吃鸡肉会导致儿童和成人做噩梦、惊恐发作、出现幻觉和心理伤害；过去20年中惊恐发作之所以变得普遍，是因为鸡肉的大规模生产。
原始表述
الولاد بيجي لهم هلوسه هواجس ضلالات الكلام ده كله مرتبط ارتباط لصيق باكل الفراخ ما فيش حد بياكل كل فراخ وماش ما بيجيلوش بانك اتاكس نوبات الهلع كلها ومنتشره في اخر 20 سنه لان حصل ايه ماس برودكشن الفراخ
按来源为原话. 译文由本项目提供；以阿拉伯语原文为准。
译文
吃鸡肉会导致儿童和成人做噩梦、惊恐发作、出现幻觉和心理伤害；过去20年中惊恐发作之所以变得普遍，是因为鸡肉的大规模生产。
出处
- 来源状态
- 视频转录文本（本人原话）
- 归属
- Elawady (machine transcript)
- 视频
- أولي حلقات برنامج الحقيقه والسراب (打开来源)
- 发布日期
- 2025年10月30日
- 时间戳
- 0:21:47 (在原视频 YouTube 自动字幕轨中的位置；可确认该内容出现的位置，但不能确认说话人是谁)
- 归属的不确定性
- Archive transcript (YouTube CC or AI-generated); wording may contain transcription errors; no timestamps available.
- 所声称的机制
Not specified.
- 所声称的健康影响
Nightmares, panic attacks, hallucinations, delusions, obsessive thoughts, enuresis, stuttering.
- 涉及人群
Children and adults
- Elawady 设定的地域限制
none found
来源版本存在差异
- 来源状态
- 档案网站引语（未注明出处）
- 归属
- Elawady (archive paraphrase; source video not given)
- 出处
- https://eltayebat.com/rule/industrial-chicken/
- 归属的不确定性
- The archive presents this in a 'د. ضياء يقول' box without a video reference; exact wording by Elawady not verified.
- 来源状态
- 视频转录文本（本人原话）
- 归属
- Elawady (machine transcript)
- 视频
- الجهاز العصبي و الاحساس بالألم؟ (打开来源)
- 发布日期
- 2025年2月9日
- 时间戳
- 无（转录文本不含时间信息）
- 归属的不确定性
- Archive transcript (YouTube CC or AI-generated); wording may contain transcription errors; no timestamps available.
- 来源状态
- 视频转录文本（本人原话）
- 归属
- Elawady (machine transcript)
- 视频
- Dr Diaa Al Awady د ضياء العوضي is live!دردشة صباحية (打开来源)
- 发布日期
- 2025年12月10日
- 时间戳
- 无（转录文本不含时间信息）
- 归属的不确定性
- Archive transcript (YouTube CC or AI-generated); wording may contain transcription errors; no timestamps available.
نوبات الهلع دي والاحلام والكوابيس اعرف يا باشا ان هو داخلها فراخ على طول الشخصيه الم فراخ يا باشا فراخ وبيض على طول
These panic attacks, dreams and nightmares: know that chicken is involved, always ... chicken, chicken and eggs, always.
- 来源状态
- 视频转录文本（本人原话）
- 归属
- Elawady (machine transcript)
- 视频
- Dr.D Clinics - Diaa Al Awady is live! الألم و الصداع (打开来源)
- 发布日期
- 2025年2月10日
- 时间戳
- 0:55:38 (在原视频 YouTube 自动字幕轨中的位置；可确认该内容出现的位置，但不能确认说话人是谁)
- 归属的不确定性
- Archive transcript (YouTube CC or AI-generated); no timestamps; wording may contain speech-recognition errors; speaker turns are not marked, the excerpt was judged to be Elawady's own speech from context.
- 来源状态
- 视频转录文本（本人原话）
- 归属
- Elawady (machine transcript)
- 视频
- Dr Diaa Al Awady د ضياء العوضي is live! (打开来源)
- 发布日期
- 2025年8月27日
- 时间戳
- 无（转录文本不含时间信息）
- 归属的不确定性
- Archive transcript (YouTube CC or AI-generated); wording may contain transcription errors; no timestamps available.
科学评估
基本错误 – 该说法的主要部分没有证据支持，或被严重夸大。
证据确定性: 低 – 进一步研究很可能大幅改变该评估。
1. 说法是什么？
Chicken causes nightmares, panic attacks, hallucinations and other psychiatric symptoms; mass chicken production explains a rise of panic attacks.
2. 哪些内容可证实是正确的？
Gastrointestinal discomfort and late eating are associated with worse sleep and more nightmares in self-report surveys. Anxiety disorders have become more common: the Global Burden of Disease study found an increase in age-standardised prevalence of anxiety disorders between 1990 and 2023 (I-CHK-107), but it gives no evidence that chicken is a cause.
3. 哪些内容是错误或夸大的？
No evidence links chicken specifically to nightmares, panic attacks or psychosis. In two surveys, people most often blamed dairy and sweets for disturbing dreams. Attributing a 20-year trend in panic attacks to chicken ignores many other factors (diagnosis, awareness, stress).
4. 哪些内容仍不明确？
Not applicable beyond the general lack of studies.
5. 哪些研究支持该说法？
None found.
6. 哪些研究与该说法相矛盾？
Indirect only: I-CHK-105 (3,362 Iranian adults: white meat intake not associated with anxiety, depression or distress); I-CHK-106 (meta-analysis: meat eaters had slightly lower anxiety and depression than meat abstainers); I-CHK-140 (WHO: anxiety disorders have social, psychological and biological causes, no food is named, and effective treatments exist); I-EGG-12, I-EGG-13 (foods blamed for dreams are mainly dairy and sweets).
7. 对德国和欧洲而言情况如何？
Not region-specific.
8. 关于埃及的已知情况是什么？
Not region-specific.
9. 合理的实际结论是什么？
惊恐发作、幻觉和持续的噩梦需要接受医学或心理评估；停吃鸡肉并不是有循证依据的治疗方法。
评估详情
- 证据确定性的依据
No study was found linking chicken consumption to nightmares, panic disorder or psychosis. Food-and-dream surveys point to dairy and sweets as the foods most often blamed (I-EGG-12, I-EGG-13), but neither survey reports chicken separately (only 'meat', 13-16% of the few food mentions for disturbing dreams) and neither measured panic attacks or hallucinations, so this evidence is very indirect. The universal wording is contradicted by everyday experience, and attributing a population trend to chicken production is an unsupported ecological inference. Rated like the comparable egg claim C-EGG-01; certainty low because the topic is little studied.
- 来源质量
Own words in several machine transcripts, plus archive paraphrase; evidence consists of caller anecdotes.
- 地区可推广性
Universal claim.
- 个体例外情况
Some people associate specific foods with poor sleep; food intolerance with gastrointestinal symptoms was associated with nightmares in a survey (I-EGG-13).
- 说法的地域范围
- 普遍性（生物学/医学）
- 最近审核
- 2026年10月26日 初步
科学证据详解
缺乏高质量证据支持 – 没有良好证据支持该说法；但仅凭这一点并不能证明它是错误的。
研究问题: In children and adults, does eating chicken cause nightmares, panic attacks, hallucinations or other psychiatric symptoms, and did mass chicken production cause a rise in panic attacks over the last 20 years?
研究问题详解 (PECO)
- 人群
- Children and adults
- 干预或暴露
- Chicken/poultry consumption; population trends in chicken production
- 对照
- Low/no chicken intake; earlier time periods
- 地域范围
- universal biology
- 结局指标
- panic attacks/anxiety disorders
- nightmares
- hallucinations/psychosis
- population prevalence trends
研究结果按作者报告呈现。我们的评估见下文。
哪些证据支持该说法？
未发现支持该说法的高质量证据。
哪些证据不支持该说法？
White meat was not linked to anxiety in Iranian adults
Cross-sectional study of 3,362 Iranian adults on red and white meat intake and mental symptoms.
- 实际结果
- White meat not associated with anxiety, depression or distress; in overweight/obese adults inverse associations (distress OR 0.64; 0.42-0.99).
- 方法学质量
- low (cross-sectional)
- 相关性
- indirect (white meat incl. fish; no panic or hallucination outcome)
- 局限
- Reverse causation; subgroup findings.
Meat eaters reported slightly less anxiety than people who avoid meat
Dobersek U et al.. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 2023 · PMID 34612096 · DOI 10.1080/10408398.2021.1974336 Meta分析已核查摘要新增Meta-analysis of 20 studies comparing meat eaters and abstainers.
- 实际结果
- Meat eaters had lower anxiety (g = 0.17; 0.03-0.31) and depression (g = 0.216).
- 方法学质量
- low to moderate (observational, heterogeneous)
- 相关性
- very indirect (meat in general)
- 局限
- Not chicken-specific; no causal inference.
WHO: anxiety disorders are common and treatable
World Health Organization. WHO fact sheet 2026 指南 / 立场声明已核查全文新增WHO fact sheet on anxiety disorders.
- 实际结果
- Lists social, psychological and biological causes; no food named; highly effective treatments exist.
- 方法学质量
- authoritative agency statement
- 相关性
- indirect
- 局限
- Not a study.
总体证据说明了什么？
基于上述研究的编辑评估——其本身并非研究结果。
哪种观点有更好的证据支持？
There is no evidence that chicken causes nightmares, panic attacks or hallucinations; the limited indirect data show no association of poultry/meat with anxiety.
为什么有些研究权重更大
No study supports the claim. Indirect observational studies point in the opposite direction or show no association. The rise in anxiety disorders (I-CHK-107) is real but has many documented determinants and no data link it to chicken.
因果关系是否已确立？ 尚未确立 No mechanism, no exposure-outcome study, ecological reasoning only.
仍存在的不确定性
No study has directly measured chicken intake and panic attacks or hallucinations; individual food-symptom associations cannot be excluded.
合理的结论
The claim is unsupported and very likely false as a general statement; panic attacks and hallucinations need medical assessment.
为什么研究结果看起来互相矛盾？
The premise that panic/anxiety became more common is partly correct (I-CHK-107: age-standardised anxiety prevalence increased 1990-2023), but this is a population trend with many possible causes and does not conflict with the null individual-level data.
这是否取决于国家？
- 一般生物学效应
- Universal claim; no biological mechanism proposed.
- 饮食习惯
- Not relevant.
- 食品原产地
- Not relevant.
- 污染物
- Not relevant.
- 本国生产条件
- Mass chicken production grew in parallel with many other social changes; ecological co-trends are not evidence.
- 法律规则
- Not relevant.
- 实际监测数据
- GBD prevalence data (I-CHK-107) show increases in all regions, with or without high chicken consumption.
足以改变结论的地区差异没有可靠数据支持。
统计复核
- Conversion of Hedges g to approximate OR – Anxiety OR about 1.36 (1.06-1.75), depression about 1.48 (1.29-1.72) for abstainers vs consumers; small, opposite to the claim. 已重新计算
总体证据的确定性（GRADE，简化版）
- 主要结局
- Panic attacks/anxiety, nightmares, hallucinations with chicken intake
- 起始等级
- 低（观察性研究）
- 降级理由
- indirectness: no study measures chicken and these outcomes
- imprecision
- 结果
- 低
由单名审查者参照 GRADE 方法进行的简化评估；并非正式的 GRADE 专家组评估。GRADE 评价的是针对某一结局的整体证据，而非单项研究。
已核查的临床指南和官方声明
- WHO: Anxiety disorders (fact sheet) (2026) · 原始文献
Anxiety disorders, including panic disorder, are common and highly treatable with psychological interventions and, in adults, SSRIs; diet is not listed as a cause.
检索策略
本次审查的文献检索记录（检索式采用原数据库语法）。
| 数据库 | 日期 | 检索式 | 检索目标 | 命中数 | 纳入数 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Europe PMC | 2026年10月26日 | (chicken OR poultry) AND ("panic disorder" OR "panic attack" OR nightmare* OR hallucinat* OR psychosis) | 支持性证据 | 3571 | |
| Europe PMC | 2026年10月26日 | (TITLE:"poultry consumption" OR TITLE:"chicken consumption" OR TITLE:"poultry intake" OR TITLE:"white meat") AND (ABSTRACT:anxiety OR ABSTRACT:panic OR ABSTRACT:nightmare OR ABSTRACT:psychosis OR ABSTRACT:hallucination OR ABSTRACT:"mental health" OR ABSTRACT:depression) | 支持性证据 | 4 | |
| PubMed | 2026年10月26日 | (poultry[tiab] OR chicken[tiab]) AND (consumption[tiab] OR intake[tiab]) AND (panic[tiab] OR anxiety[tiab] OR nightmare*[tiab] OR hallucinat*[tiab] OR psychos*[tiab]) AND humans[mh] | 双向 | 20 | |
| Europe PMC | 2026年10月26日 | TITLE:"meat" AND (TITLE:"mental health" OR TITLE:depression OR TITLE:anxiety) AND (systematic review OR meta-analysis in title/pub type) | 反对性证据 | 6 | |
| Europe PMC | 2026年10月26日 | TITLE:"Global Burden of Disease" AND TITLE:"mental disorders" AND (TITLE:"1990" OR TITLE:"2019" OR TITLE:"2021") | 反对性证据 | 39 | |
| WHO website | 2026年10月26日 | fact sheet: anxiety disorders | 指南 | 1 |
待解决的问题
Whether specific individuals report sleep effects after heavy late meals (general meal timing) rather than chicken specifically.
