PETA vegetarian starter kit - VeggieBoards
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#1 Old 07-22-2009, 01:12 AM
Newbie
 
ShaneS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 15
Hi,



I've just downloaded and read the "PETA vegetarian starter kit", and I am concerned about some of the 'facts' stated in it.



The main statement which stood out to me regarded eggs:



"One egg contains a staggering 220 milligrams of cholesterol, which clogs your arteries and leads to heart disease."



The misconception that eggs are bad for you has been rejected in many top medical journals, and in fact there have been a number of benefits reported (Vitamin A/D/E/B1/B2/B6/B12, various minerals, are a complete protein, contain polyunsaturated fat (not bad saturated)). In fact, because eggs contain polyunsaturated fat, LDL (bad cholesterol) can actually be REDUCED by eating eggs.



So, why would PETA put such misleading material in their brochure? There are plenty of other, valid, health reasons to each a no-meat diet, without resorting to this sort of thing. It taints the rest of their message, I believe.



What do people think?



Cheers,

Shane



Here is the PDF link, if you haven't seen it.



http://www.petaliterature.com/VEG297.pdf
ShaneS is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
#2 Old 07-22-2009, 01:17 AM
Veggie Regular
 
major.walrus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 625
The information provided by such groups often suffers from that flaw. I call it 'American Documentary Syndrome' - the belief that something needs to be dramatised or overdone to be noteworthy, even if the facts/concepts involved pretty much speak for themselves.



I think things like 'Meet your Meat' suffer from that too. The images are horrific enough to make the point, why add the preaching, emotionally simplistic monologue?



I agree, it does taint their message and what's more undermine the cause by making both those who trust and quote them and those who argue from other points look uninformed or even stupid.



(Note: I'm not bashing Americans in general, just the documentary-makers with frustrated Shakespearean tendencies.)
major.walrus is offline  
#3 Old 07-22-2009, 01:36 AM
Veggie Regular
 
Irizary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 8,743
Quote:
Originally Posted by major.walrus View Post

I think things like 'Meet your Meat' suffer from that too. The images are horrific enough to make the point, why add the preaching, emotionally simplistic monologue?



What monologue in Meet Your Meat do you feel is overdramatized? It's been awhile, but I remember it as a factual accounting of what happens on factory farms and in slaughterhouses? Correct me if I'm wrong.



Over 10 BILLION land animals are raised on factory farms and slaughtered in the U.S. alone each year. Logic and reliable facts dictate that the animals do not have personal or adequate care and consideration in their lives and deaths.



The meat industry could certainly come out with their own "Meet Your Meat" showing factory farms and slaughterhouses if they could make it look or sound any better. Facts about standard factory farming processes and slaughterhouses come from the industry itself.

http://www.factoryfarming.com

http://www.whyvegan.com

"If you want to know where you would have stood on slavery before the civil war, don't look at where you stand on slavery today, look at where you stand on animal rights." - Paul Watson.

 

Every animal you eat
was running for her life

Irizary is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
#4 Old 07-22-2009, 01:46 AM
Veggie Regular
 
major.walrus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 625
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irizary View Post

What monologue in Meet Your Meat do you feel is overdramatized?



...The one that runs through it?



For the record, I am NOT saying that the meat industry is anything but a huge, horrific, unjustified stain on nature and humanity.

Nor am I saying that the narrator made anything up. But he didn't just relate the information either.



The 'pitch' indicated by his wording and tone - an appeal to people on an emotional basis, not even ethical per se - limited the impact of the video.



Also, the kind of people who might change because of exposure to facts are, in my mind, those given to changing their opinions on examination of the facts. To people so inclined, emotive terms are an immediate turn-off.



Obviously, they are being tortured, so the word is merited, but it's so obvious you don't really need to say so? It smacks of a lack of faith in one's own argument, IMHO.
major.walrus is offline  
#5 Old 07-22-2009, 01:56 AM
Veggie Regular
 
Irizary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 8,743
Quote:
Originally Posted by major.walrus View Post

Obviously, they are being tortured, so the word is merited, but it's so obvious you don't really need to say so? It smacks of a lack of faith in one's own argument, IMHO.



