Systematic reviewindependent cross-checkabstract checked★ key study I-EGG-130 in-depth review
Big overview: no good reason to avoid eggs
Effect of egg consumption on health outcomes: An updated umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analysis of observational and intervention studies.
Overview
Formisano E et al.. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis 2025 · PMID 39934049 · DOI 10.1016/j.numecd.2025.103849
Across 14 meta-analyses, eggs were not linked to heart disease or overall death; a few weak signals remain uncertain.
Does the study support the specific claim? No · Methodological quality: moderate
Plain-language summary
Study explained simply
- What did the researchers want to find out?
Summarise all recent meta-analyses on eggs and health.
- How was the study done?
Umbrella review.
- How many people, animals or samples were studied?
14 meta-analyses.
- What was actually found?
No CVD or mortality association; weak signals for some outcomes.
- How large was the observed effect?
Heart failure RR 1.15; cancer mortality RR 1.13 (very weak evidence).
- What do the results mean in everyday life?
Eggs can be part of a healthy diet.
- What are the study's limitations?
Low quality of included reviews.
- What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?
Contradicts a general egg ban.
- Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?
High.
- What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?
It cannot exclude small risks at very high intake.
Scientific in-depth review
1. Full reference
- Authors
- Formisano E et al.
- Journal
- Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis
- Year
- 2025
- Identifier
- PMID 39934049 DOI 10.1016/j.numecd.2025.103849
- Verification
- verified – PubMed efetch 2026-10-26; Crossref works API 2026-10-26
- Retracted
- no
- Corrections
- none
- Extent checked
- abstract only
- Conflicts of interest and funding
Authors declare no commercial or financial conflicts.
2. Research question
What is the overall evidence on egg consumption and health outcomes?
3. Study design and population
- Study design
- Systematic review – Umbrella review of meta-analyses published since January 2020 (AMSTAR-2, NutriGrade)
- Population
14 meta-analyses (10 observational, 4 interventional)
- Country
Multinational
- Period
Meta-analyses published since January 2020
- Sample size
14 meta-analyses
- Inclusion and exclusion criteria
not detailed in abstract
4. Methods and endpoints
- Exposure / intervention
Egg consumption
- Comparator
Low or no egg consumption
- Endpoints
CVD, mortality, cancer mortality, heart failure, lipids, child growth and others
- Statistical methods
Credibility grading by sample size, heterogeneity and quality
5. Actual results
- Results
Very weak evidence for all significant associations: heart failure RR 1.15 (1.02-1.30), cancer mortality RR 1.13 (1.06-1.20), LDL WMD 7.39 (5.82-8.95), total cholesterol WMD 9.12 (7.35-10.89), apoB WMD 0.06; weak improvements in HDL WMD 1.37 (0.49-2.25), apoA1, and child growth WMD 0.47 (0.13-0.80). No association between high vs low egg consumption and any cardiovascular outcome or all-cause mortality. Overall quality of included meta-analyses critically low.
- Absolute risks
not reported
- Authors' conclusion
Insufficient evidence is available to discourage egg consumption; eggs can be part of a healthy diet.
6. Strengths
- Recent overview across outcomes
- Includes intervention meta-analyses
7. Weaknesses
- Restricted to meta-analyses since 2020
- Included meta-analyses of critically low quality
8. Risk of bias
- Orienting tool
- AMSTAR 2
- Type of assessment
- simplified assessment (abstract only)
- Full formal assessment
- no
- Overall risk of bias
- some concerns
- Rationale
Umbrella-level; simplified judgement.
9. Assessment of the statistical interpretation
Signals of harm (heart failure, cancer mortality, LDL) and benefit (HDL, child growth) are all rated very weak or weak.
10. Relevance to the specific claim
Best overview against a general harm claim: no association with cardiovascular outcomes or all-cause mortality, and only very weak signals for some outcomes; it also lists the possible adverse signals fairly.
11. Independent contrary findings
Weak signals for heart failure, cancer mortality and LDL.
12. Transferability to Germany and Europe
Global evidence.
13. Overall methodological judgement
Supports that eggs can be part of a healthy diet; no basis for avoiding all eggs.
| Multidimensional assessment | |
|---|---|
| Authenticity of the source | verified |
| Methodological quality | moderate |
| Risk of bias | some concerns |
| Precision of results | moderate |
| Directness | direct |
| Reproducibility | replicated |
| Consistency with the overall evidence | mixed |
| Regional transferability | moderate |
| Adequacy of the interpretation (by the archive) | not applicable |
14. Open questions
Better-quality primary studies.
15. Linked fact checks
- All eggs (chicken, quail, pigeon, ostrich, etc.) are harmful because an egg is an embryo / contains the 'full components of a living organism'. – Studies contradicting or limiting the claim
- Eggs should be completely avoided (all kinds, all cooking methods). – Studies with mixed or unclear results