核查深度如何？
7 项相关研究：3 项核查了全文（其中 2 项进行了结构化偏倚风险评估），4 项基于摘要核查，0 项仅核查了文献信息。 尚未进行由两名独立审查者完成的正式评估，也尚未进行独立的人类专家审核。
最近一次科学审核: 2026年10月26日
评定结论的变更历史
- 2026年10月25日 · 第 1 阶段 · 初始评估: 基本错误 (低)
- 2026年10月26日 · 第 4 阶段（系统证据审查） · 在扩展证据后重新审查；评定结论不变: 基本错误 (低)
New evidence is indirect (white meat and meat in general show no harmful association; WHO lists no dietary cause). A FALSE verdict would require direct evidence; certainty stays low. The safety note is preserved and sharpened.
新来源: I-CHK-105 I-CHK-106 I-CHK-107 I-CHK-140
通俗解释
Elawady 医生说，鸡肉会导致儿童和成人做噩梦、惊恐发作，甚至出现幻觉。没有任何研究支持这一点。在关于食物与梦境的调查中，人们大多归咎于乳制品和甜食，而不是鸡肉。惊恐发作和幻觉是真实存在、可以治疗的医学问题，应由医生检查。
与该说法相关的研究
支持该说法的研究 (0)
该组中没有研究。
与该说法相矛盾或限制该说法的研究 (5)
-
Which foods do people blame for bad dreams?
Nielsen T, Powell RA. Front Psychol 2015 · PMID 25741294 · DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00047横断面研究独立交叉核查全文，含结构化偏倚风险评估About one in six students thought food affected their dreams, mostly dairy.
该研究是否支持这一具体说法？ 否 · 方法学质量: 低 · 证据确定性：见该说法的总体评估
研究通俗解读
- 研究人员想了解什么？
How common is perceived food-dependent dreaming, and which foods are blamed?
- 研究是如何开展的？
Questionnaire survey of students
- 研究了多少人、动物或样本？
396 students; Students
- 实际发现了什么？
17.8% (68/382) thought food or late eating affected their dreams. Among the few who named foods (32 and 26 people), dairy was blamed most (44% for disturbing, 39% for bizarre dreams); sweets, spicy and starchy foods and meat followed; eggs and chicken were not mentioned.
- 观察到的效应有多大？
Associations
- 研究结果对日常生活意味着什么？
Bad dreams relate more to poor sleep and eating habits.
- 该研究有哪些局限？
Psychology students given course credit; self-reported beliefs; only about 30 people named foods; many untested-for-chance comparisons
- 它对 Elawady 的具体说法说明了什么？
Does not support egg/chicken claims.
- 研究结果是否适用于德国和欧洲？
Moderate.
- 从该研究中明确不能得出什么结论？
Cannot show that any food causes bad dreams, and says nothing about snoring, sinusitis or headaches.
-
Food sensitivities and nightmares
Nielsen T et al.. Front Psychol 2025 · PMID 40667395 · DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1544475横断面研究独立交叉核查全文，含结构化偏倚风险评估Only 5.5% of students thought food affected their dreams, mostly sweets and dairy; eggs were rarely named. People with food allergy or lactose intolerance reported more nightmares.
该研究是否支持这一具体说法？ 否 · 方法学质量: 低 · 证据确定性：见该说法的总体评估
研究通俗解读
- 研究人员想了解什么？
Why do people perceive that food affects dreams?
