Healthy, Healthful Eggs for Health!

*Health Tip of the Week: If You Eat Eggs, Eat the Yolk!*

Compared with the egg white, egg yolks are loaded with nutrition. The egg white has 3.5 grams of protein and 17 Calories, but virtually no other nutrients to speak of. The yolk, on the other hand, provides a good dietary source of vitamin B12, riboflavin, iodine, vitamin D, selenium, molybdenum, pantothenic acid, choline, iron, zinc, copper, phosphatidylcholine (lecithin), protein, omega-3 fatty acids, and some phytochemicals, lutein and zeaxanthin. Lutein and zeaxanthin are carotenoids that “have a potential role in the prevention and treatment of certain eye diseases such as age-related macular degeneration, cataract and retinitis pigmentosa” (J Sci Food Agric. Ma. 2010 Jan 15;90(1):2-12.).

You may be wondering about the high cholesterol. However, “data from free-living populations show that egg consumption is not associated with higher cholesterol levels” (J Am Coll Nutr. Kritchevsky. 2004 Dec;23(6 Suppl):596S-600S). Egg yolks have properties that can help lower serum cholesterol levels. From our own church prophet, Ellen White says, “Eggs contain properties which are remedial agencies in counteracting poisons” (*Counsels on Diet and Foods, *367). However, she also says that the time of trouble is just before us and then we may have to discard milk and cream and eggs. Therefore, people everywhere should be taught how to cook without milk and eggs. But she cautions to not give up milk, cream and eggs too soon and bring trouble and death upon yourself, “But my message is that you must not bring yourself to a time of trouble beforehand, and thus afflict yourself with death.” Milk, cream, and eggs are part of the most healthful diet, in moderation. (CDF 202, 206, 355, 470).

Enjoy a well-cooked egg now and then!

This is sort of off topic on this, but I really think cholesterol levels have much more to do with genetics than diet. I ate meat for many years. A lot of it. I also eat eggs. I'm diabetic and unable to exercise, and my cholesterol level is 135 with high levels of good cholesterol. My wife has never eaten meat, eats very few eggs, uses very few dairy products, and has a cholesterol level of 227 and walks for exercise pretty regularly. Doctors are always wanting to prescribe some type of medicine for her to lower her cholesterol levels.

Now, if diet was the sole cause of cholesterol levels hers should be low and mine should be high. Just the opposite is true.

Eggs
Michael Greger M.D. · Last Updated on March 10, 2017

Despite the powerful egg industry’s best efforts to put a “healthy” spin on egg consumption, eggs contain high levels of cholesterol and may contain carcinogenic retroviruses, heterocyclic amines, toxic pollutants (such as arsenic, perfluorochemicals like PCB, phthalates, flame retardant chemicals, dioxins), and Salmonella (see here and here). Consuming just one egg per day may significantly shorten our lifespans, increase the levels of the cancer-promoting growth hormone IGF-1, and increase our risk of heart disease, kidney stones, stroke, type 2 diabetes, gestational diabetes, and some types of cancer (such as pancreatic, breast, and prostate).

Eating a plant-based diet may improve mood, lead to weight loss, lower the risk of cataracts, neurological diseases, food poisoning, heart disease, diabetes, asthma, help reverse rheumatoid arthritis, and may increase lifespan. This may be due in part to the arachidonic acid, cholesterol, sulfuric acid, choline, methionine, and sex hormones in eggs and the relative lack of antioxidant phytonutrients.

I believe this works well if the chickens are fed well and cared for.

I have a lot of respect for Dr. Greger and his story about his grandmother. But, my experience is that good eggs are still good for human consumption.

Green, how much B12 do you get from eggs?

You are correct. Diet is not the sole factor in "bad" cholesterol development. Emotional factors do come strongly into play here. My diet has been really off for a couple of years, but my cholesterol levels are fine. Now this gives us no license to eat what we want; as there would be other, potential effects from eating wrong foods, or wrong amounts of right foods. For those interested, there is a lot written by Ellen White about the effects of our mental processes on our health and well-being. Anything I just said was in no way directed at your wife my friend.

So all this evidence is really meaningless? Interesting!

