that not all homosexuals are confused and not all are feminine. I myself am homosexual and have not considered myself confused. I held him with more credibility until i read the information about him at the end. It says that he is the found-chairman of Open-Chair Ministries, which means that he is very biased. There is a very large backlash from religion towards homosexuality in our society today and i believe that this is a staunch example.
21 comments:
The author's argument is that soy products are damaging to people, especially children. His evidence includes that soy has added estrogen and babies cannot handle that kind of overload. He also claims that the estrogen reduces penis size, adds feminine feelings, and can be the cause of homosexuality. Furthermore, he says that because of the extra boost of estrogen found in soy, it can delay puberty. As a source, I do not feel that this man is credible. First, there is no listing on why he is a valid person to listen to. What knowledge does he have about soy and the chemicals found in it? Secondly, he jumps to conclusions. He goes from saying soy is damaging by the overload of estrogen to the body to saying that it will make boys turn gay. That is just ridiculous and it completely ignores other studies proving otherwise. Finally, even when he does say "research shows" to site a fact, he has no works cited or references to show where he found that information so that it can be checked to be credible.
The author basically talks about the substance soy, and how it's not nearly as good for you as once thought. He goes on to explain how it messes with hormones, particularly estrogen, the female hormone. It causes defects in both boys and girls, depending on the circumstances and the severity, they are usually about the same. Formerly, as stated in the article, soy was thought to prevent cancer, reduce hot flashes, and prevent heart disease. However, with recent research, the only thing that soy does infact do is feminize. It leats to sexual confusion and homosexuality, so the author says.
The evidence is kind of unclear, because he doesn't state sources or site any information. So I am slightly skeptical reading this, not knowing where the information came from. He sounds fairly credible, but at the same time, this is the absolute first I've heard of this concept, so I'm not sure what to believe.
In the article, his argument is that soy is ok for most adults but is "feminizing" our youth. He is saying that it provides the body with estrogen, and at an early age, this can change many things about a person. He is saying that we should feeding soy products to children because our nation is going to have problems with "over-feminite" men and women with natural estrogen production problems.
In the article he uses evidences like the fact that soy provides estrogen to the body and gives statistics. As a source I can necessarily say that I would automatically take what he is saying as fact because he himself does not show where he got his statistics from. It could be something that he has researched over a long period of time, but on quick review I would like to see a source list before I consider him credible.
The author clearly believes that, although soy is a "health food", it is actually quite bad for us in many ways. His main argument is that soy contains estrogen...a lot of it. However, I find the article to be odd. Though, as mentioned before, he does talk about the large amounts of soy in food products, he also talks about other harmful effects of soy. After reading the short bio of him on the bottom of the page, and seeing he's part of a church group, which is "anti-gay", it could be understandable why he chose to name the article the way he did. The author also mentions that soy can lead to cancer in both children and adults. He talks about a 27% leukemia cancer jump in children. But how does he know that soy is the reason for this? He doesn't say. While he does bring up many points for why soy is dangerous, he fails to mention why or how it's dangerous in some cases.
The author of the article states that eating or drinking too much soy will give the body too much estrogen. Because of this, he blames soy intake on the rise of homosexuality. He also states that excess soy can lead to a weak thyroid which in turn will cause a person to become fat and to have heart problems. By comsuming soy, a girl can jump start her way to purberty while a boy will postpone his development. The only statistical evidence throughout the article is a research done in 2000 that states the increase of a weaker thryroid is due to excess soy. Also, he pionts out a recent research project with rats. I do not believe that the author is credible. He is not familar with this kind of topic. At the bottom of the webpage it says he has written books about religion. Religion and the effects of soy are two completely different things. There isn't any citations throughout the article and, therefore, the author's arguments and stated facts seems questionable.
The author's tries to make the arguement that by eating and drinking soy it makes you gain estrogen. He goes on to say that this gained estrogen is the reason why homosexuality is increasing. He says that soy is making boys gay. He tells of medical studies that prove soy is dangerous for babies and that it prolongs puberty in males. I don't think he is a credible source because he uses alot of his own opion in the statement. He is bias to one side so he is skewwing the facts to that side.