- 研究是如何开展的？
Online survey
- 研究了多少人、动物或样本？
1,082; Online participants
- 实际发现了什么？
5.5% (59/1,076) reported food affected dreams; sweets (30%) and dairy (21%) were blamed most, meat 8%, eggs 2% (3 mentions, none for disturbing dreams). Food allergy and lactose intolerance were linked with higher nightmare scores, the latter partly via gut symptoms.
- 观察到的效应有多大？
Associations; mediation
- 研究结果对日常生活意味着什么？
Digestive discomfort may disturb sleep.
- 该研究有哪些局限？
Students given course credit; everything self-reported; only 59 people perceived food effects; cross-sectional; many tests
- 它对 Elawady 的具体说法说明了什么？
Partly supports individual food-sensitivity effects on dreams; does not support a general effect of eggs or chicken (eggs rarely named, chicken not separated).
- 研究结果是否适用于德国和欧洲？
Moderate.
- 从该研究中明确不能得出什么结论？
Cannot show causation, and says nothing about snoring, sinusitis or headaches.
-
White meat was not linked to anxiety in Iranian adults
Kazemi S et al.. Front Nutr 2021 · PMID 34386515 · DOI 10.3389/fnut.2021.710555横断面研究独立交叉核查已核查摘要In 3,362 Iranian adults, eating more white meat was not linked to anxiety or depression.
White meat intake was not associated with anxiety or distress; no sign of harm.
该研究是否支持这一具体说法？ 否 · 方法学质量: 低 · 证据确定性：见该说法的总体评估
研究通俗解读
- 研究人员想了解什么？
Are red and white meat intakes associated with depression, anxiety and psychological distress?
- 研究是如何开展的？
Cross-sectional study with FFQ, HADS and GHQ
- 研究了多少人、动物或样本？
3,362
- 实际发现了什么？
White meat intake was not associated with mental disorders overall. In overweight/obese participants, high white meat intake was associated with lower odds of psychological distress (OR 0.64; 0.42-0.99) and depression (OR 0.68; 0.45-1.00). Red meat top quartile: depression OR 1.43 (1.09-1.89).
- 观察到的效应有多大？
White meat intake was not associated with mental disorders overall. In overweight/obese participants, high white meat intake was associated with lower odds of psychological distress (OR 0.64; 0.42-0.99) and depression (OR 0.68; 0.45-1.00). Red meat top quartile: depression OR 1.43 (1.09-1.89).
- 研究结果对日常生活意味着什么？
No sign that poultry eaters have more anxiety.
- 该研究有哪些局限？
Cross-sectional; reverse causation possible; White meat includes fish; Subgroup findings, multiple testing
- 它对 Elawady 的具体说法说明了什么？
Indirect contradiction; does not measure panic attacks, nightmares or hallucinations.
- 研究结果是否适用于德国和欧洲？
Regional (Iran); limited transfer.
- 从该研究中明确不能得出什么结论？
Cannot prove absence of an effect; cross-sectional.
-
Meat eaters reported slightly less anxiety than people who avoid meat
Dobersek U et al.. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 2023 · PMID 34612096 · DOI 10.1080/10408398.2021.1974336Meta分析独立交叉核查已核查摘要Pooling 20 studies, meat eaters had slightly lower anxiety and depression than meat avoiders.
Meat eaters had slightly lower anxiety than abstainers; not chicken-specific.
该研究是否支持这一具体说法？ 否 · 方法学质量: 低 · 证据确定性：见该说法的总体评估
研究通俗解读
- 研究人员想了解什么？
Do meat consumers and meat abstainers differ in depression and anxiety?
- 研究是如何开展的？
Meta-analysis of 20 primary studies comparing meat consumers and abstainers
- 研究了多少人、动物或样本？
171,802 participants (157,778 meat consumers; 13,259 abstainers)
- 实际发现了什么？
Meat consumption associated with lower depression (Hedges g = 0.216; 0.14-0.30) and lower anxiety (g = 0.17; 0.03-0.31) vs abstention. Study quality explained 58% and 76% of heterogeneity; more rigorous studies showed more consistent results.
- 观察到的效应有多大？
Meat consumption associated with lower depression (Hedges g = 0.216; 0.14-0.30) and lower anxiety (g = 0.17; 0.03-0.31) vs abstention. Study quality explained 58% and 76% of heterogeneity; more rigorous studies showed more consistent results.
- 研究结果对日常生活意味着什么？
No sign that eating meat makes people anxious; the link is weak and not causal.
