Cracking Up: Debunking the “Eggs as Bad as Cigarettes” Myth
Remember the ‘70s when doctors equated eggs with cholesterol and heart disease? A recent Canadian study involving over 1,200 adults published in the peer-reviewed journal Atherosclerosis says that eating eggs yolks is about as bad as smoking cigarettes when it comes to advancing coronary heart disease. We’re already seeing cracks in the theory.
In the study, researchers recorded the number of eggs eaten and packs of cigarettes smoked as recalled by each adult (average age 62). Everyone in the study had been referred to a vascular prevention clinic at a Canadian hospital, meaning their heart health (and the habits that led them there) was already in question. The researchers found that, as expected, plaque build-up in their subjects’ carotid artery thickened with age, and even correlated with smoking and egg-eating habits.
Publications like The Daily Mail and Fox News have reported blindly on the matter, but thankfully there are others out there suspiciously raising eyebrows.
The UK’s National Health Service points out some of the study’s limitations, including:
- The accuracy of the participants’ recollections of egg yolk consumption.
- A lack of details regarding how the eggs were cooked (or not).
- Disregard for other factors of heart disease advancement, including but not limited to exercise, alcohol consumption, antidepressant use (antidepressants have been shown to cause arteries to thicken 400% faster than aging,) and other important dietary factors.
Neither the study in question nor the NHS takes into consideration, however:
- The harmful effects of the chemicals and hormones found in non-organic eggs.
- The effects on the human body from eating eggs from chicken given GMO feed.
- The living condition of the chickens.
Non-organic eggs can contain the same antibiotics, chemicals, and hormones administered to conventional chickens. Add GMO feed, polluted water, and unsanitary living conditions to these chickens, and you may have eggs that are little more than hard-shelled pellets of poison.
Organic eggs from healthy chickens on GMO-free feed have actually shown in many studies to prevent heart disease. They contain healthful amounts of protein, vitamin B, omega-3 fatty acids, and many nutrients like lutein and zeaxanthin, which reduce risk for age-related macular degeneration (AMD), a major cause of blindness.
The key? Moderation, as with most things, and buying organic eggs from local farmers who can raise their chickens in truly cage-free conditions. Happy, healthy chickens produce more healthful eggs.
Good read, Lisa. The lack of critical thinking is a key enabler of the tabloid style "health news" alerts.
Glad there are those out there spreading the truth!
Your conclusions are not particularly helpful for most of us.
Not all Americans have access to the kind of eggs you recommend, and many of us who do, can't afford them. It seems that you may actually agree with the study's conclusions, as regards typical eggs in the US. Are ordinary eggs really "little more than hard-shelled pellets of poison"? I don't think so. Maybe you could back that up with some citations. You may not be in the 'eggs are bad' camp, but are certainly in the 'most eggs are bad' camp.
How about some links to studies showing the benefits of ordinary eggs?
It appears to me that the two studies you link to in this sentence — "Organic eggs from healthy chickens on GMO-free feed have actually shown in many studies to prevent heart disease." — do not mention the source of their eggs, and I doubt they were of the type you claim. (I don't have the money to purchase the actual articles, but I did read the abstracts.)
Added hormones are prohibited in the US for all commercial chickens, including layers, as anyone can verify using their favorite search engine, or by reading the required disclaimer in the labeling on any egg or chicken package that claims to be 'free of added hormones'. Why do you mislead?
I'm disappointed that you advise against one of the few affordable, healthy foods available to many millions of us. Not as healthy as what you advocate, but what should the poor and middle-class substitute? Cheerios?
I'm especially disappointed in the lack of accuracy in your reporting.
The reason this is worthless is because they don’t mention WHAT ELSE these people ate besides eggs. Did they have toast with jam, oatmeal, french toast and pancakes with their eggs all those years? Those other things are shown to be very harmful. And relying on peoples’ memory of what they ate isn’t even accurate for 48 hours much less decades. Worthless.