Talk:Genistein

message: 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)
thread_title:  Not so shiny 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Genistein vs. phytoestrogens 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Tamoxifen 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Coherence 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Snipping 

message: 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 IITalk to my owner:Online 08:44, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blacklisted Links Found on [[Genistein]] 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Two newer studies show benefits towards Testosterone levels and testicular weight. 

message: 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)
thread_title:  High doses