- 该研究有哪些局限？
Mostly cross-sectional; Not poultry-specific; Possible reverse causation (people with mental illness may change diet)
- 它对 Elawady 的具体说法说明了什么？
Very indirect evidence against the claim.
- 研究结果是否适用于德国和欧洲？
Mostly Western populations.
- 从该研究中明确不能得出什么结论？
Cannot say that meat protects mental health.
-
WHO: anxiety disorders are common and treatable
World Health Organization. WHO fact sheet 2026指南 / 立场声明独立交叉核查已核查全文WHO names effective psychological and drug treatments and does not list any food as a cause.
WHO lists no food (including chicken) as a cause and names effective treatments.
该研究是否支持这一具体说法？ 否 · 方法学质量: 中 · 证据确定性：见该说法的总体评估
研究通俗解读
- 研究人员想了解什么？
What are anxiety disorders, their causes and treatments?
- 研究是如何开展的？
Agency fact sheet
- 研究了多少人、动物或样本？
not applicable
- 实际发现了什么？
Anxiety disorders affected 470 million people in 2023; panic disorder = 'panic attacks and fear of continued panic attacks'; 'There are highly effective treatments for anxiety disorders'; psychological interventions are essential treatments; SSRIs can be useful. Contributing factors listed: social, psychological and biological factors and adverse experiences; diet is not listed as a cause (only 'eat a healthy diet' as self-care).
- 观察到的效应有多大？
Anxiety disorders affected 470 million people in 2023; panic disorder = 'panic attacks and fear of continued panic attacks'; 'There are highly effective treatments for anxiety disorders'; psychological interventions are essential treatments; SSRIs can be useful. Contributing factors listed: social, psychological and biological factors and adverse experiences; diet is not listed as a cause (only 'eat a healthy diet' as self-care).
- 研究结果对日常生活意味着什么？
Panic attacks should be assessed and treated; diet change is not a treatment.
- 该研究有哪些局限？
Fact sheet, not a systematic review
- 它对 Elawady 的具体说法说明了什么？
Supports the safety note.
- 研究结果是否适用于德国和欧洲？
Applies globally.
- 从该研究中明确不能得出什么结论？
Not a study of chicken.
该组中没有被标记为关键研究的研究。
结果不一或不明确的研究 (2)
-
Anxiety disorders became more common worldwide since 1990
GBD 2023 Mental Disorder Collaborators. Lancet 2026 · PMID 42167272 · DOI 10.1016/S0140-6736(26)00519-2系统综述独立交叉核查已核查摘要Age-standardised prevalence of anxiety disorders increased between 1990 and 2023.
Anxiety prevalence rose since 1990 (premise partly correct), but the data give no causal link to chicken.
该研究是否支持这一具体说法？ 部分支持 · 方法学质量: 中 · 证据确定性：见该说法的总体评估
研究通俗解读
- 研究人员想了解什么？
How did the prevalence and burden of mental disorders change from 1990 to 2023?
- 研究是如何开展的？
Systematic analysis and Bayesian meta-regression (GBD 2023)
- 研究了多少人、动物或样本？
204 countries
- 实际发现了什么？
1.17 billion prevalent cases in 2023; age-standardised prevalence of all mental disorders +24.2% (11.4-41.4) since 1990; notable increases in age-standardised prevalence for anxiety disorders, major depressive disorder and others. Anxiety disorders ranked 11th of 304 causes of DALYs.
- 观察到的效应有多大？
1.17 billion prevalent cases in 2023; age-standardised prevalence of all mental disorders +24.2% (11.4-41.4) since 1990; notable increases in age-standardised prevalence for anxiety disorders, major depressive disorder and others. Anxiety disorders ranked 11th of 304 causes of DALYs.
- 研究结果对日常生活意味着什么？
The observation that anxiety is more common is partly right; the cause is not shown.
- 该研究有哪些局限？
Modelled estimates, sparse data in many countries; No information on causes of trends; Erratum published (Lancet 2026;408:698)
- 它对 Elawady 的具体说法说明了什么？
Supports only the trend observation, not the attribution to chicken production.
- 研究结果是否适用于德国和欧洲？
Includes European and North-African countries.
- 从该研究中明确不能得出什么结论？
Cannot attribute the trend to any food.
-
How much do we know about poultry and health?