That kind of "evidence" is not empirically established for every country on earth, and if understood in its context, writings of Ellen White would advise people to use their best judgment for whatever geographical area we are living in.

For eg, here in Canada, Robin Hood Flour has just been recalled country-wide due to Listeria concerns. It is not always safe to even be vegetarian in certain situations.

I think that for now, eggs are ok in moderation, and not eaten every day for most areas. There might be exceptions.

I think the spiritual person exercises moderation in all things, and avoids all extremes.

The evidence presented by Dr. Gregor from the world literature is compelling.

And again: The people everywhere should be taught how to cook without milk and eggs, so far as possible, and yet have their food wholesome and palatable. {MH 320.2} I think when she says "people everywhere", she means people everywhere, and "so far as possible" means so far as possible, and this is good advice.

One sentence from Ministry Of Healing does not establish sound doctrine or practice. There is some context to consider:



I thought it was important to include the last two paragraphs in my series of quotes, because in the book Counsels On Diet, these paragraphs were placed immediately after the portions above talking about eggs; and so it appears that they were being placed in correct relation to the sometimes contentious issue of what to eat or not to eat. I really like those last two paragraphs and have often wished that in the past that I paid better attention to them. Hopefully, others will find them helpful as well.

Personally, I believe it's time to stop using dairy products. Unless organically fed and raised.

It has been that "time" since the days of Ellen White, Alchemy. She was milking her own cows for years.

Wanderer has the correct perspective from Mrs. White. Those in this discussion who prescribe a vegan diet for others are ignoring her counsels. Choose for yourself whatsoever diet you please, but she gave no license to anyone to prescribe his or her personal diet to others, nor to set himself or herself up as an example to them.

Mrs. White said very plainly:


According to Ellen White:

• Milk or cream were part of "the most healthful diet."
• The best biscuit recipes included them.
• Eggs contain properties that counteract certain poisons.
• Eggs may prolong life.

According to the Bible:

• Canaan was proclaimed a land of milk and honey--both animal products.
• A God-given requirement of Passover was to eat the sacrificial lamb.
• Jesus ate fish, miraculously reproduced fish for human consumption, and cooked fish.

Would the vegans here say that God would make an exception for a single individual, and that He would at the same time tell all others they should NOT follow the advice Ellen White gave above? If that is the case, what about the following advice which she also gave someone?



Interestingly, the egg prescription came after the fruitarian one. And it does not come alone. She prescribed the same "medicine" to a child.



The discerning, open-minded reader who seeks the truth without the bias of personal opinions or preferences, will see in the following passage much to contemplate.



Clearly, Mrs. White references the "eggs" as being the article of diet of which the message recipient had deprived himself, and she tells him he is an "extremist" for taking such a step. When, as The Wanderer already pointed out, Mrs. White says repeatedly we cannot prescribe a milkless, eggless (vegan) diet but that the issue will resolve itself in due time, it is a sin to ignore her counsel and to teach others contrary to the message we have been given.

Mrs. White herself ate plenty of eggs. To her dying day.

Mrs. White made it clear that the "liberal" diet (a diet inclusive of eggs) was best, not only for Dr. Kress, but for all of the patients in the sanitarium.



To Mrs. White there were two classes of diet:

-- The "liberal" diet was the lacto-ovo-vegetarian diet.
-- The "extreme" diet was that in which all milk and eggs were discarded.

None if you don't eat them. How much B12 do you get from tofu?



Eggs improve the cholesterol ratios of the body. Scientists are finally learning this, and publishing about it. They have discovered that fears over cholesterol in eggs were entirely unfounded.


There's a lot of "may" in there, and not a single reference to a peer-reviewed study in support of its pseudo-facts. The fact is that lacto-ovo vegetarians have a lesser mortality than vegans, per the 1999 Meta-Analysis study done on the aggregated data from five separate studies, including Adventist Health Study 1. Vegans had the same mortality rate as meat eaters in that study. Those with the lowest mortality rate were the pescatarians (those who eat fish, milk, and eggs with the remainder of their diet entirely from plants).

It is true that vegans have far less diabetes than those of other dietaries. No one has explained to me yet, though, why vegans have more than double the rate of cervical cancer when compared with meat eaters (National Institute of Health, 2011).

