Egg lovers rejoice! They don’t cause heart disease, says new study
Those with prediabetes or type-2 diabetes shouldn’t fear eggs anymore, researchers say.
Eggs are one of those foods, like coffee, that nutritional science has gone back and forth on in terms of whether it’s healthy or not. The latest on coffee is that it’s loaded with antioxidants and may even be able to boost memory and cognitive skills. In fact, one study says 4-5 cups a day could have health benefits, as long as you aren’t a twitchy mess... and skip the cream and sugar. Now, eggs are having their time in the sun (figuratively speaking). According to a study out of the University of Sydney, which was recently published in The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, they don't cause heart disease.
How was the study conducted?
Researchers recruited 128 participants for a weight-maintenance study. They were split into two groups: the first group was told to consume just two eggs per week, while the other were instructed to eat 12 eggs per week. After that, they were put on a weight loss diet for another three months. Here, participants were told to omit saturated fats. These include butter and lard, which lead to atherosclerosis—the hardening of the arteries. They were to be replaced with monounsaturated and polyunsaturated fats, including olive oil and avocado. These help maintain proper cardiovascular health.
Over another 12 months, participants were told to continue with whatever type of egg diet they’d been prescribed. In the end, each volunteer underwent a number of tests to see if the cardiovascular system was affected, and if so how. Throughout the study, researchers monitored each participant’s blood pressure, blood sugar, and cholesterol.
In the past, nutritional scientists mistakenly gave eggs a bad name. Image credit: Pixababy.
What did they find?
Regardless of how many or how few eggs they ate, participants’ heart health stayed more or less the same. Bottom line: it didn’t matter how many eggs they ate because there were no cardiovascular effects. Egg consumption didn’t correlate with weight outcomes either. “Despite differing advice around safe levels of egg consumption for people with pre-diabetes and type 2 diabetes,” Dr. Fuller said, “our research indicates people do not need to hold back from eating eggs.”
How many eggs are safe to eat per week?
The results show that eggs are a great dietary addition to most diets; particularly those patients with pre-diabetes and even type 2 diabetes. Researchers found that up to 12 eggs per week is fine, even for those with the aforementioned pre-diabetes or type 2 diabetes. Such findings support a 2015 study which gave similar results.
Dr. Fuller was quoted as saying:
While eggs themselves are high in dietary cholesterol – and people with type 2 diabetes tend to have higher levels of the ‘bad’ low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol. This study supports existing research that shows consumption of eggs has little effect on the levels of cholesterol in the blood of the people eating them. Eggs are a source of protein and micro-nutrients that could support a range of health and dietary factors including helping to regulate the intake of fat and carbohydrate, eye and heart health, healthy blood vessels and healthy pregnancies.
So, coffee and eggs are safe. But what about other foods? Click here:
Famous physicists like Richard Feynman think 137 holds the answers to the Universe.
- The fine structure constant has mystified scientists since the 1800s.
- The number 1/137 might hold the clues to the Grand Unified Theory.
- Relativity, electromagnetism and quantum mechanics are unified by the number.
Younger Americans support expanding the Supreme Court and serious political reforms, says new poll.
- Americans under 40 largely favor major political reforms, finds a new survey.
- The poll revealed that most would want to expand the Supreme Court, impose terms limits, and make it easier to vote.
- Millennials are more liberal and reform-centered than Generation Z.
A 2020 study published in the journal of Psychological Science explores the idea that fake news can actually help you remember real facts better.
- In 2019, researchers at Stanford Engineering analyzed the spread of fake news as if it were a strain of Ebola. They adapted a model for understanding diseases that can infect a person more than once to better understand how fake news spreads and gains traction.
- A new study published in 2020 explores the idea that fake news can actually help you remember real facts better.
- "These findings demonstrate one situation in which misinformation reminders can diminish the negative effects of fake-news exposure in the short term," researchers on the project explained.
Previous studies on misinformation have already paved the way to a better understanding<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDU1NzQ4NC9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYxNjE2Mjg1Nn0.hs_xHktN1KXUDVoWpHIVBI2sMJy6aRK6tvBVFkqmYjk/img.jpg?width=1245&coordinates=0%2C800%2C0%2C823&height=700" id="fc135" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="246bb1920c0f40ccb15e123914de1ab1" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="fake news concept of misinformation and fake news in the media" />
How does misinformation spread?
Credit: Visual Generation on Shutterstock<p><strong>What is the "continued-influence" effect?</strong></p><p>A challenge in using corrections effectively is that repeating the misinformation can have negative consequences. Research on this effect (referred to as "continued-influence") has shown that information presented as factual that is later deemed false can still contaminate memory and reasoning. The persistence of the continued-influence effect has led researchers to generally recommend avoiding repeating misinformation. </p><p>"Repetition increases familiarity and believability of misinformation," <a href="https://engineering.stanford.edu/magazine/article/how-fake-news-spreads-real-virus" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">the study explains</a>.</p><p><strong>What is the "familiarity-backfire" effect?</strong></p><p>Studies of this effect have shown that increasing misinformation familiarity through extra exposure to it leads to misattributions of fluency when the context of said information cannot be recalled. <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0956797620952797#" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">A 2017 study</a> examined this effect in myth correction. Subjects rated beliefs in facts and myths of unclear veracity. Then, the facts were affirmed and myths corrected and subjects again made belief ratings. The results suggested a role for familiarity but the myth beliefs remained below pre-manipulation levels. </p>