Breaking: Eggs not bad for you and the NYT is on it

posted at 9:35 pm on January 28, 2013 by Mary Katharine Ham

You see what I did there?

Oh, the poor maligned egg. Formerly a cherished staple of American breakfasts, it has in the last several decades been blamed for high cholesterol, heart attacks, and obesity. But not anymore, sayeth the New York Times. You’ll be glad to know that if common sense had convinced you eating eggs was probably a-okay—even the yolk!— you are safe. The New York Times is allowing “Eggs [to] Regain Their Reputation.”

Egg yolks are high in cholesterol, but a new analysis adds to the evidence that they are not the dietary sin we once thought they were. The review suggests that for most people, eating one egg a day is not bad for the heart.

Researchers reviewed eight prospective studies including 263,938 subjects and pooled the data for analysis. They found no evidence that eating up to an egg a day increased the risk of heart disease or stroke. The results were the same for men and women and in all age ranges.

Diabetic patients were the only exception. For them, high egg consumption was associated with an increased risk of heart disease and a reduced risk for hemorrhagic stroke. But there were too few diabetics in the studies to draw reliable conclusions.

A little further down in this story we find this:

A co-author of the study, Dr. Frank B. Hu, a professor of nutrition and epidemiology at Harvard, said that eating two or three or more eggs a day might be harmful, in theory, although there are no data on that.

So, one egg a day doesn’t increase the likelihood of disease and there’s “no data” to suggest even three eggs a day would. But a quick perusal of the New York Times‘ own archives seems to suggest it certainly thought there was plenty of data to scare us off of eggs. I’m amazed again and again how conventional wisdom on foods that are “bad for you” solidifies with so little data to support it. Please see: salt, which I’ve been trying to convince people isn’t necessarily unhealthy for years, but the conventional wisdom is so strong, people think I’m a conspiracy theorist. The New York Times recently came around on this one, too. Let’s follow eggs’ journey.

“A Heart Expert’s Prescription for the Nation,” 1989:

“We want you to concentrate on the biggest enemy,” Dr. Castelli said. ”If I take saturated fat out of your diet, I automatically don’t have to take out the cholesterol, with a couple of exceptions.” The exceptions are foods like egg yolks and organ meats. ”We’re not against the egg, just against the yolk,” he said. ”White is sensational protein. You can fry up all the whites you want.”

“Report Urges Low-Fat Diet for Everyone,” 1990: A front-page story on a federal commission’s recommendations, including an egg condemnation:

The new report recommends that all Americans from age 2 onwards consume no more than 30 percent of their calories as fat, a decrease of about 15 percent from the fats that most adults consume today. For children, a 30 percent fat diet is a ‘goal’ and for adults it is a maximum. The group also said that unsaturated fats, which, like butter, are solids at room temperature, should constitute no more than 10 percent of the calories consumed. The average American diet now obtains 13 percent of its calories from these fats. Polyunsatuated fats like corn oil should constitute up to 10 percent of fats consumed, and monounsaturated fats like olive oil should constitute the rest of fat calories.

The report also recommends that Americans consume less than 300 milligrams of cholesterol a day, a decline from the average 304 milligrams a day for women and 435 milligrams a day for men. The yolk from a large egg contains 274 milligrams of cholesterol.

The recommended diet would contain more fruits, vegetables and grains, and more skim milk than the average American diet today. It would contain fewer egg yolks and less meat. People are advised to keep the fat content of foods firmly in mind as they select foods at grocery stores and restaurants.

“The Joy of Eggs (in Moderation, of Course) Is Rediscovered,” 1993 allows a recipe that includes eggs, with the proper apologies, of course.

“Heart Ills and Cholesterol May Not Be Linked in Old Age,” 1994, suggests that egg = high cholesterol = heart attacks is not the simple equation nutritionists and reporters had assumed it was:

At first glance, the questioning of cholesterol’s effects may sound odd, heart disease researchers said. After all, if large amounts of cholesterol in the blood encourage the buildup of artery-clogging plaque in middle-aged people and even in people as old as 65, why would they not do the same in the very old?

One possible explanation, said Dr. David Kritchevsky, a cholesterol researcher at the Wistar Institute in Philadelphia, is that anyone who reaches 80 or so with a high cholesterol level and no evident heart disease may be immune to cholesterol’s effects. “The bullet has missed you,” he said.

But Dr. Kritchevsky said many people did not want to hear that they could ignore cholesterol after reaching a certain age. “What has happened is that the risk factor has become the disease,” he said. High cholesterol levels themselves have come to be viewed as a pathology.

Dr. Kritchevsky said many old people and their doctors were so convinced that high cholesterol levels were dangerous at any age that the question of whether to measure them, or try to lower them if they were high, might never come up. “My own father, who is 82, announced to me that he was going to stop eating eggs,” Dr. Kritchevsky said. “I told him, ‘Eating eggs is what got you here.’ “

A piece entitled “Personal Health,” suggests the NYT was on this story, and should have stayed on it, as far back as 1995:

In recent decades the egg, like Humpty Dumpty, has had a great fall. Since the mid-1940′s, concern about cholesterol and heart disease has sent per capita consumption plummeting from more than 400 eggs a year to only 235 in 1992, according to the latest figures available.

But after a half-century of hard knocks, 1995 may be the year that the egg, unlike Humpty, gets put together again. After three decades of blanket dietary advice to keep daily cholesterol intake below 300 milligrams and to limit egg consumption to four yolks a week, some experts on diet and heart disease are considering a more individualized approach that would allow a large portion of the population to eat more eggs, as well as other foods, like shrimp, that are relatively high in cholesterol but low in fat.

The interest in eggs stems from several incontrovertible facts. Eggs are inexpensive, readily available, easy to chew and digest, simple to prepare, relatively low in calories, and rich in protein, iron and many other essential nutrients. Unfortunately, eggs are also rich in cholesterol. The yolk of one large egg (the whites are free of both fat and cholesterol) has 213 milligrams of cholesterol and 5 grams of fat; 2 of them are saturated fat, which can raise blood levels of cholesterol.

“Go Ahead and Have Another Egg, Ads Say,” 1997, features the federal government running a campaign to goose the egg industry after derping it into despair.

A national advertising campaign this summer says it has the final word on eggs and cholesterol. “The good news about eggs just got better,” the headline boasts.

“More studies say eggs are O.K.,” the advertisement continues, showing a mouth-watering picture of a green pepper-and-mushroom omelet. “The conclusion: If you’re healthy, go right ahead and enjoy your eggs. Your cholesterol will probably stay about the same.”

Nutritionists caution, however, that people with cholesterol problems — and those with heart disease — should still be careful about how many eggs they eat.
The advertising campaign was approved by the Agriculture Department, which also publishes guidelines recommending that people try to control their cholesterol. The agency said the advertisements had been reviewed by a panel of scientists and by the Food and Drug Administration before being released.

A pro-egg era continues with 1997′s “Scientists Ease up on Fear of Eggs.”

When it comes to eggs, few medical experts are neutral. Either they want to see the entire population, young, old, women, children, those with low cholesterol levels and those with high cholesterol levels, assiduously restricting egg consumption. Or they dismiss the anti-egg movement as so much dogmatism by heart disease fanatics.

The truth, as scientists now view it, seems to be not in the middle but more to the side of those who would like to see Americans relax about eggs — a sentiment that is growing.

Yes, eggs contain about 215 milligrams of cholesterol in their yolks.

Yes, cholesterol in the diet is capable of raising the levels of cholesterol in the blood.

But individual responses to cholesterol in food vary so greatly that some people show virtually no effect. And in any event, the primary culprit is not cholesterol in the diet but saturated fat in the diet.

Also, genetics play a much larger role in how one’s body responds to cholesterol than diet. There is some more interesting data in this story, which seems to refute Dr. Hu’s assertion today that there’s “no data” on what three to four eggs a day might do to a person. Or, perhaps he just meant there’s “no data” to prove it harmful:

But two studies by Dr. Henry N. Ginsberg at Columbia University’s College of Physicians and Surgeons found that young men and women who ate as many as three to four eggs a day for weeks on end had virtually no change in their blood cholesterol levels.