From VeganHealth.org, the following quote supplies fresh research proving the veracity of earlier studies on the same point relative to cancer among vegans:



So, while "vegetarians had a lower risk of all cancer," the vegans had an equal risk with meat-eaters.

It all proves Mrs. White's words once again. She said giving up milk and eggs prematurely would result in death.

It comes down to this: When the risks in eating milk and eggs exceed the risks of not eating them, that is the time when it would be most favorable to give them up--as God leads. We are told that God will indicate to us when it's time. I trust those words. I will not haphazardly run ahead of God, but wait for the right timing.

In my situation, eggs are an important aspect of nutrition. I praise God for His providence in teaching me and providing for my needs.

Is that a statement of ignorance or a flat out lie??? I guess you do not understand how NutritionFacts.org works, or else, you just are attempting to mask truth? Every video is based on peer review data. Every one! And every one has a list of peer review journal articles there were quoted in the videos. I hope your belief about NutritionFacts.org is not as it says in 2 Peter, a "willingly ignorant," a choosing to ignore the facts.

That is a good way to view the subject. "Theologically" or "health-wise" it does not seem that it is a good idea for us to be telling the whole world: "Mrs White says not to eat eggs." It simply is not outlined that way, and medical facts do not yet substantiate such an idea. I can think of a few areas in the world where I would never in a million years eat an egg, but here, I have approximately 2 eggs per week. I am 62 and my cholesterol is fine. I just had it tested a month ago. I praise God for the principle of moderation in "health reform"

I'm not ignoring the facts. There are many facts that contradict the ones Dr. Greger chose to purvey. His facts are not presented in a balanced manner at all. For example, if he wants to talk about "arsenic" being a problem, then he had far rather give up rice than eggs. The rice plant naturally takes up arsenic and concentrates it, to the point that many in America have become aware of it as published in mainstream news. As a vegetarian, I must limit my rice consumption. I do not eat rice every day like most people where I live. If, on the other hand, I ate meat on a regular basis, the arsenic would be virtually a non-issue, because the high sulfur content of the meat would help to flush the excess arsenic.

And here's where it gets more interesting still: eggs are likewise high in sulfur, and help to flush arsenic (a poison) out of the body. While Mrs. White did not name arsenic as one of the poisons that eggs help with, and while she did not say sulfur was the agent to help rid the poisons, her statement is nonetheless clear that eggs do help remove poisons. Therefore, Dr. Greger, whomever he is, cannot hope to build a solid case when so much of it contradicts what Mrs. White has given us through inspiration.

Multiple "facts" Dr. Greger put forward are brought into question by Ellen White and by other scientists and studies done today. His fears about the cholesterol in eggs have already been proven false. Eggs actually help us in that department, and moderate usage of eggs does not contribute to heart disease. Those who consume eggs live longer than the vegans who do not, statistically.

Ellen White informed us that giving up milk and eggs prematurely would result in death. She was right, of course.

Green, how much sulfur do you need to flush out poisons?
How much specifically needed for arsenic from eating a mostly rice diet?

Green - you did not address this false statement. Everything that Dr. Greger presents is from the peer review literature. I doubt would could come up with much of anything in the peer review literature to refute the facts he presents. Your claims about his facts are just that, claims without basis in fact.

Well, here's a journal article to refute the arsenic in eggs "fact": written by Daghir and Hariri in Journal of Agricultural Food Chemistry. They studied chickens fed a measured dosage of arsenic over a 15-week period. Here is the abstract and conclusions:


It is noteworthy that the hens' arsenic output in the eggs was far less than the known input. Obviously, then, the hens must be eliminating arsenic in their wastes.

Kland, those are good questions. I do not have scientific studies that would firmly quantify the answers with something like dosages or milligrams. However, that the consumption of a high-sulfur diet helps to eliminate the arsenic I have seen first hand from returned lab reports comparing myself, a vegetarian, to another person subsisting on the same rice diet but with the addition of meat. Whereas my own levels of arsenic were found to be elevated, my co-worker's arsenic was in the normal range. Later, when that individual became vegetarian, the tests were redone and both of us had elevated arsenic.