Connolly G et al.. Adv Nutr 2022 · PMID 36351778 · DOI 10.1093/advances/nmac074系统综述独立交叉核查已核查摘要A map of 525 studies found little direct research on poultry itself and no randomised trials.
Mental-health outcomes appear only among 'other' topics; no evidence base for the claim.
该研究是否支持这一具体说法？ 不明确 · 方法学质量: 中 · 证据确定性：见该说法的总体评估
研究通俗解读
- 研究人员想了解什么？
What research exists on poultry intake and human health?
- 研究是如何开展的？
Systematically searched scoping review (protocol on OSF)
- 研究了多少人、动物或样本？
525 of 13,141 articles
- 实际发现了什么？
525 articles: 212 cancer, 41 CVD, 52 CVD risk factors, 32 T2D, 33 T2D risk factors, 42 body weight, 181 other (incl. mental health). 366 observational, 64 experimental, 76 reviews. No RCT and only 1% of observational studies assessed processed poultry. 'A paucity of research exists to support poultry as health-promoting foods'.
- 观察到的效应有多大？
525 articles: 212 cancer, 41 CVD, 52 CVD risk factors, 32 T2D, 33 T2D risk factors, 42 body weight, 181 other (incl. mental health). 366 observational, 64 experimental, 76 reviews. No RCT and only 1% of observational studies assessed processed poultry. 'A paucity of research exists to support poultry as health-promoting foods'.
- 研究结果对日常生活意味着什么？
Science has not studied chicken alone very much.
- 该研究有哪些局限？
Scoping review: no effect estimates or quality rating; Funding not stated in abstract (PubMed: non-US government support)
- 它对 Elawady 的具体说法说明了什么？
Explains why certainty about chicken-specific effects is low.
- 研究结果是否适用于德国和欧洲？
General.
- 从该研究中明确不能得出什么结论？
Gives no effect sizes.
该组中没有被标记为关键研究的研究。
地区背景
德国 / 欧盟
Not region-specific.
埃及
Not region-specific.
- Antibiotic (veterinary drug) residues in poultry meat and eggs
- Antimicrobial use in food animals and antibiotic growth promoters
- Hormones in poultry, meat, milk and farmed fish
- Salmonella in laying hens, eggs and broiler chicken
- Drinking water quality
- Import controls and the meaning of RASFF notifications for Egyptian products
在我的国家适用什么？
一般科学评估
基本错误 没有证据表明鸡肉会导致噩梦、惊恐发作或幻觉。
以下食品安全领域与该说法相关：
- 兽药与抗生素
- 激素类促生长剂
- 污染物（重金属、PFAS、PCB、二噁英、硝酸盐）
- 病原体（沙门氏菌、弯曲杆菌等）
- 畜禽养殖与饲料
- 监管、进口、召回、标签
禽类
选择一个国家，查看针对该国已核查的信息。
局限：法律规则描述的是允许什么，而不是每一种食品实际含有什么。检测数据来自样本，只有结合其方法细节才有意义。
参考文献
- Dreams of the Rarebit Fiend: food and diet as instigators of bizarre and disturbing dreams.. Nielsen T, Powell RA. Front Psychol 2015 · PMID 25741294 · DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00047
- More dreams of the rarebit fiend: food sensitivity and dietary correlates of sleep and dreaming.. Nielsen T et al.. Front Psychol 2025 · PMID 40667395 · DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1544475
- Red and White Meat Intake in Relation to Mental Disorders in Iranian Adults.. Kazemi S et al.. Front Nutr 2021 · PMID 34386515 · DOI 10.3389/fnut.2021.710555
- Meat and mental health: A meta-analysis of meat consumption, depression, and anxiety.. Dobersek U et al.. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 2023 · PMID 34612096 · DOI 10.1080/10408398.2021.1974336
- WHO fact sheet: Anxiety disorders (15 September 2026). World Health Organization. WHO fact sheet 2026
- Updated trends in the global prevalence and burden of mental disorders, 1990-2023: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2023.. GBD 2023 Mental Disorder Collaborators. Lancet 2026 · PMID 42167272 · DOI 10.1016/S0140-6736(26)00519-2
- Poultry Consumption and Human Health: How Much Is Really Known? A Systematically Searched Scoping Review and Research Perspective.. Connolly G et al.. Adv Nutr 2022 · PMID 36351778 · DOI 10.1093/advances/nmac074