This is pretty good information to include in any piece that mentions eggs and cholesterol.

1998: OH, GAWD, WE HAVE NO FARGING IDEA! “Feeding Frenzy; It’s Good. No, It’s Bad. No, It’s Good. Really. I Think.”

EGGS: Once condemned for their high cholesterol content, eggs might be okay after all for most people, who can safely eat a few a week without worrying about their blood-cholesterol level.

Along the way, throughout the early 2000s, there were a handful of very concerned feature stories about people with heart disease, which blithely condemned eggs without mentioning that actual data printed in the New York Times suggested conventional wisdom on eggs was incorrect and that they have different implications for different populations.

And, in 1999, we have “Eggs Eaten in Moderation Pass Muster, Study Finds,” which may sound familiar:

An egg a day is O.K. for most people, according to researchers who found that healthy people eating up to seven eggs a week did not increase their risk of heart attack or stroke.

“Our study doesn’t mean that people should go back to the typical Western diet — a breakfast with two eggs, bacon, sausage, butter and toast,” said Dr. Frank B. Hu, a nutritional epidemiologist at the Harvard School of Public Health, who led the research. “This kind of diet is very unhealthy. But eggs per se, I don’t think they deserve such a bad reputation.”

Diabetics, however, do face higher risks of heart attack or stroke with increased egg consumption, according to the study, which is being published today in The Journal of the American Medical Association.

A spokeswoman for the American Heart Association, which was not involved in the study, said the findings would not change the association’s belief that Americans should limit their dietary cholesterol.

“These new data do not conflict with the American Heart Association’s recommendations that healthy individuals consume no more than 300 milligrams of dietary cholesterol per day,” said the spokeswoman, Dr. Alice H. Lichtenstein of the Department of Agriculture’s nutrition center at Tufts University.

That’s the same Dr. Hu who is the co-author of the meta-analysis which sparked today’s “Eggs Regain Reputation.” Maybe they can keep it this time.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Maybe the egg thread can scramble the Palin thread for high comments!

can_con on January 28, 2013 at 10:37 PM

I’m sorry but I don’t look to the NYT for any advice on nutrition or anything else. I don’t read the NYT but will grab a copy if it’s around to line my cat’s litter box.

TulsAmerican on January 28, 2013 at 10:41 PM

My hens are quite egg-cited about this good news. It means their eggs, and not them, will have a higher likelihood of being eaten.

TXUS on January 28, 2013 at 10:44 PM

Any active gym enthusiast could’ve told you this. Eggs are one of, if not the best source of protein on the planet.

njrob on January 28, 2013 at 11:00 PM

eggs are one of my favorite foods and i eat them all the time <333 so i hope they're not bad for you, lol. but really, my health is fine- it's pretty rare that i get sick. i don't think they're that bad, especially the special kinds of eggs that have added vitamins in them. (and cage-free, vegetarian0fed hens) i prefer those eggs to just regular, normal eggs. they taste better ^___^

Sachiko on January 28, 2013 at 11:01 PM

now i’m reading the thread comments and see that you all love eggs too! i’m surprised. it always seemed like i ate so many more of them than everyone else, i thought a lot of people didn’t like eggs that much. now i’m happy XD

Sachiko on January 28, 2013 at 11:07 PM

Also, the whole idea that cholesterol is killing is likely a myth as well. But hey, those drug companies are making billions off those drugs, will be shortly after they lose the patent protection before we learn the truth likely.

astonerii on January 28, 2013 at 9:48 PM

Yes, and …

The whole low fat, high carb recommendations recommendations by the AHA, AMA, etc. are falling on their faces. I recommend everybody interested in this subject read Gary Taubes book “Good Calories Bad Calories.” The accumulated research shows that it is clearly high carb intakes, effecting insulin levels that is the culprit for heart disease and diabetes. Fat (except for heated vegetable oils and transfats) have no effect in a low carb environment. Another good book is “The Great Cholesterol Con.” Your body makes more cholesterol than is in your food and it is only arterial damage, caused by small particle type LDL from high carb/sugar foods that allows the cholesterol to accumulate in the arterial walls. Eggs are the most healthy foods you can eat. Slowly, the food pyramid will be turned on its head as more people find out the truth.