This author argues that the amount of soy products given to children at infantcy is cousing an imbalance between testosorone and estrogen levels and causing the new generation to be of homosexual decent. He goes on to explain that it is sort of the parents fault for giving their children so much soy milk at birth and during infantcy. He also critsizes and blames the FDA for part of this mess. His article sounds convincing and he has a good argument, but there were no sources cited in his article so that makes you wonder if he really found this info somewhere or did he just pull it out of the sky. So I guess in my opinion he would be a good source to mention in your paper if soy was the subject, but I probably wouldn't base my whole paper one this source. I would try and find a more credible source for the backbone of my paper and maybe use this source as a secondary or supporting source.
According to Jim Rutz, soy is the cause of almost every "problem" America is facing today. Cancer, homosexuality, and obesity are all apparently being caused by the increasing amounts of soy people are taking in or being fed at infancy. The large amounts of estrogen in soy are supressing masculinity in men and causing male children who were given soy milk while younger to become homosexual.
This is absolutely ridiculous. He has no sources whatsoever in his article. He just states "according to a study" or "doctors have claimed" but doesn't actually tell us which studies have given out this information or which doctors are stating these facts. I suppose if you were for this argument you could consider him credible as he is writing for an online news journal, but just reading through the article i can't see how anyone would actually believe this. We might as well blame the extinction of the dinosaurs on soybeans.
Soy is making kids 'gay': The author is arguing that food products with lots of soy is increasing the amount of estrogen in a person's body, male and female. This estrogen increase may lead to increase femininity in males and early development in females. Soy products are even worse for babies, because of their inexperienced endocrine system, their bodies can't fight of the damaging effects. In the end, the authors ends by mentioning that soy product could possibly double in the next few years. To sum up "soy is feminizing."
The author does provide evdience although he does not show his sources. He mention statistics and research but does not mention how credible they are. He seems to be unbiased about the user as he explains the male side and female side, and the adult side and infant side. While this author makes a good argument, he is not very credible.
This article describes the affects of soy in a person's diet. The article argues that soy contains gives off estrogen and is the reason that a lot of men are turning out homosexual. The evidence that the author is using is research he found by looking at what soy produces. I feel that the author is not a credible source because he doesn't give enough evidence proving his theory of soy/homosexualality. I personally feel that he is just searching for a reason to prove why people choose to be who they want to be. If the author were to have been researching this topic from the birth of a baby and when he/she was drinking the formula with soy, up until the child's adulthood then i would be more likely to take his theory into consideration. But, since he didn't show this, I feel that this article is more opinionated.
As he makes very clear that soy contains too much estrogen for our own good, which could be a big problem. I couldn't help but notice how he handled the topic of homosexuality. At jimrutz.com his biography states he is all of these things,"...Author, advertising copywriter, columnist, teacher, pioneer thinker, chronicler of the miraculous, and spokesman for the worldwide House Church community."
Out of those Advertising copywriter and Spokesman for the Worldwide House Church community stick out. He is not valid to be talking about these things with no scientifuc background. His credentials screem out he is somebody we shouldn't take too seriously.
"Soy is making kids 'gay' " by Jim Rutz concentrates on the estrogenical features of soy and it's effects on children of both genders. I checked out his background on his website and he has absolutely no medical credentials that would prove the points in his article valid. He also does not state sources of his information in his article, suggesting that he made up the points based on mental bias instead of science.
Rutz believes that the enormous amount of estrogen in soy will cause male children to become more feminine. He believes that they will reach puberty later, and have irreversible side effects from the soy. According to Rutz, soy also leads to problems with the thyroid which could cause obesity.
But why should we listen to Jim Rutz? His credentials only include writing several books and for several magazines, mostly on religious topics. Personally, I don't trust his background well enough to think anything of this article.