NOTE: The vegetarian connection was only made after the second series of lab tests were done which showed this result. The tests served to confirm the degree of protection against arsenic which meat eaters may have.

Brown rice contains higher arsenic levels than white rice. The region in which the rice was grown will also make a significant difference in how much arsenic it contains. So no one rule could be made as to how much sulfur per how much rice in the diet.

From the research I have done, no higher sulfur-content food is available to a vegan than garlic. Garlic contains more sulfur than onions. However, ounce for ounce, an egg will have eight times as much sulfur as garlic; and who sits down to a bowl of mashed garlic anyhow?

Arsenicosis can produce thickened areas of skin, such as on the hands and feet, called keratosis. It can cause headache, weakened digestive system and/or stomach pain, and general fatigue. Acute arsenic poisoning can cause death, but chronic poisoning, such as through daily rice consumption, will produce symptoms more gradually as the levels build. I have experienced multiple of these symptoms, and still must stay on top of arsenic on a constant basis where I live. Especially the headache and stomach weakness bother me. Another, more specific, antidote to arsenic poisoning is selenium. I have had to import selenium supplements, as no pharmacy here has it. But sulfur is a more broad-spectrum antidote for toxins, and can also help to remove many other elemental and biological toxins.

I rather dislike eating eggs. More and more they seem to lack in quality. Nonetheless, the more I manage to consume, the better I feel overall. When I fail to eat them with sufficient quantities, I can feel my stomach weakening, and the tinge of headache that can set in. It's not a strong headache, at least not at first. But it will not go away, and can stay for weeks at a time. When my stomach weakens, I feel loath to eat rice. This causes me to switch to more "American" foods, like corn flakes, white bread (there's no such thing as whole wheat around here), or oats. But these all increase the cost of living for me substantially. In other words, my vegetarian diet truly is more expensive than the poor, meat-eater's diet of those around me. They could not afford to live as I do, even with simply milk and eggs in place of meat--truth be told.

I advise the locals to give up their pork, shrimp, snake, dog, mouse, or whatever else of an unclean nature entirely, and then to cut down substantially on fish. Most go and buy the biggest fish they can at the market--little knowing that it has the highest concentration of toxins. I teach them that if they eat fish, they should eat the smallest ones. They are not ready to give up meat entirely yet here. The local economy and the foods available at the market simply leave them with few options. The change must be gradual, one step at a time. The first step is to cut out the unclean.

While they begin to remove meat from their diet, I advise them to use eggs as its replacement--just as Mrs. White says.

Green, you said quote, " and not a single reference to a peer-reviewed study in support of its pseudo-facts." Do you still claim this as truth? You offered a (single) journal article, but was this against anything Dr. Greger said? If so, what? Again, I think you have no specific facts against NutritionFacts.org and in truth, your claim is patently false that there is "not a single reference to a peer reviewed study." Your hole is deep enough, stop digging!

APL,

You really should check on your B12 levels. Note that blood tests for B12 can be inaccurate--did you see the link about that in the article from VeganHealth.org that I posted earlier? Anyhow, you seem to have forgotten what you posted from Dr. Greger. In what you posted, no references were made to supporting materials.

For now, I'm addressing one solitary pseudo-fact of his: the arsenic. Would you like to find where Dr. Greger specifies how much arsenic is in eggs? It's really not much of a "fact" with such a general statement as you quoted here. The article I found actually quantifies the amount of arsenic that a chicken will pass through to its egg when given arsenic in its feed. Dr. Greger gave no facts about this. In fact, I think I can safely say there is arsenic in the vegetables you eat too. Should you then avoid them as a consequence? (If you wonder about it, research the arsenic connection with Brussel's sprouts, cabbage, broccoli, etc.)

Will you support Dr. Greger in opposition to Mrs. White? I'll follow the messages from God given through the latter. You are free to follow whomever you wish.

Green, my hair is still curling over your comments about people eating mice and snakes...

Would you happen to know where EGW wrote something about eating the best we can for whatever geographical area we are living in? I recall once reading it but have not yet found it.

Perhaps it is this one.



If this is not the one you are looking for, I would suggest "locality" as a good search term, in combination with other term(s) relative to the diet.

