Talk:Genistein

Pharmacology Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pharmacology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pharmacology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PharmacologyWikipedia:WikiProject PharmacologyTemplate:WikiProject Pharmacologypharmacology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Alternative medicine

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative medicine, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Alternative medicine related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Alternative medicineWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative medicineTemplate:WikiProject Alternative medicineAlternative medicine articles

Chemicals Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemicals, a daughter project of WikiProject Chemistry, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of chemicals. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details on the project.ChemicalsWikipedia:WikiProject ChemicalsTemplate:WikiProject Chemicalschemicals articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Not so shiny[edit]

Why none even bothers to even mention the bad side pf phytoestrogens in males infants and pre-menstrual women. it seems that "reduce cholesterol prevent cancer and anti oxidative properties are found in damm near everything that some shady "health experts" advertise..... pfft. I can't belive wikipedia has fell for this medieval mentality instead of finding out the truth.

Oh great Anonymous bearer of The Truth, if you would like more information on the potential health risks of Phytoestrogens, you could start by reading the page on phytoestrogen under the Health Risks section. --Idurey 19:29, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Any company that tries to market soy as preventing cancer will get in trouble with the FDA; the FDA has not nor will ever award soy GRAS status. Actually, soy causes cancer as will be seen in the phytoestrogen article Idurey references. --Nibblet 00:11, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the statement on animal experiments carried out by NCI scientists on Genistein. There are other articles that show Genistein causes uterine adenocarcinomas in older animals through epigenetic mechanisms, see:

"Persistent hypomethylation in the promoter of nucleosomal binding protein 1 (Nsbp1) correlates with overexpression of Nsbp1 in mouse uteri neonatally exposed to diethylstilbestrol or genistein." Tang WY et al 2008 pmid=18669593 --Amosfolarin (talk) 10:34, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What cancer is elevated somewhere in the world that is associated with high genistein consumption? Nicmart (talk) 10:25, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Genistein vs. phytoestrogens[edit]

This article makes quite a few seemingly contradictory statements. This may be in part because of conflicting research results, but may also be because the article conflates the effects of genistein with those of phytoestrogens in general. Citations to research directly related to genistein are badly needed, and comments about phytoestrogens in general should probably be taken out and/or moved to the article on phytoestrogens.-- Ed (Edgar181) 13:09, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tamoxifen[edit]

That's in one of my quotations and it begs the question: "Who paid for your research?", and "Is it replicated?".
BrewJay (talk) 21:56, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Coherence[edit]

I'm not sure that I can paint a coherent picture of what genistein does in a summary. Hmmm. Maybe I can just scan all the headlines in a pubmed search, probably about 6000 hits or three hours. BrewJay (talk) 22:58, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Snipping[edit]

I removed "what leads to many, frequently exclusive or paradoxical conclusions" in "Molecular" section. This phrase is confusing and might be taken as either opinion or unsupported/undocumented, or both. It would be good of someone to take a run at laying out the controversies alluded to on this talk page in the actual article. Here.it.comes.again (talk) 08:57, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

assorted minor problems[edit]

Acetylated compounds - wighteone is not acetylated! Ref. 24, 43, & 59 are duplicates. Wording problems: Molecular function - that should presumably be proOxidative and inhibiting it aT higher. Tyrosine kinase inhibitor - is tyrosine kinase inhibitION. Redox-active - free radicals poisonS. Cancer links - , instead of .; after radio-therapy and no , after although. Carcinogenic - whICH may lead to leukemia. Ref. 9 - shouldn't that be fLavanones etc.? Ref. 16 - obviously gamma instead of g.

Blacklisted Links Found on Genistein[edit]

Cyberbot II has detected links on Genistein which have been added to the blacklist, either globally or locally. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed or are highly inappropriate for Wikipedia. The addition will be logged at one of these locations: local or global If you believe the specific link should be exempt from the blacklist, you may request that it is white-listed. Alternatively, you may request that the link is removed from or altered on the blacklist locally or globally. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. Please do not remove the tag until the issue is resolved. You may set the invisible parameter to "true" whilst requests to white-list are being processed. Should you require any help with this process, please ask at the help desk.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

http://www.drugfuture.com/chemdata/genistein.html
Triggered by \bdrugfuture\.com\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 08:44, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Two newer studies show benefits towards Testosterone levels and testicular weight.[edit]

Quite a few newer studies than the 1998 one which was cited as destroying testes have surfaced in my research. (the 1998 study does not even mention dosages in the excerpt, making it useless ihmo) They have the opposite claim, that Genistein may help protect testicles from the deleterious effect of estrogen when administered in moderate quantities:

http://www.researchgate.net/publication/236869307_Effects_of_isoflavones_on_testicular_weight_and_testosterone_secretion_in_ISA_Brown_roosters

http://www.hindawi.com/journals/bmri/2014/598630/

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12840195

http://dbzach.fst.msu.edu/publications/pdf/Fielden-FoodChemTox41(4)447-54,2003.pdf

This may reveal a possible smear-campaign attempt against isoflavones in general. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NeferiusNexus (talk • contribs) 04:47, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

High doses[edit]

It reads: “ In high doses it was found to be strongly toxic to normal cells.” This is dog whistle to some people. Could someone include the real world human dose calculation? Ounces of tofu a day? Pounds? Tons? Nicmart (talk) 10:28, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]