You're saying that they're obviously being tortured, but saying so means that one doesn't really believe it? I don't get that.



Is it possible that you're uncomfortable about giving that much importance to animals (as most of the world doesn't)? Do you have the same feeling about Amnesty International?

"If you want to know where you would have stood on slavery before the civil war, don't look at where you stand on slavery today, look at where you stand on animal rights." - Paul Watson.

 

Every animal you eat
was running for her life

Irizary is offline  
#6 Old 07-22-2009, 02:07 AM
Veggie Regular
 
major.walrus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 625
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irizary View Post

You're saying that they're obviously being tortured, but saying so means that one doesn't really believe it? I don't get that.



Is it possible that you're uncomfortable about giving that much importance to animals (as most of the world doesn't)? Do you have the same feeling about Amnesty International?



No no no. I feel the same way about the way people advocate many causes.



If something is shocking in itself, be it homeless refugees or abused animals, you don't need to enhance the emotional content. To do so indicates to a certain kind of mind that it doesn't have enough importance in itself.



This isn't just my opinion. In fact, it's one formed by people's reactions to Meet your Meat specifically. Two people I showed it to were sickened by the actual evidence, but once they got halfway through they just sneered and went 'Well, the narration is a bit dramatic, isn't it? *proceeds to point out every presumption and instance of vauge anthropomorphisation*'



Maybe I just hang out with a very cynical crowd, but I honestly think it would be better if people were left to extrapolate from the evidence. Purely from the point of view of convincing people. Whatever the cause.
major.walrus is offline  
#7 Old 07-22-2009, 02:19 AM
Newbie
 
MiaFleur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 14
I honestly don't like PETA, they do tend to talk a lot of bullcrap in my experience.
MiaFleur is offline  
#8 Old 07-22-2009, 02:43 AM
Newbie
 
ShaneS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 15
@ major.walrus: I totally take your point, and agree. Without wanting to start some sort of flame war, it's the same thing Michael Moore does. He tends to have lots of really interesting information, but the shove-it-down-your-throat attitude makes click 'off' on him



I am very disappointed in PETA. That's not to say I am against the fundamentals they espouse, it's just I don't like mixing in fact and fiction. A lot of people look up to and respect them as an organisation, and I'm sure they do great work in bringing these issues to the fore, but they can do it with just pure facts - and yummy recipes!



A good example that has a solid impact without ramming it home is the recent film, "HOME". http://www.youtube.com/user/homeproject?blend=3&ob=4 There is a scene where they pan over a MASSIVE AWFUL outdoor cattle yard, with no green as far as the eye can see. It just said it all, and was very moving. Check it out if you haven't seen it, it's very good.



Shane
ShaneS is offline  
#9 Old 07-22-2009, 03:29 AM
Kiz
Veggie Regular
 
Kiz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 12,132
Yeah, PETA are not exactly know for their trustworthiness or accuracy.

Love the post? Why not buy the T-shirt!
http://www.kiz-shop.de/index.php?page=categorie&cat=8
http://www.kiz-shop.de/index.php?page=product&info=94
Kiz is offline  
#10 Old 07-22-2009, 03:34 AM
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 7,981
What part of that statement do you disagree with?



Do eggs contain 220 milligrams of cholesterol or not?



Does cholesterol clog your arteries or not?
MrFalafel is offline  
#11 Old 07-22-2009, 04:03 AM
Beginner
 
Kotegaeshi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 138
Quote:
"One egg contains a staggering 220 milligrams of cholesterol, which clogs your arteries and leads to heart disease."



I think these are both true, but it's misleading to have them in the same sentance as people will assume they're linked. I'm not sure cholesterol in the diet relates absolutely to blood cholesterol.



From British Heart Foundation website:

"The cholesterol which is found in some foods such as eggs, liver, kidneys and some types of seafood, does not usually make a great contribution to the level of cholesterol in your blood. It is much more important that you eat foods that are low in saturated fat."
Kotegaeshi is offline  
#12 Old 07-22-2009, 04:05 AM
Kiz
Veggie Regular
 
Kiz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 12,132
They can contain up to that, usually a little less. The cholesterol in eggs does not "clog your arteries" when eaten in sensible amounts as part of a varied diet.