Where I live, people eat most anything that moves. I was not even facetious in that statement. I truly do teach the locals here not to eat those things. In fact, in place of "mice" I probably should have said "rats." The local word for them lumps them both together, and perhaps the locals eat both, but I am sure they prefer the larger end of the spectrum. I have passed signs that advertised "genuine field mice/rats" for sale--people prefer the "natural" ones. When I saw rats for sale at the local food market, it turned my stomach. But then to hear of people making owl soup, or even seeing Adventists here eating ants' eggs--do they not know that these are unclean?

Quail eggs, chicken eggs, duck eggs, ants' eggs (usually of the red fire ant variety)--these are some of the "egg" products locals consume regularly. Only the first two in the list would I recommend. I understand the latter two to be unclean. Ants eat anything--even filthy carcases of animals!

Come to think of it, maybe I should have said "chicken" eggs in the title here! (Though quail eggs are fine, too.)

Wow. I am surprised that people eat that stuff and do not realize how bad it is. It really makes me cringe just to think of it.

Thanks for those references. They are good ones - on the right track. I think there is another one I was originally hoping to find. When I discover it I will post it here.

I do know that a few years ago I lived on a small acreage and we had ducks. Mostly for pets. But I remember trying the duck eggs a few times, and feeling ill after eating them. They are quite different from "regular" eggs.

Don't chickens --who aren't kept in cages -- eat just about anything?
insects, grubs, snails, seeds, fallen fruit and berries, even mice and worms, grasshoppers and fly larvae (out of the cow pies). Chickens gladly and voraciously tear at the flesh and guts of a freshly shot groundhog, opossum or raccoon.
Of course they also eat some grain and herbs and grass.

However, chickens are scavengers and omnivores.

And these are the chickens considered the ones making healthy eggs.

You may be taking that a bit too far in your list there (I have witnessed chickens leaving a carcase entirely untouched), but birds do have a very low pH stomach acid that enables chickens to digest even the shell of that snail they consume, and get the calcium from it for making their own egg shell. The acid would kill any parasite rather well. Of course, God, who made the list we see in Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14, knew all this. From the tone of your post, you seem to be questioning His wisdom in declaring chickens clean.

If chickens were so filthy as you imply, why would God give instructions through Mrs. White that sick people should eat raw eggs in order to regain strength?

The diet reform should be progressive. As disease in animals increases, the use of milk and eggs will become more and more unsafe. An effort should be made to supply their place with other things that are healthful and inexpensive. The people everywhere should be taught how to cook without milk and eggs, so far as possible, and yet have their food wholesome and palatable. {MH 320.2}

Several years ago we bought a house on the outskirts of a town. Unbeknownst to us the nice treed area next to the house hid an egg raising farm about half a mile away.

Whenever the wind blew toward our place it brought a strong most unpleasant smell with it. Sorry -- but that killed any relish for eggs that I might have had prior. There is nothing healthy concerning how chickens are raised these days.

Yes, people have asked me why are chickens, who eat all kinds of unclean things, considered "clean" while rabbits, who eat clover and grasses, hay and grains considered unclean, even though they even chew their cud.

That discussion usually centers on "what if during the time of trouble we flee to mountains" or "what if we are lost in the woods" -- lots of rabbits in the bushes, they'd be a good source of nourishment.

I really don't know why one is "clean" the other "unclean" -- I don't eat either. But if people think they need meat, better to stick with those scripture allows.

However all the meat, and animal produced foods were not part of the original diet God gave to mankind.
They are all "exceptions" allowed due to sinful conditions -- none are part of the ideal diet.

Nor would I look to EGW's example as the "ideal", for she had a tough time giving up meat herself. It was about 30 years from the time she was given the health vision, till she made a total and complete break from meat. Though she was learning to eat and cook without it all those years, she had numerous lapses.

It's true that in some cases an egg is "medicine" to help correct a dietary deficiency, and give a nutritionally dense boost to the system.
The Bible even recommends a little wine for the stomach --
Many make the same case that alcoholic drink is good using that text in the same way as people use EGW's statement to someone sick, to promote eggs.
Yet scripture warns that wine is a mocker and we should not partake of it. Just as EGW tells us we need to learn to cook well balanced meals without eggs and milk.

