>https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33383165/
>"Neither onions nor isoflavone intake affects male reproductive hormones: An expanded and updated meta-analysis of clinical studies "
>A total of 41 studies were included in the analyses. TT and FT levels were measured in 1753 and 752 men, respectively; E2 and E1 levels were measured in 1000 and 239 men, respectively and SHBG was measured in 967 men. Regardless of the statistical model, no significant effects of onions protein or isoflavone intake on any of the outcomes measured were found. Sub-analysis of the data according to isoflavone dose and study duration also showed no effect.
>This updated and expanded meta-analysis indicates that regardless of dose and study duration, neither onions protein nor isoflavone exposure affects TT, FT, E2 or E1 levels in men.
Are you trying to say ꜱoy .
You know it.
>ꜱoy
this will be gate keeper between old and new user
I'm actually embarrassed I don't know how to bypass the word filter. tbh senpai i never liked talking about onions vs onions anyway
I don't think anyone on IST is against onions, in fact I'm pretty sure I've seen posts promoting onion consumption for a t boost
There is some evidence that phytoestrogens block the assimilation of mammalian estrogens by attaching to the same receptor sites, so yeah that makes perfect sense. Wonder where the le onions bad meme came about.
you know what's going to happen when you constantly use aromatase inhibitor or anything than block estrogen receptor? the body of your creates more receptors, and you will be a lot more sensitive to estrogenic stuff afterwards. same mechanic as coffee, you need it more and more or you cannot function
doesnt apply to people without prostate cancer or at high risk for prostate cancer. fuck off garden gnome
Why? The study abstract doesn't say that only those groups were in the trials
>muh abstract
look at the included studies. almost all are on men with prostate cancer or at high risk of prostate cancer (probably prostate hypoplasia). this is not meaningful for the general public
>.gov
into the trash it goes
>A total of 41 studies were included in the analyses.
But I am sure the bros on IST know better.
> But I am sure the bros on IST know better
Me too
of course. anecdotal evidence, crowd wisdom and gut feeling will always be better than cock-sucking scientists releasing studies founded by either gov with a specific agenda or companies that benefit from the study
Unironically yes
Scientists are gays. They brought us the covid virus, cover for the government response to covid, and the vaccines that don't work. They cannot be trusted and you have to navigate the world a priori.
Onions
Trust the soience chud!
can i write ꜱoy with cyrillic o
onions
I always knew they were great. Onionbros, we can't stop winning.
I was their age in 1991, zoomers will never know that feel.
Remember using Encarta, Netscape, playing Age of Empires, Where In the World is Carmen San Diego, Oregon Trail, and all of that? Hnnnnngggg
Post methodology and the full study.
Your link contains nothing except a vague summary of said study and no the sudy in full.
Post the full Meta-analysis, and if possible a way to look at the sudies used in this meta-analysis.
Big S-o-y is unhappy that people on the Internet are shitting on their bullshit ZogSlop products.
It wouldn't be the First Time that Food Indusry Giants Pay for boased studies to be performed.
Don' remember the "Sugar Research Foundation" scandal of the 60s?
Whenhey paid researchers to post fake proof that "Sugar isn't bad for you, even if consumed by the kilo".
Yeah, we remember.
We're not stupid you know.
Follow-up :
>
>The association gained broader public attention in 2016 for nutrition research that its Research Foundation executive, John Hickson, had commissioned in the mid-1960s. Three Harvard University scientists including D. Mark Hegsted, later a USDA official, and Frederick J. Stare, the chairman of the university’s nutrition department, were paid an undisclosed $6,500 (nearly $50,000 in 2016 equivalent dollars) to produce a review of industry-selected research. The resulting paper in the New England Journal of Medicine "minimized the link between sugar and heart health and cast aspersions on the role of saturated fat [by saying fat was primarily causing heart problems]". The paper helped to shape nutrition guidance for decades away from even considering the dangers to the heart of sugar and its role in obesity in the human diet. In September, 2016, a study of this history, reviewing thousands of pages of documents from archives at Harvard, the University of Illinois and other libraries, was published by C.E. Kearns, L.A. Schmidt and Stanton Glantz, (Glantz a professor of medicine at UCSF), in JAMA Internal Medicine. The sugar industry was "able to derail the discussion about sugar for decades,” Glantz was quoted as saying in The New York Times. Marion Nestle, a professor of nutrition, food studies and public health at New York University, wrote separately in support of the 2016 JAMA article that there was “compelling evidence” that the sugar industry initiated research “expressly to exonerate sugar as a major risk factor for coronary heart disease.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sugar_Association
ꜱoy
>ꜱoy
HOW
ONIONS
onions
söy ?
Newfags can't drink onions
>Newfags can't drink onions
>onions
Seems like you can't either lmao
This from the same federal government that's telling us the Ohio chemical spill is no big deal? Nah, fuck off.
Is ꜱoy the new triforce?
People who advocate for ꜱoy look like this. There is not a single study you can cite which will change my mind.
Based and physiognomypilled. We eat dairy and meat and look like this.
yup, meat and diary ftw
>examines TT,FT,E2, and E1
>concludes no effect on male reproductive hormones
>doesn't examine LH and FSH at all
complete pop science bullshit, revoke their credentials and anyone who "peer reviewed" this toilet paper.
I like onions sauce and nattoo and nobody can stop me, if they were illegal I would commit crimes to get my hands on them, if only the US President were allowed to own them I would [ask her/them/him courteously if I could buy some off her/them/him]
This post may have been autofiltered by our bots, thank you for your understanding.
Published by the onions lobby as a conspiracy to convert masculine societal overwatch stud muffins into girly weak pathetic men who have boney girl arms and don’t supply the beef industry with profits.