Decoski on January 28, 2013 at 9:49 PM

… yes. I cannot wait — I simply cannot wait — until the whole cholesterol thing implodes just like AGW. It will, it most assuredly will, I am certain. I gave my family doctor a print of the cover of “The Great Cholesterol Con” and she looked archly at me as if I was going to give her a live cobra. The whole topic of so-called high cholesterol caused me to do a lot of reading about its history and how it got to be such a health issue. Surprise! The real story is muddier than the Mississippi River, yet the medical and drug industry zeroed in on cholesterol itself as the root of all maladies. I can’t help but paraphrase Ayn Rand’s quote here: “When there aren’t enough patients, one then makes them [by convincing them they are sick or about to be from high cholesterol levels].

As for eggs, I love ‘em. Always have, always will.

PatriotGal2257 on January 28, 2013 at 11:07 PM

I don’t know why people listen to a) “scientists” who have an agenda and/or rely on the “right” results to get funding and keep their jobs; and, worse, b) people with communication/journalism degrees.

besser tot als rot on January 28, 2013 at 11:08 PM

Yet thanks to politics, subsidies, etc they” never admit that high fructose corn syrup is the main cause of the obesity epidemic.

Oxymoron on January 28, 2013 at 11:34 PM

Yet thanks to politics, subsidies, etc they” never admit that high fructose corn syrup is the main cause of the obesity epidemic.

Oxymoron on January 28, 2013 at 11:34 PM

Egg-xactly! (had to insert that woefully bad pun :))

PatriotGal2257 on January 28, 2013 at 11:36 PM

Obligatory video comment

Shy Guy on January 28, 2013 at 11:41 PM

Why aren’t there more chicks here?

Fallon on January 28, 2013 at 10:13 PM

When you say “here”, do you mean Chicago?

Shy Guy on January 28, 2013 at 11:43 PM

Yet thanks to politics, subsidies, etc they” never admit that high fructose corn syrup is the main cause of the obesity epidemic.

Oxymoron on January 28, 2013 at 11:34 PM

Lately, I’ve been hearing that it’s grains.

As some guy on the radio said recently, “If you want to fatten a pig or cow for market, what do you feed it?”

trigon on January 28, 2013 at 11:57 PM

I eat a lot of eggs and I don’t give a fig what anyone says about it.

Dack Thrombosis on January 29, 2013 at 12:09 AM

I guess eating too much sweet or fatty food is potentially not good for you unless you need the energy like an alpine climber or an Eskimo or what not.

Then again if you are stranded in the desert and alls you got is eggs, why sir…I reckon you can eat thems too.

Common sense ….who woulda thunk it??

On some days a year you might even have you a 32 ounce colee AND three eggs! (It might be illegal in some sheetass places, but you won’t die, no sir!)

So have at it, just not every GD day!

Sherman1864 on January 29, 2013 at 12:12 AM

So lol away you LOLlygaggers, cause ole Shermy here says so!

Sherman1864 on January 29, 2013 at 12:17 AM

But we are suppose to buy that they know what they are talking about when it comes to “climate change”? I don’t think so.

Cindy Munford on January 29, 2013 at 12:18 AM

I am still waiting for someone to adequately explain why Diet Coke is bad for us. So far I’ve gotten is “it just is.”

Mallard T. Drake on January 29, 2013 at 12:30 AM

Mallard T. Drake on January 29, 2013 at 12:30 AM

I think they are suggesting it has a lot of sodium. Which will be good for us next week.

