|
About This Author
Come closer.
|
Carrion Luggage #1087848 added April 23, 2025 at 8:42am
Restrictions: None
Science Eggsperiment
Today, we're taking a look at an age-old conundrum about eggs. No, not whether or not they preceded chickens (from an evolutionary perspective, they did), or why they're still so expensive, but, well, I'll let The Conversation explain it:
I'm tempted to answer "no." Most question headlines are answered "no."
You might have heard that eating too many eggs will cause high cholesterol levels, leading to poor health.
Researchers have examined the science behind this myth again, and again, and again – largely debunking the claim.
And yet, it persists, because people tend to remember only the first word on a subject, not its later retractions.
A new study suggests that, among older adults, eating eggs supports heart health and even reduces the risk of premature death.
This. This is why people don't trust nutrition science.
The article describes the study's methods. Then:
The research was published in a peer-reviewed journal, meaning this work has been examined by other researchers and is considered reputable and defensible.
At least, that's how it's supposed to work. Sometimes, though, things slip through.
Researchers received funding from a variety of national funding grants in the United States and Australia, with no links to commercial sources.
I'm glad they included this line, because funding can induce bias, even unconscious bias: a desire to get more funding, so we'll tend to produce the result they want. All those studies about how great dark chocolate is for you? Well, they might not be wrong, but they're suspicious because they were paid for by Willy Wonka.
Due to the type of study, it only explored egg consumption patterns, which participants self-reported. The researchers didn’t collect data about the type of egg (for example, chicken or quail), how it was prepared, or how many eggs are consumed when eaten.
There may be other confounding factors, too. It may be a correlation-not-causation thing: what if the high-level egg-eaters also had other dietary habits that are known to be heart-protective, like eating rabbit food?
The article notes other limitations of the study, then goes off on some other scientific research, apparently unrelated to eggs. This may be an editing issue.
Here's the important part, though:
The fuss over eggs comes down to their cholesterol content and how it relates to heart disease risk. A large egg yolk contains approximately 275 mg of cholesterol — near the recommended daily limit of cholesterol intake.
In the past, medical professionals warned that eating cholesterol-rich foods such as eggs could raise blood cholesterol and increase heart disease risk.
But newer research shows the body doesn’t absorb dietary cholesterol well, so dietary cholesterol doesn’t have a major effect on blood cholesterol levels.
Unlike the egg thing, the relationship between cholesterol and heart disease risk is well-founded. What wasn't well-founded, apparently, was the idea that eating foods that naturally contain cholesterol, like eggs, is linked to blood cholesterol levels.
While the science is still out, there’s no reason to limit egg intake unless specifically advised by a recognised health professional such as an accredited practising dietitian.
And I say we're already neurotic enough about food. Worrying about it so much can't possibly be good for you. |
© Copyright 2025 Robert Waltz (UN: cathartes02 at Writing.Com). All rights reserved.
Robert Waltz has granted InkSpot.Com, its affiliates and its syndicates non-exclusive rights to display this work. |