Health reform is progressive --
We should be encouraging people forward to the ideal,
No- not condemning them if they eat an occasional egg or two --
But encouraging them to learn to cook without animal foods.

According to Mrs. White, teaching people to cook without milk and eggs, and prescribing a vegan diet, were poles apart. It is important that we give people knowledge. It is also important that we give them freedom of conscience without pressure.

Don't worry about it, APL. God will take care of the matter in His own time. When it is time to give up the milk and eggs, He'll tell us. Meanwhile, "let your moderation be known unto all men."

Green - I do not tell people what to eat. I let the evidence speak for itself. Could it be that God has revealed evidence to people other than yourself? Did EGW tell us that EVERYONE should eat eggs? Did she even say that the majority should eat them? Some people do take extremes and do not learn how to eat properly, these people do give health reform health deform.

Consider the following:
Dr. Rand, educate yourself to discard all flesh meat. Soon butter will never be recommended, and milk will be entirely discarded; for disease in animals is increasing in proportion to the increase of wickedness among men. Soon there will be no safety in using eggs, milk, cream, or butter. {Lt14-1901}

God will give His people ability and tact to prepare wholesome food without these things. Let our people in Australia discard all unwholesome recipes and learn how to live healthfully in accordance with the directions God has given. Let them impart this knowledge as they would Bible instruction. Let them preserve the health and increase the strength by avoiding the large amount of cooking which has filled the world with chronic invalids. We are coming to the time when recipes for cooking will not be needed, for God’s people will learn that the food God gave Adam in his sinless state is the best for keeping the body in a sinless state. {Lt14-1901}

Has God given anyone the ability to live without eggs, milk and butter? I know many that do and are very healthy. It may not work for you. I do not tell you what to eat. I do teach all how to do without them. Then leave them free to choose. That is how God works. God never forces people, He only draws. We see the devil working within the church now to force the conscience. Many disturbing things within the leadership of the church is now resorting to the use of force. Sad, how the rejection of the SOP is getting stronger.

I am not sure if you were directing this part of your post to Green, but I would say that he is the last one here that i would accuse of this. I have learned much from his knowledge of the Bible and the writings of EGW

I am of the opinion when it comes to the food thing, we should not be so hasty in labelling others as "rejecting the testimonies," for it is really just a difference in understandings and knowledge bases. And of course, not everyone, everywhere can do the same when it comes to diet.

A given person cannot truly "reject the testimonies" until they have a 100% understanding from them on a given subject. I would suggest that that has not happened, atleast here in this topic with any of the participants.

Really? In the "Rejection of the Testimonies Foretold" thread, you said this:



The only problem is. . . that is NOT what the Spirit of Prophecy teaches us to do. It teaches us that "the doctrine of dispensing with them [milk and eggs] should not be taught."

OK - I will rephrase to what I meant - I will teach other HOW to dispense with all animal products. Again, all individuals are free to choose. Diet reform as with the accepting the truth about God has to be a choice of the individual. No one can force the will of another.

Wanderer, it is true I not put much faith in much of green's theology. Though in my previous comment, the rejection of the SOP was directed more at the top leadership of SDA inc.

Well; it's not necesarily "wrong" to feel doubts about Church Leadership, or "Green's Theology," or the "interpretation" of others on "the health message," it might even be good for the health to not keep such steam all bottled up inside. The first step to healing, unity, and "the fellowship of Christ" starts with transparency and honesty. I can't imagine us as individuals, or as the collective "Church" coming to God any other way. Although I would add that it is likely always more important to promote hope in all situations of contention and disagreement. If we cannot give people the Hope we have in Christ, no matter what the disagreement,then we give them nothing.

The great motive powers of the soul are faith, hope, and love; and it is to these that Bible study, rightly pursued, appeals. The outward beauty of the Bible, the beauty of imagery and expression, is but the setting, as it were, for its real treasure--the beauty of holiness. In its record of the men who walked with God, we may catch glimpses of His glory. In the One "altogether lovely" we behold Him, of whom all beauty of earth and heaven is but a dim reflection. "I, if I be lifted up," He said, "will draw all men unto Me." John 12:32.

As the student of the Bible beholds the Redeemer, there is awakened in the soul the mysterious power of faith, adoration, and love. Upon the vision of Christ the gaze is fixed, and the beholder grows into the likeness of that which he adores. The words of the apostle Paul become the language of the soul: "I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord, that I may know Him, and the power of His resurrection, and the fellowship of His sufferings." Philippians 3:8-10. {Ed 192.1}

The springs of heavenly peace and joy unsealed in the soul by the words of Inspiration will become a mighty river of influence to bless all who come within its reach. Let the youth of today, the youth who are growing up with the Bible in their hands, become the recipients and the channels of its life-giving energy, and what streams of blessing would flow forth to the world!--influences of whose power to heal and comfort we can scarcely conceive--rivers of living water, fountains "springing up unto everlasting life." {Ed 192.2}

Seems like, "a lot of "may" in there, and not a single reference to a peer-reviewed study in support of its pseudo-facts".

So you don't have any scientific facts.
You don't know how much sulfur is needed.
You don't know how much eggs provide.

Pseudo-facts or pseudo feelings? Seems like it would.
But you don't know.

And we should just take your word for it, eh?
Pseudo-feelings.

Yep, I've heard meat eaters say the same, insisting they must certainly have meat.
Ellen White went through that.
4. I have thought for years that I was dependent upon a meat diet for strength. I have eaten three meals a day until within a few months. It has been very difficult for me to go from one meal to another without suffering from faintness at the stomach, and dizziness of the head. Eating would remove these feelings. I seldom allowed myself to eat anything between my regular meals, and have made it a practice to often retire without supper. But I have suffered greatly for want of food from breakfast to dinner, and have frequently fainted. Eating meat removed for the time these faint feelings. I therefore decided that meat was indispensable in my case. {CD 482.2}


Don't imply a vegetarian diet is synonymous to your SAD American diet. Really, corn flakes and white bread you associate with "vegetarian"? Pitiful.

Why? What if they start feeeeeling "faintness at the stomach, and dizziness of the head"?

That almost sounds like reason here. But keep in mind, that's for them. Not you. You know better. You should have progressed more. But instead you are trying to make your diet a criterion for those of us who aren't in that situation. If you want to reject Ellen White, that's your business. Don't make it for the rest of us.

And your B12 snide egotistic remark to APL, you still haven't given any facts as to how much you get in eggs.

Is that like the Bible teaching us to live without sin is poles apart from actually striving to live without sin?

Are you aware that Green was the one who initiated the, "rejecting the testimonies" with regard to food, by plugging in his promotion for eggs?

Yes, I am aware. My statement is intended for all of us, and if you look at my statement, you will see that I used "we," to make sure people could see my intentions

Again, when someone is trying to make a quote sound against what you know to be true, it pays to find and read the quote, read above and beyond it. It may be, shall we say, a little bit different than what was portrayed.

Read the whole thing. Here are a few excerpts.

When Health Reform Becomes Health Deform

Letter 37, 1901
{CD 203-}
You will not be successful in sanitariums, where the sick
are treated, if you prescribe for the patients the same diet you have prescribed for yourself and your wife.


So the passage is about a doctor prescribing for sick patients.

While I would discard flesh meat as injurious, something less objectionable may be used, and this is found in eggs.

Something less objectionable than meat.
For the diet, of the sick, who are not necessarily subscribing to the health reform.

You have not taken the food essential to nourish your frail physical strength. You must not deny yourself of good, wholesome food.

So whatever the doctor is eating, he is denying himself and wife good wholesome food. This does not imply that the less objectionable items than meat are considered to be "good wholesome food". Just that the doctor, in his choices, has denied "good wholesome food".

At one time Doctor ----- tried to teach our family to cook according to health reform, as he viewed it, without salt or anything else to season the food.
This involves more than not eating eggs. No salt, either.
"tasteless dishes", monotonous dishes, "insipid" dishes, "refused by the stomach" dishes.

Do not go to extremes in regard to the health reform. Some of our people are very careless in regard to health reform. But because some are far behind, you must not, in order to be an example to them, be an extremist.
Some are far behind! But don't go to the extreme to make up for them.