Cindy Munford on January 29, 2013 at 12:31 AM

Actually cultural studies determine this in 1987. Hey, But why break the gravy train of government leeches.

pat on January 29, 2013 at 1:02 AM

I eat lots of eggs. my chickens are egg laying machines I sell/trade about 20 dollars worth per week at the farmers market. they provide all of my wife’s and my fruits and veg plus we eat about 5 per day. And I only spend about 10 bucks on feed per month. it aint a bad deal.

esnap on January 29, 2013 at 1:16 AM

junk science from the beginning. Anyone that would listen to the USDA the group that brought us obesity and diabetic epidemics as they played god with our eating habits based on junk science is nuts.

High carb low fat diets lead to obesity and diabties.

eggs continue everything a embryo needs to grow into a full formed baby chick. In other words and egg is natures own little miracle food. EVERYTHING froma nutrituional stand point is in an egg. From the correct amount of fat protien and carbs to the right amnio acids, vits and minerals to fully form a baby chick. Nothing else is placed into the egg from the moment it is laid until the chick hatches. It has to contain all the needed ingredients to produce life. Anyone that things this food is “bad for you” seriously needs to check their IQ.

this is why you don’t want a bunch of elites in a far away city controlling your life. when people go to the same colleges and are around the same people day after day they tend to devolve into groupthink.

Everything the liberals have told you about our food for the last 40 years is hogwash.

unseen on January 29, 2013 at 1:43 AM

As some guy on the radio said recently, “If you want to fatten a pig or cow for market, what do you feed it?”

trigon on January 28, 2013 at 11:57 PM

carbs…be it grains or grass or oats or barley or apples etc. You feed livestock carbs to fatten them up. And once you think about it the animals with the highest chlestrol is ones that eat nothing but carbs….so ask yourself this if meat is high in chlestrol and the animals only eat carbs what makes people think meat causesthe body to build up chlestrol?

unseen on January 29, 2013 at 1:50 AM

Now this was a fun thread…

fabrexe on January 29, 2013 at 3:12 AM

Yes. A fun thread!

As for diabetes, the causes are not known so much as the effects, unfortunately. Look for yourself on ADA website.

I am still waiting for someone to adequately explain why Diet Coke is bad for us. So far I’ve gotten is “it just is.”
Mallard T. Drake on January 29, 2013 at 12:30 AM

They can’t and they won’t ….

And while eating too much may kill you, not eating at all will kill you faster.

Let thy medicine be thy food and thy food by thy medicine.

Or reverse that.

Sherman1864 on January 29, 2013 at 5:29 AM

Be thy!!

Sherman1864 on January 29, 2013 at 5:30 AM

I don’t know why people listen to a) “scientists” who have an agenda and/or rely on the “right” results to get funding and keep their jobs; and, worse, b) people with communication/journalism degrees.

besser tot als rot on January 28, 2013 at 11:08 PM

That is the heart of it. Most of us do not read all of the scientific literature ourselves and are not able to interpret what we read if we did. So, when someone with authority (respected journalists, for example) tell us something, most of us accept it.

And increasingly, science has become a tool or prop for politicians. Whether it’s cherry-picking studies they like or paying for others to reach the conclusion they want our public servants squander our tax dollars to impose the findings they want on us. I’m one who has always believed that government must support academic research and development, but the more government finances agenda driven medical and global warming, etc, the more I question my own stance.

MJBrutus on January 29, 2013 at 5:45 AM

Let’s be clear here folks, there are no “experts”. Some people claim to be “experts”, or have “expert” bestowed upon them by others but in reality, all it is is that they might know a little bit more on a subject than others. The rest is just guess work. If that wasn’t true then why do virtually all “experts” do a 180 on their preachings every 7 or so years. That old line “in light of new findings we now realize that we’ve been wrong all along” is getting pretty boring.

Most people wing it 99.99% of the time, in all aspects of life. The word “expert” is one of the most misused words in our language.

Except sesqui of course, he/she/it is a bonafide expert on virtually everything.

NapaConservative on January 29, 2013 at 6:41 AM

Saliva causes cancer. But only if swallowed in small amounts over a long period of time.

Bad news. They’ve discovered Chirpees in Parakeets. The good news is it’s tweetable.

bluesdoc70 on January 29, 2013 at 7:29 AM

I actually don’t just wing it most of the time.

