Adapted by:
Pablo Martínez-Juarez
WriterEnvironmental economist and science journalist. For a few years, I worked as a researcher on the economics of climate change adaptation. Now I write about that and much more.
Karen Alfaro
WriterCommunications professional with a decade of experience as a copywriter, proofreader, and editor. As a travel and science journalist, I've collaborated with several print and digital outlets around the world. I'm passionate about culture, music, food, history, and innovative technologies.
You’ve probably heard it countless times: whether eggs are good or bad for your health. It’s a settled debate—the evidence that eggs are “bad” is limited and has been refuted by several studies, but the topic continues to be the subject of new research.
Studies continue to show that regular egg consumption poses no additional risk.
Another study on the list. A recent study on mortality associated with egg consumption found no evidence of increased mortality from eating eggs. What’s more, it found an inverse relationship between regular egg consumption and the risk of death from cardiovascular disease.
The study followed 8,756 people over 70 who provided information about their diets. Based on this data, the team divided participants into three groups: those who never or rarely ate eggs, those who ate eggs between one and six times a week, and those who ate eggs daily.
The verdict. The results showed that people in the moderate-consumption group had a 15% lower risk of death than those in the low-consumption group, after controlling for other factors. Researchers also observed a 29% reduction in heart disease–specific mortality.
From aspirin to eggs. The study was part of the ASPirin in Reducing Events in the Elderly (ASPREE) project, which, interestingly, is dedicated to studying the effects of aspirin in preventive medicine. It was published in the journal Nutrients.
But don’t eggs have cholesterol? “Eggs are a nutrient-dense food, they are a rich source of protein and a good source of essential nutrients, such as B vitamins, folate, unsaturated fatty acids, fat-soluble vitamins (E, D, A, and K), choline, and numerous minerals and trace elements,” Holly Wild, co-author of the study, said.
However, eggs have gotten a bad rap for their cholesterol content. Each egg contains about 275 milligrams of cholesterol—nearly the full recommended daily allowance, according to Lauren Ball and Karly Bartrim, experts at the University of Queensland in Australia.
Ball and Bartrim told The Conversation that the trick is absorption. Just because you eat a food high in cholesterol doesn’t mean your body will absorb it and send it into your bloodstream, where it can pose a risk.
This is how progress is made. The debate about the hypothetical health risks of eggs has gone on for years. It’s often been used to discredit advances in nutrition.
It’s true that the science of nutrients and their effects on our bodies is complex. The variety of human diets and the immense complexity of our biology make it extremely difficult to measure the impact of certain foods. It’s not surprising, then, that we occasionally encounter this kind of debate.
Conflicting results are common in science. Studies may produce errors due to flawed methods, calculation mistakes or simple statistical chance. That’s why findings must be tested multiple times, by different teams, using varied methods. Many errors and spurious relationships have been revealed this way. That’s how the process is supposed to work.
Image |Cara Beth Buie (Unsplash)
View 0 comments