4.7 Review

Egg Consumption and Human Cardio-Metabolic Health in People with and without Diabetes

Journal

NUTRIENTS
Volume 7, Issue 9, Pages 7399-7420

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/nu7095344

Keywords

dietary cholesterol; eggs; type 2 diabetes mellitus; cardiovascular disease

Funding

  1. Australian Egg Corporation Limited
  2. Sanofi-Aventis
  3. Novo Nordisk
  4. Allergan
  5. Roche products
  6. Merck
  7. Sharp Dohm
  8. GlaxoSmithKline
  9. iNova Pharmaceuticals
  10. Pfizer Australia
  11. Servier Laboratories (Australia)
  12. Astra Zeneca
  13. National Health and Medical Research Council
  14. University of Sydney

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The guidelines for dietary cholesterol and/or egg intake for both the general population and those at higher risk of cardiovascular disease (for example, people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM)) differ between countries, and even for different specialist societies in a country. The disparity between these guidelines is at least in part related to the conflicting evidence as to the effects of eggs in the general population and in those with T2DM. This review addresses the effect of eggs on cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk from both epidemiological research and controlled prospective studies, in people with and without cardio-metabolic disease. It also examines the nutritional qualities of eggs and whether they may offer protection against chronic disease. The evidence suggests that a diet including more eggs than is recommended (at least in some countries) may be used safely as part of a healthy diet in both the general population and for those at high risk of cardiovascular disease, those with established coronary heart disease, and those with T2DM. In conclusion, an approach focused on a person's entire dietary intake as opposed to specific foods or nutrients should be the heart of population nutrition guidelines.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available