Eggs
Options
Replies
-
Here’s my take on eggs, we’re not immortal creatures, so something will eventually get us. Eggs and fruit fill me up and keep me from over eating. As I’m fairly certain that obesity will kill me long before the 2 eggs I have a day will, I’m eating my eggs as part of slowly getting healthier diet. Last I checked water, air, salads, kale, and a bunch of other stuff is killing us too, thanks to pollution.5
-
The study was a 17 year study with very little to no control over variables. It’s your typical correlation does not equal causation. It didn’t find any biomechanical link between eggs and heart disease.
It truly amazes me the amount of studies that are incredibly flawed in design, make wild claims, gain massive popularity and then the next ten years of woo and fear are created.12 -
Dandylines wrote: »I interpreted the report as saying be careful if you are concerned about cholesterol. Some people are and some are not - depends on overall eating habits and genetics. I do have to watch it but eat only 4 eggs a week.
Looking at personal examples such as a 117 year old woman is not applicable. You need to know your own medical history and heredity also.
You also need to be aware that dietary cholesterol has only minimal effect on serum cholesterol
The recent analysis that is garnering all the attention links higher dietary cholesterol to increased mortality and increased incidence of cardiovascular disease in multiple studies tracking nearly 30,000 people for an average of 17 years. So the lack of a link between dietary cholesterol and serum cholesterol is irrelevant.
That said, I find the way the results are presented in the abstract (see the JAMAnetwork link upthread) -- I haven't read the full paper-- either confusing or suspicious.each additional 300 mg of dietary cholesterol consumed per day was significantly associated with higher risk of incident CVD (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.17; adjusted absolute risk difference [ARD], 3.24%) and all-cause mortality (adjusted HR, 1.18; adjusted ARD, 4.43%), and each additional half an egg consumed per day was significantly associated with higher risk of incident CVD (adjusted HR, 1.06; adjusted ARD, 1.11%) and all-cause mortality (adjusted HR, 1.08; adjusted ARD, 1.93%).
As written, it seems to imply a straight-line relationship between cholesterol consumption and increased mortality risk and CVD incidence, from 0 to max consumption found in participants, which seems highly unlikely to me. I would expect the slope of the relationship to change over the range of cholesterol consumption.
If anyone has read the full study and can shed any light on whether they're actually talking about a linear relationship, I would be interested.5 -
I'm hoping to see something that undercuts the analysis's conclusion. I eat a fair amount of eggs (I would say one to two eggs three to four times a week, and three eggs a couple of times a month), and not so much meat, so eggs and dairy are my major source of cholesterol. I just looked at my MFP report for cholesterol, and I've been under 300 mg dietary cholesterol only 29 of the past 90 days (plus 3 days over 1000 mg of cholesterol!). Since my serum cholesterol numbers come back in the OK to good range for the most part, I haven't worried about it. But with this direct connection between dietary cholesterol and mortality risk/CVD incidence, good serum cholesterol numbers apparently don't matter.
Still, this is a small percentage increased risk from the base risk. Around 6000 people of the nearly 30,000 had died at the (average) 17 year follow-up, or 20%. So if you have 300 mg of dietary cholesterol a day, you move from having a roughly 20% chance of dying in the next 17 years (from all causes -- average age of participant at start was 51 years) to a roughly 22% of dying during that time. I think I'm going to wait for more studies or analyses to confirm this before I worry about
5 -
I've been eating 13 a day for a couple of years,I'm still alive.3
-
marcusjgrose wrote: »I've been eating 13 a day for a couple of years,I'm still alive.
I like eggs.
I enjoy a fairly high TDEE compared to many people on this site.
I don't like eggs enough to devote more than 1000 Calories a day to them.
So good luck with that
As to the level of cholesterol which is significant for each of as as individuals, I found a discussion with a cardiac surgeon who had just performed a double by-pass on a relative who had NORMAL levels of blood cholesterol to be somewhat interesting: "it is not whether the level of cholesterol was too high in terms of population averages that matters, it is that for this individual that particular level of cholesterol was too high for her and enough to lead to blockages"
A second interesting point, which I already mentioned up-thread, is that even in the abstract the study in question mentions that once total cholesterol has been taken into account there was no finding of statistical significance when it came to whether the people had eaten more eggs. In other words, in my mind, their statistical finding was in terms of total dietary cholesterol.4 -
Those studies are impressing on people moreover the importance of monitoring their cholesterol levels. As such, balance is key. For instance, this past week, I had 8 whole eggs scrambled for dinner. But I don't eat eggs every day of the week--maybe once, twice or none at all per week.
This is why some people vary their diet with different sources of protein, fats, carbohydrates, vitamins and minerals weekly so that they don't encounter problems of eating too much of any single type of food on a daily basis, which my land them in the trouble with their health.0 -
lynn_glenmont wrote: »
I'm hoping to see something that undercuts the analysis's conclusion. I eat a fair amount of eggs (I would say one to two eggs three to four times a week, and three eggs a couple of times a month), and not so much meat, so eggs and dairy are my major source of cholesterol. I just looked at my MFP report for cholesterol, and I've been under 300 mg dietary cholesterol only 29 of the past 90 days (plus 3 days over 1000 mg of cholesterol!). Since my serum cholesterol numbers come back in the OK to good range for the most part, I haven't worried about it. But with this direct connection between dietary cholesterol and mortality risk/CVD incidence, good serum cholesterol numbers apparently don't matter.
Still, this is a small percentage increased risk from the base risk. Around 6000 people of the nearly 30,000 had died at the (average) 17 year follow-up, or 20%. So if you have 300 mg of dietary cholesterol a day, you move from having a roughly 20% chance of dying in the next 17 years (from all causes -- average age of participant at start was 51 years) to a roughly 22% of dying during that time. I think I'm going to wait for more studies or analyses to confirm this before I worry about
Just realized I put the decimal point in the wrong place in that calculation. (too late to edit my post)
If you have 300 mg of dietary cholesterol a day, you move from having a roughly 20% chance of dying in the next 17 years (from all causes -- average age of participant at start was 51 years) to a roughly 20.2% of dying during that time, not 22%, as I said above.3 -
What I find particularly disquieting about your analysis is that I apparently have at least a 20.2% chance of dying over the next 15 years!2
-
I eat three EVERY SINGLE DAY, and my cholesterol is in target range!0
-
The last time eggs were demonized the country went low fat. That turned out well. 🙄
5 -
The country (if the US is meant) never actually went low fat.
I'm pro egg, though, often eat about 12 per week. I'd like the read the whole study, although the numbers identified above don't bother me, especially since I think it's hard to exclude other reasons for the correlation.2 -
What I find particularly disquieting about your analysis is that I apparently have at least a 20.2% chance of dying over the next 15 years!
It disturbed me a bit too. But you do have to remember that some of 51-year-olds who were going to die within 17 years when you were 51 have already died, and you weren't one of them, so statistically, your odds of making it to 68 (51 + 17) are now better than they were when you 51.
6
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.9K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.8K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 398 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 976 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions