Sure, but that degree certainly doesn't qualify you to defend the information you linked in post #27. If you had studied this issue extensively you'd know that isoflavones are dissimilar from estrogen in many ways. As I said before, unlike estrogen, isloflavones are tissue selective and can have estrogen-like effects in some tissue but either no effects or antiestrogenic effects in other tissues. Isoflavones are referred to as phytoestrogens because they bind to estrogen receptors and exert estrogen like effects under some conditions. However, the ability of a chemical to bind to hormone receptors, such as the estrogen receptor, won't tell you much about potency or any resulting biological activity. That explains why the breast cancer drug tamoxifen and the hormone estrogen both bind to estrogen receptors but the former exerts an antiestrogenic effect, while the latter exerts an estrogenic effect, on breast tissue.
As for the effects on infants and children, you can find legitimate research like this article that refutes what you posted earlier. Again, your linked research may be suggestive but it certainly doesn't prove anything.
I don't feel like arguing with you. You have defended Walmart in the past, so we must be on the same page.