I guess that puts me in the 00.01 percent group.

I do however avoid the “let’s be clear” line because it is a favorite of Obama’s.

Otherwise, the incredible edible egg.

Sherman1864 on January 29, 2013 at 7:50 AM

Ham and eggs.

Green eggs and Ham.

Sherman1864 on January 29, 2013 at 7:51 AM

Within years of seeing Sleeper I realized that Woody Allen accurately predicted the future for healthy food…. and I have since given up on all attempts by so-called ‘modern’ food Nazis to tell you what is and is not good for everyone.

Now how long is it to the orgasmatron, I wonder?

ajacksonian on January 29, 2013 at 7:58 AM

The word “expert” is one of the most misused words in our language.

Except sesqui of course, he/she/it is a bonafide expert on virtually everything.

NapaConservative on January 29, 2013 at 6:41 AM

As the old saying goes, “An expert is someone from out-of-town with slides! “

2L8 on January 29, 2013 at 8:01 AM

Replace egg with climate change and you will get the same thread – as one by one studies come out showing that the “scientific consensus” on man-made global warming is being shown to be as valid as the egg-demonizers.

Scientific consensus, not that long ago, held universally that bleeding a sick person would cure them.

Always go back to the scene from Sleeper where the scientist from the future says that red meat, tobacco, deep-fat fried foods and hot fudge were the healthiest things you could put in your body!

sultanp on January 29, 2013 at 8:13 AM

Yolk, yolk, yolk. You rang?

Steve Eggleston on January 28, 2013 at 9:44 PM

Oh for heaven’s sake, it’s so obvious. Mary Katharine and Steve should do a column together. Ham and Eggs.

Fallon on January 29, 2013 at 8:18 AM

Ham and eggs.

Green eggs and Ham.

Sherman1864 on January 29, 2013 at 7:51 AM

And, I totally missed this. Sorry about that. Are your toes sore from my awkward dancin’?

Fallon on January 29, 2013 at 8:19 AM

I actually don’t just wing it most of the time.

I guess that puts me in the 00.01 percent group.

Sherman1864 on January 29, 2013 at 7:50 AM

Let’s be clear here Sherman, you’re fukcing special.

NapaConservative on January 29, 2013 at 8:28 AM

Also, genetics play a much larger role in how one’s body responds to cholesterol than diet.

Half of who you are is your genetics & the other half is how your environment affects those genetics.

We can see what the white man’s diet has done to the American Indians.
They need to go back to their cultural historic diet.
I am amazed at how many people take what is said in the media & print as gospel truths.
My mother in law believes everything that’s printed in Star magazine!

I eat whatever the frack I want & use my common sense.
Sometimes I have too much candy over a period of time & my a$$ gets big.
So I cut down.
Don’t understand fat? Go here.

In fact, this is a website that has quite a lot of good research information about medical things.
And it’s for high school kids. I use it in my classes all the time.
Educate yourself.

Badger40 on January 29, 2013 at 8:31 AM

And, I totally missed this. Sorry about that. Are your toes sore from my awkward dancin’?
Fallon on January 29, 2013 at 8:19 AM

Not to worry! Sore toes are the pitfall of genius (I wish!).

Sherman1864 on January 29, 2013 at 8:50 AM

Thank God that the NYT is on this! Otherwise Mayor Bloomberg would feel compelled to waste more taxpayer money on regulating the number of eggs a restaurant could serve customers. Or do you regulate the size of the eggs? Or do you check each chicken for cholesterol output and only allow eggs from certified chickens. Then there would be the cost of chasing down the egg bootleggers.

bartbeast on January 29, 2013 at 8:56 AM

Oh for heaven’s sake, it’s so obvious. Mary Katharine and Steve should do a column together. Ham and Eggs.

Fallon on January 29, 2013 at 8:18 AM

Funniest thing I heard all day. I’m nowhere near MK’s league.

Steve Eggleston on January 29, 2013 at 8:57 AM

I pay no attention to anything “experts” or the government says about what’s good and bad for me. My common sense is far more reliable and doesn’t lie to me in order to prop up one industry or another.