Love the post? Why not buy the T-shirt!
http://www.kiz-shop.de/index.php?page=categorie&cat=8
http://www.kiz-shop.de/index.php?page=product&info=94
Kiz is offline  
#13 Old 07-22-2009, 05:25 AM
Newbie
 
ShaneS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 15
@MrFalafel: Well, like I said in my initial post, they do not clog your heart at all. It's a total misconception which has been proven wrong on many occasions.



Eggs contain contain polyunsaturated fat, not LDL (bad cholesterol) increasing saturated fat, so LDL can actually be REDUCED by eating eggs. Not to mention all of the positives eggs deliver (again in my initial post).



It's this that I take issue with. It's plain incorrect, and scares people into not eating them, rather than provide individuals with the facts. Rather than hunting down articles, just type "eggs health" into Google and you will find a number of reputable sources reporting valid information.
ShaneS is offline  
#14 Old 07-22-2009, 05:38 AM
Veggie Regular
 
RichardB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,126
Interesting! I've learn more about eggs form these posts. THANKS!
RichardB is offline  
#15 Old 07-22-2009, 05:41 AM
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 7,981
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShaneS View Post

@MrFalafel: Well, like I said in my initial post, they do not clog your heart at all. It's a total misconception which has been proven wrong on many occasions.



Eggs contain contain polyunsaturated fat, not LDL (bad cholesterol) increasing saturated fat, so LDL can actually be REDUCED by eating eggs. Not to mention all of the positives eggs deliver (again in my initial post).



It's this that I take issue with. It's plain incorrect, and scares people into not eating them, rather than provide individuals with the facts. Rather than hunting down articles, just type "eggs health" into Google and you will find a number of reputable sources reporting valid information.



Are you referring to a study or two that leads in the direction that eggs may be healthy if used correctly in the right dietary framework or are you referring to hardened facts that have been peer researched and proven time and time again? Thats a big difference.



Yes, there are a lot of websites published by the Egg Council and even more websites that publish whatever information the Egg Council gives them. Do you always believe the information given to you by the person selling you something?
MrFalafel is offline  
#16 Old 07-22-2009, 05:43 AM
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 7,981
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiz View Post

They can contain up to that, usually a little less. The cholesterol in eggs does not "clog your arteries" when eaten in sensible amounts as part of a varied diet.



But what if eggs are not eaten in a sensible diet?



What are the most common way eggs are consumed? Cheese Omlettes? Fried in butter?
MrFalafel is offline  
#17 Old 07-22-2009, 06:01 AM
Newbie
 
ShaneS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 15
@ MrFalafel:

I'm talking about hard facts, from reputable universities. Here is a study discounting egg consumption causing heart disease from the Journal of the American Medical Association:



http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content...ct/281/15/1387



Here is another from the American Heart Association:



http://www.americanheart.org/present...tifier=3006030



Keep in mind, this isn't about how you prepare the eggs; it's about the eggs themselves. You can make green beans unhealthy if you slather them with oils and fats!



Remember that people here are vegetarians, or trying to follow as closely to a vegetarian diet as they can. They aren't going to go out, eat a bunch of eggs, with a side of bacon, some pork chops covered in butter, are they?



Eggs are a great source of nutrition, and don't contain 'bad' LDL cholesterol. They are packed with nutrients, and represent a complete protein, which is typically tricky to get as a vegetarian. They are full of minerals and importantly vitamin D, which tends to be lacking in vegetarian diets (unless you're rigorous or work in the sun).



So, my point regarding PETA still stands. I love vegetarianism, but the best way to help people understand the complex issues of building a balanced, healthy diet, is to provide them with balanced facts. Not scare tactics.
ShaneS is offline  
#18 Old 07-22-2009, 06:09 AM
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 7,981
So you agree that eggs fried in oil or butter aren't exactly health food? Great.