Evidence that this article uses are past experiments. "Research in 2000 showed that a soy-based diet at any age can lead to a weak thyroid, which commonly produces heart problems and excess fat." This shows that he has done research on the topic, but has kind of faded away from the main topic. Although some of his facts may be true I would not consider this article to be credible. You can't say that making a younger child eat something, or drink something is going to make them gay. That just doesn't sound very credible to me.
Rutz, Jim. "Soy is making kids 'gay'." 12 December 2006. The Big Picture. 26 March 2007. http://wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53327
The author is this article argues that soy effects the hormone system. Soy has estrogen in it, so when eating it, it puts this hormone into your body. For males, this isnt good, becasue it masks over the testosterone that keeps a male from showing female-like qualities mentally adn physically. He says that it can be extremely harmful for babies, because it like feeding a baby 5 birth control pills a day. He says that its even bad for women, because a womans bodya can only handle so much of that hormone. I would say this source is not creditable, and i wouldnt use it in a paper, because this is a personal opinion article.
The author is trying to show the effects of soy on younger people. He claimed that because of the large amount of estrogen in the soy, it is overtaking the other hormones and turning kids gay. Grown-ups don't have to worry because they have counter hormones such as testosterone helping to disable the effects of estrogen. However, considering 60% of refined objects contain soy it is turning into a problem.
I believe that the author is not credible because he did not show a lot of evidence, although it did sound like he researched well. If he had told us where the information came from he could be considered credible but in this case he is just stirring ideas.
In this article James Rutz is trying to convince people that soy products lead to homosexuality, as well as other health problems. He says that the estrogen in soy products counters the testosterone on males, causing homosexuality and defects in sexual development. He also tries to link the intake of soy with widespread problems such as cancer, lukemia, heart disease, infertility, and obesity.
This article doesnt seem credible. It is not peer reviewed, and is a popular source. Rutz is a minister, not a doctor or scientist, and is probably not well enough informed to make these assumptions.
Use of soy products in infants raises estrogen levels so high that it can induce menarche in girls as young as seven and make boys more feminine, and therfore more prone to homosexual tendencies.
He tries to sound scientific in his presentation, making reference to biological and chemical evidence as well as human development.
He doesn't really try to reconcile the three fields. It might have been a more credible arguement if he had presented what the normal estrogen and testosterone levels in humans were, and how much extra hormones would be needed to produce the changes that he argues happens.
He is not a particularly credible source. He is a religious leader and therfore has a preconcieved agenda against homosexuality.
And last I heard cough cough ethanol was the "fuel of the future." Anyway, the writer states that he has a bias, that he states openly he's a health food guy. He claims that soy beans are making us, the human race, after thousands of years of consumption, making males like their female counterparts just from eating soybeans. I'm sorry, but this guy just sounds like he read some report and was bored so he had to write something to get attention. This writer has no scientific backround, and did not cite anything to back him up, so I find it as credible as reading some article on how great ethanol is from an everyday consumer. It is not this "new" thing regarding soy beans as in asia it has been used for a very very long time. Do soy beans contain some small amount of a form of estrogen, yes, but maybe signs may pop up if u eat pounds of it a day which really if you are doing that, you have a more serious problem. It is like eating any one thing only, you just don't get enough of everything else. To sum it up really, this guy needs to find somehting better to do rather than rant on about something he doesn't know about.
The author's argument is that soy products contain large amounts of estrogen that our bodies cannot handle normally. I would say that from his title he is most likely a credible source. He does seem to know what he is talking about, however he does not cite anything within the work or have a works cited after. His most blatent claim is that because soy contains high amounts of estrogen it is making children (boys) much more feminine. He claims that increased estrogen reduces penis size, causes sexual confusion, and delays puberty overall. The problem here is that not all homosexuals are confused and not all are feminine. I myself am homosexual and have not considered myself confused. I held him with more credibility until i read the information about him at the end. It says that he is the found-chairman of Open-Chair Ministries, which means that he is very biased. There is a very large backlash from religion towards homosexuality in our society today and i believe that this is a staunch example.
Post a Comment