The reason for Doctor -----'s poor health is his overdrawing on his bank stock of health, and then failing to replace the amount drawn out by wholesome, nutritious, palatable food. My brother, devote your whole life to Him who was crucified for you, but do not tie yourself down to a meager diet; for thus you misrepresent health reform.

Meager diet.
Overdrawn on health.
Would it be an overstatement to say, "sick"?
If you are sick, eggs can help recover, if you are not going to replace your diet with "good wholesome food".

Those who desire to be co-workers with God must consider carefully how they teach health reform in God's great vineyard. They must move carefully in specifying just what food should and should not be eaten. The human messenger must unite with the divine Helper in presenting the message of mercy to the multitudes God would save.
We are to be brought into connection with the masses. Should health reform be taught them in its most extreme form, harm would be done. We ask them to leave off eating meat and drinking tea and coffee. This is well.
God's great vineyard.
Multitudes God would save.
Connection with the masses.
Sounds like in the message to the world, we should not at present, 100+! years ago, urge giving up eggs and milk besides the more objectionable meat, tea, and coffee. A little at a time, for diet reform is progressive.

But some say that milk also should be given up. This is a subject that needs to be carefully handled. There are poor families whose diet consists of bread and milk, and, if they can get it, a little fruit. All flesh food should be discarded, but vegetables should be made palatable with a little milk or cream or something equivalent. The poor say, when health reform is presented to them, "What shall we eat? We cannot
afford to buy the nut foods." As I preach the gospel to the poor, I am instructed to tell them to eat that food which is most nourishing. I cannot say to them: You must not eat eggs, or milk, or cream; you must use no butter in the preparation of food. The gospel must be preached to the poor, and the time has not yet come to prescribe the strictest diet.

Poor.
Whose diet consists of bread and milk.
Poor who cannot "afford to buy the nut foods."
The nut foods, which could supply the place of eggs and milk and cream.
Because they are poor.
Nothing about because they don't want to.

The reforms that are strained to the highest tension might accommodate a certain class, who can obtain all they need to take the place of the things discarded; but this class forms a very small minority of the people to whom these tests seem unnecessary.
The health reform can accommodate a certain class,
who can INDEED obtain all they need to take the place of the things discarded;
A class who forms a very small minority
in 1901!

They fail to supply the system with proper nourishment, and as a consequence become weak and unable to work.
Of which, a certain class can INDEED supply the system of the things discarded.
A certain class, who over 100+ years ago, could even then supply the system of the things discarded.
Who, at least in North America, who are not poor (but even then, it's probably less expensive) cannot supply the system of the things discarded?
Have we not progressed?
Has shipping of fresh produce nationwide become a reality?
What would one eat, in the middle of the nation, in 1901, in winter? Can we not today get fresh strawberries year round? Can we not find some sort of fresh fruits and vegetables, seeds and grains, year round for fairly decent price?


The patients pay a good price for their board, and they should have liberal fare. Some may come to the sanitarium in a condition demanding stern denial of appetite and the simplest fare, but as their health improves, they should be liberally supplied with nourishing food.

Sick patients.
Who are paying for care.
The doctor's "diet should be made the criterion for others to follow."


Is anyone here urging the poor to eat a certain way?
Is anyone here urging those who cannot otherwise supply the system with proper nourishment to eat a certain way?

But there is someone here urging others, whether poor or not or otherwise able to supply the system with proper nourishment to not follow the health message, who rejects the testimonies. One who thinks their "diet should be made the criterion for others to follow."

Quail eggs, chicken eggs - OK.
Duck eggs, ant eggs - not OK.

Ummm, Green, you said God declared chickens to be clean.

Could you show where?

kland,

Read Deuteronomy.



If you do not see chickens in the list above, then they are expressly declared clean by God. And here's more:



Job, a righteous man, ate eggs.

Green, you're saying if something is not explicitly forbidden, it is expressly declared ok by God. Guess you're saying smoking God expressly declares as ok to do. And you're also saying in the next statement that "bird" means "chicken". Not true.

Do you see the California Condor listed as being unclean?