The Rogue Tomato on January 29, 2013 at 9:17 AM

-_-

Bmore on January 29, 2013 at 9:20 AM

MJBrutus on January 29, 2013 at 5:45 AM

Love the “respected journalist” line. I had a good laugh.

Cindy Munford on January 29, 2013 at 10:01 AM

Oh, the poor maligned egg. Formerly a cherished staple of American breakfasts …

Eggs? Pffft. Bourbon; now there’s a cherished breakfast staple.

M240H on January 29, 2013 at 10:54 AM

I love Ham on eggs.

peski on January 29, 2013 at 10:54 AM

If you must have something to worry about, make it Inflammation. When it is present , that’s when the gunk starts clogging up the arteries. Make sure you doctor tests C-Reactive Protein (CRP) in your annual blood tests.

FlatlanderByTheLake on January 29, 2013 at 11:00 AM

Hah, good thing I learned not to listen to these capricious so called “scientific” studies a long time ago. One could substitute coffee for eggs or global warming, or the “ten feet of impacted feces” meme in the article. I’ll bet that all these were funded by our tax dollars by vegan liberals at one time or another.

jake49 on January 29, 2013 at 11:02 AM

Ahhh the left, they believe in “dietary sins” and “environmental sins” but not actual sins.

29Victor on January 29, 2013 at 11:07 AM

This is what ticks me off about all science reporting now days.

We have to accept this new “fact” as gospel truth or we’re some kind of nuts while prior to this we had to accept an opposing “fact” as gospel truth or we were some kind of nuts.

But, if we don’t accept science as absolute truth….we’re nuts.

29Victor on January 29, 2013 at 11:10 AM

I love Ham on eggs.

peski on January 29, 2013 at 10:54 AM

iswydt

29Victor on January 29, 2013 at 11:15 AM

Try this on for size, cholesterol has nothing to do with CAD. The whole issue is one of inflammation of vascular structures. Low cholesterol diets or diets low in fat and no influence on the issue. People with naturally occurring high cholesterol, may have a genetic predisposition to the inflammation. Big pharma is fighting this tooth and nail as they promote statin drugs. Those drugs reduce cholesterol by 40% but do not really reduce CAD and MI>

davidcaskey on January 29, 2013 at 11:19 AM

I always laugh when I see people ordering egg whites in the deli every morning. Why oh why oh why oh why would you deprive yourself of the absolute best part of an egg?

Sharke on January 29, 2013 at 11:21 AM

Otherwise Mayor Bloomberg would feel compelled to waste more taxpayer money on regulating the number of eggs a restaurant could serve customers. Or do you regulate the size of the eggs? Or do you check each chicken for cholesterol output and only allow eggs from certified chickens. Then there would be the cost of chasing down the egg bootleggers.

Hmmm, Bloomie would insist on regulation that only egg whites be served by restaurants, and grocery stores limiting customers to one dozen per month upon providing verifiable ID and acceptable cholesterol count.

hawkeye54 on January 29, 2013 at 11:29 AM

Why oh why oh why oh why would you deprive yourself of the absolute best part of an egg?

Absolutely.

hawkeye54 on January 29, 2013 at 11:30 AM

I actually started eating eggs two years ago as part of a low glycemic/low carb diet. I’ve lost 50lbs and kept it off, without a whole lot of exercise, or really much effort at all. I know this isn’t scientific, but I just don’t see how I could be at a higher risk of morbidity without manboobs and a gut. If I am, so what. Early death is worth looking and feeling good for the next few decades.

EricW on January 29, 2013 at 11:36 AM

I always laugh when I see people ordering egg whites in the deli every morning. Why oh why oh why oh why would you deprive yourself of the absolute best part of an egg?
Sharke on January 29, 2013 at 11:21 AM

Job 6:6 “Can that which is unsavory be eaten without salt? or is there any taste in the white of an egg?”

samuelrylander on January 29, 2013 at 12:18 PM

I actually started eating eggs two years ago as part of a low glycemic/low carb diet. I’ve lost 50lbs and kept it off, without a whole lot of exercise, or really much effort at all. I know this isn’t scientific, but I just don’t see how I could be at a higher risk of morbidity without manboobs and a gut. If I am, so what. Early death is worth looking and feeling good for the next few decades.

