Please forgive the length of this, but there was a lot to address.
Thanks Dextery and Iguana! When I get interested in a topic I like to investigate thoroughly and explore all sides, because I have been consistently amazed at what I've learned this way over the years. For example, in this way I found fascinating examples of hunting, fishing, fauna eating and carnivory among some nonhuman primates that dispelled a lot of vegetarian propaganda. Interestingly, the main original sources of antagonism toward eggs seem to be large food corporations and vegetarian/vegan groups.
It looks like the food companies spread anti-egg propaganda so as to replace egg breakfasts and raw eggs for bodybuilding with their processed cereals and other breakfast food products and their processed bodybuilding drinks and supplements (such as whey protein powders). To get people to buy their processed crap they demonized eggs (as well as meats and animal lard).
Of course all of us here are familiar with the reasons why vegetarians and vegans tend not to be big on egg consumption, the propaganda tactics they use and their general preference for dogma (based on alleged "ethics") over honest inquiry. They tend to use the same sorts of tactics against eggs that they use against meats.
The other source of criticism of eggs has tended to be from Paleo dieters and others who say that eggs were not commonly eaten during the Stone Age and most chickens are fed crap today. I was in this camp, but now I think that for me, these downsides may be offset by potential bodybuilding and convenience benefits.
...The one beef I have with Christophereggs is the following quote on the FATS link
It is well known that saturated fats are bad for us. Found in many foods including meat, dairy products, and some tropical oils, saturated fat increases the risk of coronary artery disease, diabetes and obesity.
For a company that has a good product, I find that statement ludicrous.
Yes, it's ironic that the most bad-mouthed foods on the planet--red meat and saturated fat--are actually the healthiest of all (along with the other animal fats and organs) when wild or pasture-fed. It took me a long time to learn about this myself.
I have one other minor bone to pick with Christophereggs, but it's the same one I have with all the large organic, free-range egg producers: chickens are not vegetarians! So for the sake of the chickens, if not also egg consumers, stop feeding chickens a biologically inappropriate vegetarian diet! If they let them eat the insects, grubs, worms and carrion they do in the wild, the omega 3's would come naturally and they wouldn't need to feed them supplements to artificially boost it. Of course, prices would be higher, but I wish there were at least one major brand of premium eggs that did this.
Paleophil, you're misstating the case. No rawist has ever claimed that you get biotin deficiency from whole, raw eggs(only exception I've ever heard of is Mercola who isn't genuinely raw, anyway).
These are the sort of comments that piqued my curiosity:
> "(oh and raw eggs-don't consume the egg-white)."
> "Re avidin:- Some rawists have claimed that you only get biotin deficiency if you eat the equivalent of 24 raw eggs a day, including the egg-white. Others have claimed that it's better to just eat the egg-yolk as they cite potential side-effects re biotin-deficiency. It's difficult to say, but perhaps one should err on the side of caution, given the lack of fertilised, raw eggs in the UK." (
http://www.rawpaleoforum.com/general-discussion/new-to-forum-hello/msg5282/#msg5282) Elsewhere you provided a link to the source of that claim (
http://ourlittlefarm.bz/knowledge). I read the article and it provided no supporting references or other evidence, so it's nearly useless. Once again it's just a claim that eggs cause problems as though it were a known fact without any supporting evidence or explanation. At least in this case they're admitting it would take a huge number of raw eggs to cause a problem. It's amazing that even some egg producers have bought into some of these anti-egg arguments without solid evidence.
> "Re raw butter:- I would suggest using raw eggs instead. One can't seem to get fertilised eggs in the UK, so you might want to heed the warnings by some RPDers re avidin, so you may want to throw away most of the egg-white." (
http://www.rawpaleoforum.com/general-discussion/new-to-forum-hello/msg5221/#msg5221)
So I was merely investigating what you have said. You're not the only one to make such statements, so I'm not singling you out--there were other comments by people at other forums and maybe here as well that stated multiple reasons for not eating raw eggs or eggs in general almost anytime eggs were mentioned, as though they were indisputable facts, with little or no references or other evidence. I grew increasingly suspicious about this, because that's the sort of talk that emanates from urban legends. Based on my research so far it's looking like most of the criticisms are indeed urban legends. Usually when I try to find the original sources, the trail leads nowhere.
I have not found much real evidence that raw eggs are unhealthy or inferior to cooked eggs, though I would not be surprised if it turned out that standard commercial vegetarian-fed raw eggs have some negative long-term health effects. Speculations about the potential problems of standard eggs and that the fact that eggs were eaten less often than meats are the closest thing to evidence I've seen. The latter argument is also true of fish, which could not possibly have been eaten in anywhere near the quantities of land creatures (which is a fact of basic geography and has been confirmed in observations of all human and nonhuman primate groups--even those humans living on coasts like the Greenland Inuit apparently tend to eat more red meat from sea animals like seals and whales than fish, with the possible exceptions of the groups that lived near bountiful salmon runs, and even there they had to eat land animals when salmon were not in season), yet most people insist that fish are healthy nonetheless--and I think they're probably right. Granted, fish are closer to land mammal meat than eggs, but eggs don't seem hugely different either (they are basically chicken ova and zygotes--in other words, animal flesh). What's your opinion of fish eggs? Other than the salt, are those also a problematic food?
What has been shown is that raw(unfertilised) eggs are less well digested raw than cooked(unlike raw meats which are better digested raw than cooked). ....
Here's the study I referred to re raw eggs and cooked eggs. Granted, it is just 1 study:-
http://jn.nutrition.org/cgi/content/full/128/10/1716
OK, thanks for that reference. It's the first decent one I've seen from the anti-raw-egg perspective. It looks like it may have been funded by the American Society for Nutritional Sciences. Nutrition organizations tend to be funded by food conglomerates like Nestle Corp. and the like. That doesn't refute the study, but does help to maintain a healthy attitude of skepticism.
Carnivore's counterpoint is valid and can be easily tested. Just try eating as many cooked eggs as you can one day and raw eggs the next. You'll find you can eat substantially more raw eggs, and faster.
I'm surprised that you of all people would argue that cooked unfertilized eggs are more nutritious than raw unfertilized eggs. What about all the problems with cooking you've stated repeatedly before?
While I recognize that frequent consumption of large numbers of eggs is not truly Paleo, I'm increasingly interested in quality raw eggs as a food source for the purposes of a fast, convenient and easy weight-gain food. Most people don't need to gain weight like I do, so I'm not recommending this for anyone else--just considering it for myself. First I want to go at least 4 days in a row without eating any eggs (for a baseline comparison in case I do experience problems) and then I hope to begin the egg bonanza.
I finished the last of my current small batch of eggs today.
I'm still interested in Lex's input too, though. Because he has a way of ripping my points to shreds.
As always, I'm open to whatever will actually work for me.
Topic: palatable and safe raw food (Read 83487 times)