Otherindependent cross-checkfull text checked I-CHK-131 standard review
Chicken with skin gets about as much energy from fat as from protein; breast without skin is lean
USDA FoodData Central, SR Legacy: Chicken, broilers or fryers, breast, meat only, cooked, roasted (FDC 171477) and meat and skin, cooked, roasted (FDC 171450)
Overview
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. FoodData Central (SR Legacy) 2019
With skin, energy from fat (1.12 x protein) slightly exceeds protein; skinless breast is lean (0.26). The n-6:n-3 ratio is high in both.
Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: moderate
Plain-language summary
Study explained simply
- What did the researchers want to find out?
What is the energy, fat, protein and fatty-acid composition of roasted broiler meat with and without skin?
- How was the study done?
National food composition database entries
- How many people, animals or samples were studied?
database values
- What was actually found?
Breast meat only, roasted: 165 kcal, protein 31.02 g, fat 3.57 g, 18:2 0.59 g, 18:3 0.03 g, EPA 0.01 g, DHA 0.02 g. Meat and skin, roasted: 239 kcal, protein 27.3 g, fat 13.6 g, 18:2 2.57 g, 18:3 0.11 g, EPA 0.01 g, DHA 0.04 g. Calculated (stats/C-CHK-11_fat_protein.py): fat:protein energy ratio 0.26 (breast) and 1.12 (meat and skin); 18:2/(18:3+EPA+DHA) about 9.8 and 16.1.
- How large was the observed effect?
Breast meat only, roasted: 165 kcal, protein 31.02 g, fat 3.57 g, 18:2 0.59 g, 18:3 0.03 g, EPA 0.01 g, DHA 0.02 g. Meat and skin, roasted: 239 kcal, protein 27.3 g, fat 13.6 g, 18:2 2.57 g, 18:3 0.11 g, EPA 0.01 g, DHA 0.04 g. Calculated (stats/C-CHK-11_fat_protein.py): fat:protein energy ratio 0.26 (breast) and 1.12 (meat and skin); 18:2/(18:3+EPA+DHA) about 9.8 and 16.1.
- What do the results mean in everyday life?
Whether chicken is 'fatty' depends on the skin; omega-6 dominates in both cases.
- What are the study's limitations?
Older US analyses; not modern EU/Egyptian birds; 18:3 undifferentiated; AA and DPA not retrieved
- What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?
Partly supports the claim for whole chicken with skin; contradicts it for skinless breast.
- Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?
Composition of EU broilers is broadly similar but was not checked here.
- What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?
Does not compare modern with older birds.
Scientific in-depth review
1. Full reference
- Authors
- U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service
- Journal
- FoodData Central (SR Legacy)
- Year
- 2019
- Identifier
- Verification
- verified – USDA FoodData Central API (DEMO_KEY) 2026-10-26 for FDC 171477 and 171450
- Retracted
- no
- Corrections
- none
- Extent checked
- full text
- Conflicts of interest and funding
not stated in abstract
2. Research question
What is the energy, fat, protein and fatty-acid composition of roasted broiler meat with and without skin?
3. Study design and population
- Study design
- Other – National food composition database entries
- Population
US broiler meat samples (analytical dates not given in API record)
- Country
USA
- Period
SR Legacy, published 1 April 2019
- Sample size
database values
- Inclusion and exclusion criteria
as described in the abstract
4. Methods and endpoints
- Exposure / intervention
Skin on vs skinless
- Comparator
not applicable
- Endpoints
Protein, total fat, 18:2, 18:3, EPA, DHA per 100 g
- Statistical methods
as reported in the abstract
5. Actual results
- Results
Breast meat only, roasted: 165 kcal, protein 31.02 g, fat 3.57 g, 18:2 0.59 g, 18:3 0.03 g, EPA 0.01 g, DHA 0.02 g. Meat and skin, roasted: 239 kcal, protein 27.3 g, fat 13.6 g, 18:2 2.57 g, 18:3 0.11 g, EPA 0.01 g, DHA 0.04 g. Calculated (stats/C-CHK-11_fat_protein.py): fat:protein energy ratio 0.26 (breast) and 1.12 (meat and skin); 18:2/(18:3+EPA+DHA) about 9.8 and 16.1.
- Absolute risks
not reported
- Authors' conclusion
Not applicable (database).
6. Strengths
- Standardised national database
7. Weaknesses
- Older US analyses; not modern EU/Egyptian birds
- 18:3 undifferentiated; AA and DPA not retrieved
8. Risk of bias
- Orienting tool
- none applicable
- Type of assessment
- simplified assessment (abstract only)
- Full formal assessment
- no
- Overall risk of bias
- not assessable
- Rationale
Reference data.
9. Assessment of the statistical interpretation
Ratios computed by this reviewer from the database values.
10. Relevance to the specific claim
Independent composition data to test the fat:protein and n-6:n-3 statements.
11. Independent contrary findings
12. Transferability to Germany and Europe
13. Overall methodological judgement
With skin, energy from fat (1.12 x protein) slightly exceeds protein; skinless breast is lean (0.26). The n-6:n-3 ratio is high in both.
| Multidimensional assessment | |
|---|---|
| Authenticity of the source | verified |
| Methodological quality | moderate |
| Risk of bias | not assessable |
| Precision of results | not applicable |
| Directness | direct |
| Reproducibility | unknown |
| Consistency with the overall evidence | consistent |
| Regional transferability | moderate |
| Adequacy of the interpretation (by the archive) | not applicable |
14. Open questions
15. Linked fact checks
- The modern broiler provides more energy from fat than from protein, with an omega-6:omega-3 ratio up to 9:1 instead of the recommended 2:1. – Studies with mixed or unclear results