3 ms·

let's say that what you are claiming is true (although your reference leaves much to be desired) - that doesn't mean that there is no "eggs-cholesterol danger",

by shlant 5y ago

let's say that what you are claiming is true (although your reference leaves much to be desired) - that doesn't mean that there is no "eggs-cholesterol danger", just that it was used as a narrative to combat inflation.

giantg2 5y ago
It depends on what you consider "danger". If you drink too much water that can be dangerous. I believe the general consensus is that 1-2 eggs a day is not harmful. I believe they've also shown that saturated vs unsaturated fat intake is the main driver of cholesterol (plus carbs), not cholesterol consumption itself. https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/what-should-you-eat/fats-and-cholesterol/cholesterol/ https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/what-should-you...
notafraudster 5y ago
In general it seems like -- and this is my outside perspective, not informed by any expertise, just casual reading -- the trajectory of nutritional science has more or less been "if something is bad in your body, then consuming it as part of your diet is bad; if something is good in your body, then consuming it as part of your diet is good" followed by later research saying "no, it turns out bioavailability doesn't work that way, and anyway the thing might have been a side effect rather than a cause of harm". See: dietary cholesterol, dietary fat, omega-3, probiotics, iron supplements, anti-oxidants
yissp 5y ago
> although your reference leaves much to be desired Is NPR not considered a trustworthy source? I thought they were generally fairly well regarded in that sense.
- shlant 5y ago
  NPR is just referencing a quote from someone in a book. Not saying NPR is untrustworthy, just that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
  - wombatmobile 5y ago
    > NPR is just referencing a quote from someone in a book. "Just"? Have you considered the verification processes NPR employs before it includes references in broadcasts and published articles?
  - Supermancho 5y ago
    What is extraordinary about a claim that eggs do or do not raise cholesterol negatively?
    - shlant 5y ago
      the extraordinary claim is that the narrative was made up to serve an alternate motive.
phkahler 5y ago
>> let's say that what you are claiming is true (although your reference leaves much to be desired) - that doesn't mean that there is no "eggs-cholesterol danger", just that it was used as a narrative to combat inflation. But the message itself was deceptive. Regardless of the truth value of "eggs-cholesterol danger" the reason for telling people was something else - to combat inflation. There are a number of problems with that kind of manipulation, one of which is that the truth value of the statement will never be ascertainable due to biases all around. BTW eggs contain everything you need (except air and water) to make a chicken. How bad can they be?

by shlant 5y ago

giantg2 5y ago

It depends on what you consider "danger". If you drink too much water that can be dangerous. I believe the general consensus is that 1-2 eggs a day is not harmful. I believe they've also shown that saturated vs unsaturated fat intake is the main driver of cholesterol (plus carbs), not cholesterol consumption itself. https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/what-should-you-eat/fats-and-cholesterol/cholesterol/ https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/what-should-you...

notafraudster 5y ago

In general it seems like -- and this is my outside perspective, not informed by any expertise, just casual reading -- the trajectory of nutritional science has more or less been "if something is bad in your body, then consuming it as part of your diet is bad; if something is good in your body, then consuming it as part of your diet is good" followed by later research saying "no, it turns out bioavailability doesn't work that way, and anyway the thing might have been a side effect rather than a cause of harm". See: dietary cholesterol, dietary fat, omega-3, probiotics, iron supplements, anti-oxidants

yissp 5y ago

> although your reference leaves much to be desired Is NPR not considered a trustworthy source? I thought they were generally fairly well regarded in that sense.

shlant 5y ago
NPR is just referencing a quote from someone in a book. Not saying NPR is untrustworthy, just that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
- wombatmobile 5y ago
  > NPR is just referencing a quote from someone in a book. "Just"? Have you considered the verification processes NPR employs before it includes references in broadcasts and published articles?
- Supermancho 5y ago
  What is extraordinary about a claim that eggs do or do not raise cholesterol negatively?
  - shlant 5y ago
    the extraordinary claim is that the narrative was made up to serve an alternate motive.

phkahler 5y ago

>> let's say that what you are claiming is true (although your reference leaves much to be desired) - that doesn't mean that there is no "eggs-cholesterol danger", just that it was used as a narrative to combat inflation. But the message itself was deceptive. Regardless of the truth value of "eggs-cholesterol danger" the reason for telling people was something else - to combat inflation. There are a number of problems with that kind of manipulation, one of which is that the truth value of the statement will never be ascertainable due to biases all around. BTW eggs contain everything you need (except air and water) to make a chicken. How bad can they be?