Sounds to me that PETA is trying to warn people away from unhealthy eggs. Lets face it, how many people actually have steamed eggs or boiled eggs as opposed to how many people have fried or scrambled eggs? PETA is warning people that the 'normal' use of eggs served to 10s of millions of consumers in restaurants and cafes is unhealthy. I don't see a problem with that.
MrFalafel is offline  
#19 Old 07-22-2009, 06:39 AM
Newbie
 
ShaneS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 15
@MrFalafel

Like I said, it's not about how you eat the eggs. Eggs are not unhealthy. If you prepare eggs in an unhealthy manner, that's another discussion, and shouldn't get in the way of this discussion.



This is about PETA's statement in their starter kit:



"One egg contains a staggering 220 milligrams of cholesterol, which clogs your arteries and leads to heart disease."



The cholesterol in eggs does not cause heart disease.



Here is one more article from Harvard Medical School:

https://www.health.harvard.edu/press.../egg-nutrition



"The only large study to look at the impact of egg consumption on heart disease—not on cholesterol levels or other intermediaries—found no connection between the two". That directly contradicts PETA's statement. I'll take Harvard's Medical School as the valid argument



Again, I it's important to note, this site is for vegetarians, so they don't have to worry so much about the effects of saturated fats from meat. This makes the argument to include eggs (if you want of course!) in your diet.



I can't really add any more to my point, but an interesting conversation for sure! I hope I've helped people learn a little more about eggs, if nothing else



Cheers,

Shane
ShaneS is offline  
#20 Old 07-22-2009, 06:47 AM
Veggie Regular
 
KelleyMarie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 510
I think PETA will say or do anything to further its cause. Makes it hard to trust PETA.



Eggs can easily fit into a low-fat diet; it is your total daily intake of fat that counts, not the fat of any one food item. Saying you shouldn't eat eggs because you are likely to fry them in butter is like saying you shouldn't eat avocados because you will likely just be making potato chip dip.



KM
KelleyMarie is offline  
#21 Old 07-22-2009, 06:51 AM
Newbie
 
ShaneS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 15
"Saying you shouldn't eat eggs because you are likely to fry them in butter is like saying you shouldn't eat avocados because you will likely just be making potato chip dip."



My point exactly. All this talk of potato chip dip has made me hungry though
ShaneS is offline  
#22 Old 07-22-2009, 07:08 AM
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 7,981
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShaneS View Post

@MrFalafel

Like I said, it's not about how you eat the eggs. Eggs are not unhealthy. If you prepare eggs in an unhealthy manner, that's another discussion, and shouldn't get in the way of this discussion.



This is about PETA's statement in their starter kit:



"One egg contains a staggering 220 milligrams of cholesterol, which clogs your arteries and leads to heart disease."



The cholesterol in eggs does not cause heart disease.



Here is one more article from Harvard Medical School:

https://www.health.harvard.edu/press.../egg-nutrition



"The only large study to look at the impact of egg consumption on heart diseasenot on cholesterol levels or other intermediariesfound no connection between the two". That directly contradicts PETA's statement. I'll take Harvard's Medical School as the valid argument



Again, I it's important to note, this site is for vegetarians, so they don't have to worry so much about the effects of saturated fats from meat. This makes the argument to include eggs (if you want of course!) in your diet.



I can't really add any more to my point, but an interesting conversation for sure! I hope I've helped people learn a little more about eggs, if nothing else



Cheers,

Shane



No, you're saying that PETA is lying but in reality they are not.



Eggs DO contain 220 milligrams of cholesterol.



Cholesterol DOES lead to heart disease and other health issues.



You are saying that there are studies that 'certain types' of cholesterol is bad and certain types are good. Thats fine. However, nothing in PETAs statment is a lie.
MrFalafel is offline  
#23 Old 07-22-2009, 07:25 AM
Newbie
 
ShaneS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 15
@MrFalafel:

I'm sorry, but with respect, I'm not sure you know what cholesterol is, what molecules it is made up of, or how it is transported around your body. It's important you do, because your statement, agreeing with PETA, that "Cholesterol DOES lead to heart disease and other health issues." is simply false. Here is a head start:



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cholesterol



I've tried to help you by finding sources from reputable journals, but I'm not sure you've looked at any of them. Take a look, and you'll see the problem with PETA's statement.