EricW on January 29, 2013 at 11:36 AM

This is my experience as well. I started eating only slow carbs, but mostly sticking with veggies, meat, nuts, some fruits, some dairy, etc. I allows myself one cheat day per week on which to enjoy pizza or whatever. I too lost 50 lbs with no effort and have kept it off for 2 years.

And I enjoyed 2 eggs bathed in Chalula just this morning. YUM!

stvnscott on January 29, 2013 at 12:43 PM

Everything in moderation.

You can even drown yourself by drinking too much water.

The fact is that a lot of foods that are high in something “bad” for you, have something else that balances and mitigates the bad. Eggs are a source of cholesterol, but the other proteins and enzymes actually help your body process it very well.

Whole milk, while high the evil word “fat” is actually well balanced with the proteins and milk fat is easily processed. Kids that still have their baby fat can actually reduce that with drinking 2% and whole milk.

But if it’s not a poison, anything we can eat is ok in moderation. All of it. Salt, sugar, fat, etc. is all part of a diet eaten in proper portions. Period.

But the nanny state just won’t have that. . .

PastorJon on January 29, 2013 at 1:09 PM

Eggs are bad / eggs are good / bad / good
Wine is bad / wine is good
coffee bad / coffee good
EVERYTHING we friggin eat or drink has been declared good and bad back and forth – I’m tired of this crap.
I’ll eat and drink whatever I dam well feel like – no matter what Nanny Bloomingidiot or anyone else says.

dentarthurdent on January 29, 2013 at 1:22 PM

On to the next health scare:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/01/28/cdc-leafy-greens-poultry-dairy-foodborne-illness/1872557/

LOL!!!

patch on January 29, 2013 at 1:42 PM

I can’t wait for the headline “arugula causes cancer”

dentarthurdent on January 29, 2013 at 2:13 PM

Please see: salt, which I’ve been trying to convince people isn’t necessarily unhealthy for years, but the conventional wisdom is so strong, people think I’m a conspiracy theorist.

It’s not salt, it’s FREEDOM!!

At least, I seem to remember hearing someone say that.

I was thinking just recently that almost everything I’ve been told about which foods were healthy and which were not is at least arguable, and much of it dead wrong. From a child, we were taught that eating healthy meant eating lots of whole grains and vegetables, and avoiding meat. But when I was trying to lose weight, I was getting nowhere until I learned to cut out the grains, breads, and other starches, and up the protein in meat. We were also taught that fat was bad for you, especially animal fat. But that appears to have been based on very poor science indeed, that assumed if you consumed a fat, it went straight to the fat stores on your body, completely ignoring how our bodies actually digest food.

I figured out as a teenager that eggs were actually good for you in moderation, and a decent portion of meats were also good for you. But now I’ve come to realize that much of the obesity we see around us is because of people eating way too much energy-dense grains, breads, and other starches instead of healthy portions of meats and proteins and smaller portions of starches, with a fair amount of fruits and vegetables.

And I’ve come to realize there are precious few reliable rules for our diets, except to eat a variety of foods, plenty of proteins including eggs, and limit mostly-empty foods like chips, breads, grains, and pastries.

Which makes it all the more remarkable that one old rule about diet still holds true: too much sugar is not really good for you.

tom on January 29, 2013 at 10:26 PM

Eggs used to be bad for you? I really have to start paying attention.

mchristian on January 28, 2013 at 9:40 PM

You have great instincts. You started paying attention at just the right time.

tom on January 29, 2013 at 10:27 PM

Absolutely. Eggsolutely.

hawkeye54 on January 29, 2013 at 11:30 AM

FIFY

CW on January 30, 2013 at 7:49 AM

Here’s egg on your face!

Sherman1864 on January 30, 2013 at 4:24 PM

Comment pages: 1 2