Good luck, I'm off to eat a healthy hard boiled egg
ShaneS is offline  
#24 Old 07-22-2009, 07:41 AM
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 7,981
Yeah, thanks for reminding me to look up eggs. They can be considered not harmful if eaten in extreme moderation and cooked a certain way. But the reality is people eat way to many eggs and cook them in unhealthy ways therefore obliterating any health benefits



The Bottomline:

The American Heart Association says an egg a day is fine* for a healthy diet, and you should try to replace other high cholesterol foods such as dairy, meats and poultry. If you follow that one-a-day rule, keep in mind that many baked goods contain eggs and are a source of cholesterol and fat as well.




*Thats 'fine', not 'good' or 'beneficial'. 'Fine' as in tolerable, like its OK to have a glass of wine with dinner. And who eats only one egg?



One fried egg:

http://www.nutritiondata.com/facts/d...products/116/2



The good: This food is a good source of Protein, Riboflavin, Vitamin B12 and Phosphorus, and a very good source of Selenium.



The bad: This food is high in Saturated Fat, and very high in Cholesterol.




Now double or triple that for the average american breakfast.



Whoops! Just as bad in an omlet!

http://www.nutritiondata.com/facts/d...products/118/2



So yeah, go ahead and eat 1 (just one) hard or soft boiled egg as it won't hurt you (keep your fingers crossed with salmonella) http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6153362.stm . However, if you then eat cakes or any other items that contain eggs throughout the day you will have negated any health benefits of that egg by countering it with the fat and other 'bad' ingredients in eggs.



PETA are trying to protect people from eating too much fat and cholesteral. Sorry but eggs are a source of fat and cholesterol. Especially the way most people eat them.
MrFalafel is offline  
#25 Old 07-22-2009, 08:10 AM
Newbie
 
ShaneS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 15
@MrFalafel:

Sorry to be a stickler on this, but how you prepare eggs and eggs themselves are completely separate issues. As for 'extreme moderation', there is no such thing. You're moderate in the amount you eat, or you're not. You're extreme or you're not, but you're not both. Just eat eggs in moderation, or in like with what your research tells you.



1. For what it's worth, I'm a vegetarian and 90% of the time eat hard boiled eggs. I don't fry them, or add oil to them in any way (which would clearly be bad). The other 10% I'll scramble them, with olive oil to stop sticking. There is nothing wrong with pure olive oil. On weekends, I'll likely have two eggs one of the days, no problem. I'm very healthy, and my cholesterol is right in the middle of the range for a 37 year old male. In other words, I practice what I preach.



2. As a vegetarian, I don't eat a high saturated fat diet derived from meats. This massively lessens any potential fat contribution from eggs. Not to mention you're optimising the wrong part of your fat intake by not eating eggs. You're better off reducing saturated fat in your diet. You really have to keep the fact that we don't eat meat in mind when discussing high levels of fat and cholesterol in your diet.



3. PETA are printing false information. It doesn't matter how you slice it, that's just wrong.



I don't want to live in a nanny state where organisations like PETA feel they need to look out for my interests by printing misleading or downright false information. After reading their leaflet, lot's of people will just take it at face value that eggs cause heart disease. They will then tell others this, and their children, and perpetuate false information. That's not how science works, and it's not how I want my information given to me.



Also, I am Australian, and our 'average breakfast' is different from American's. Here is some excellent Australian literature on eggs, particularly health studies.
ShaneS is offline  
#26 Old 07-22-2009, 08:42 AM
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 7,981
The American Heart Association says 1 egg is OK. Are you now arguing with one of the foremost authorities on heart health issues? Or in your world is everybody who doesn't agree with you simply 'wrong'?



PETA is not giving false information. PETA is not aiming their literature at vegetarians, they are aiming them at omnivores. The average omnivore in the US eats eggs for breakfast, has eggs in their pancakes, will have eggs in the foods they eat throughout the day as well. Thats a lot of eggs. As stated above, 1 egg is 'ok' in a day but most americans don't just eat one egg a day, they eat more than that which is unhealthy as stated by leading medical research.



Oh and a traditional Australian breakfast seems to be:



Fried egg (sunny side up) with crispy bacon and half a fried tomato with some seasoning on top. Top with tomato (NEVER BBQ!) sauce, on a piece of HEAVILY (lol) buttered toast and you have it



or Bacon aplenty, egg, tomato ketchup smeared all over, a few chipolatas. Go to any outback roadhouse to try it.



An egg ,bacon and BBQ sauce on a roll



http://answers.yahoo.com/question/in...8104633AA0E5r1



Looks like Australia still hasn't got the healthy eating message, especially around egg consumption.
MrFalafel is offline  
#27 Old 07-22-2009, 08:52 AM
Beginner
 
Simply_Love's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 162
Humans don't need any chlorestoral in their diet. We make it ourselves. Their is no RDA for chlorestoral, but less than 300 mg is what is recommended. Eggs have around 220--that's nearly as much as the maximum limit. Eggs are in a bunch of products (breads, pastas, ect.), so eating an egg or two daily, plus milk products, meat, and other things high in chlorestoral, isn't healthy at all. Even if the eggs are boiled, not fried, they aren't the best for you on a daily basis.
Simply_Love is offline  
#28 Old 07-22-2009, 08:54 AM
Veggie Regular
 
Mrs. Skittles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 911
I like how you left this part of the response out:

ALternatively, fresh fruit salad, atop bircher muesli that has been soaked in juice overnight, with a dollop of greek yogurt and a sprinkling of Cinnamon.



I doubt that the typical American vegetarain eats a whole lot more than 1 egg a day. Typically I will eat 2 eggs every other weekend when I make breakfast and any trace egg that is in the bread or pasta I eat.



ShaneS... I completely agree with you. There are several statements that PETA makes, such as this one, that really piss me off. Eggs themselves are healthy.



I am not saying that the egg industry is not cruel and inhumane, but that is why I choose to buy organic cage free and free range eggs only. I get them at the farmer's market, so that I can directly talk to the farmer that raises the chickens about his practices. Plus, I don't have to buy an entire dozen.
Mrs. Skittles is offline  
#29 Old 07-22-2009, 09:23 AM
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 717
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShaneS View Post

Hi,



I've just downloaded and read the "PETA vegetarian starter kit", and I am concerned about some of the 'facts' stated in it.



The main statement which stood out to me regarded eggs:



"One egg contains a staggering 220 milligrams of cholesterol, which clogs your arteries and leads to heart disease."



The misconception that eggs are bad for you has been rejected in many top medical journals, and in fact there have been a number of benefits reported (Vitamin A/D/E/B1/B2/B6/B12, various minerals, are a complete protein, contain polyunsaturated fat (not bad saturated)). In fact, because eggs contain polyunsaturated fat, LDL (bad cholesterol) can actually be REDUCED by eating eggs.



So, why would PETA put such misleading material in their brochure? There are plenty of other, valid, health reasons to each a no-meat diet, without resorting to this sort of thing. It taints the rest of their message, I believe.



What do people think?



Cheers,

Shane



Here is the PDF link, if you haven't seen it.



http://www.petaliterature.com/VEG297.pdf



It's not misleading depending on your source of information. Egg yolks are a good source of many nutrients, they're also high in cholesterol. Some experts say that the benefits outweigh the cholesterol, others say that the cholesterol outweighs the benefit. It's the same story with dark chocolate, coffee, alcohol, fish etc., I've heard so many experts say that these things had great health benefits, at least in moderation, and others saying that they should be avoided completely. These people are always at odds with one another. T.Colin Campbel would argue that even just the protein in egg whites, never mind the cholesterol in the egg yolk, is detrimental to our health.
African_Prince is offline  
#30 Old 07-22-2009, 09:24 AM
Ankle Biter
 
Poppy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Central Virginia, USA
Posts: 9,333
I don't know whether or not eggs are good for people. But I do know that supplying eggs for people is certainly not good for chickens.



"Meet you meat" was a life-changing experience for me. I have no idea whether or not it was overly dramatic, and have no intention of ever watching it again to find out.

It is our choices that show what we truly are far more than our abilities. ~A. Dumbledore
Poppy is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the VeggieBoards forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in


Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off