Organic, free-range eggs less likely to carry salmonella (but no guarantees)
Q. I recently heard someone claim that you can't get salmonella poisoning from organic eggs. I thought that salmonella was a risk for ALL eggs. What's the truth?
A. You are correct that all eggs and poultry carry some risk of salmonella, which is the leading cause of food poisoning in the U.S. Organic or free-range eggs and poultry are not immune from contamination with this bacteria. The only way to eliminate all risk of salmonella is to thoroughly cook all eggs and poultry to a temperature that kills the bacteria. (That means no runny yokes.)
That's not to say that every egg is contaminated. People regularly order their eggs sunny side up or easy over. Classic recipes for Caesar salad dressing, mayonnaise, and chocolate mousse all involve raw eggs--and many enjoy these foods every day and live to tell the tale. Nonetheless there is always some risk involved. And it is true that the risk is lower with free-range eggs.
Conventionally (industrially) raised egg layers are kept confined in very close quarters, where as free-range layers have more space. The extra space translates into less contact with waste and lower contamination rates. A recent British survey found that about about a quarter of caged hen populations tested positive for salmonella, versus less than 5% of organic flocks and 6.5% of free-range flocks. In fact, the amount of salmonella contamination was directly parallel to the size of the flocks. Huge industrial chicken farms housing 30,000 or more birds had four times the level of bacteria of the smaller flocks mandated by U.K. organic standards.
Obviously, if you want to eat your eggs raw or undercooked, free-range, organic eggs are much safer (although the risk is not zero). They also appear to be a lot more nutritious. Analysis conducted by Mother Earth News found that eggs from pasture-raised chickens contained twice the omega-3 content, three times more vitamin E, and a whopping seven times as much beta-carotene as commercially produced eggs. They also had a third less cholesterol and a fourth less saturated fat.
In my household, we buy all of our eggs right at farm at which they are laid, an arrangement that is becoming increasingly common as many Americans attempt to forge a more direct connection with their food suppliers. I know our layers have plenty of room to roam around because I see them lounging around in their huge pasture whenever I go up to the farm. To find an egg producer (or any other type of farmer) near you, check LocalHarvest.org.
If you are using pasture-raised eggs, here's a custom entry with nutrient values approximated based on the Mother Earth reports that you can add to your pantry and use for more accurate dietary analysis.
 older posts |
home | newer posts  |
| Complementary proteins: How much does timing matter? | | Nutrition Data Blog | | Secrets of Anti-Aging Nutrition: Join me in Virginia |
Posted by: veg chick | Jul 30, 2009 11:07:39 AM
I have a couple of comments to contribute to this discussion.
There is no legal definition or consistent industry standard for free range in this country. There are only two ways to be assured that the eggs you consume are from truly free range birds. The first (and best way in my opinion) is to find a farmer who sells free range eggs, and verify by visiting the farm that the birds are being raised according to your definition of free range. The second is to purchase certified organic eggs. Please see the following for a definition of organic standards:
http://www.attra.org/attra-pub/PDF/organicpoultry.pdf
As for Judit's comment:
"The story only gets worse from here! Free-range eggs have a higher risk of having too high levels of dioxins and dioxin-like polychlorinated biphenyls because these are pollutants that the chicken would pick up from the soil and environment. In fact, one study concluded that "Available data show that current soil levels of dioxins and DL-PCB in residential and agricultural areas in Europe often appear to be too high to produce free-range eggs with dioxin levels below the current limit values in the EU." I doubt that our situation in North America is any better."
If this is true, frankly we are all screwed. What do even factory farmed beef, pork, poultry eat? Feed that has been produced on land with these high levels of dioxins. It would make sense that everything is contaminated with some level of pcbs. It has been widely reported that we all carry around a toxic load of chemicals in our bodies. I choose to eat organic, vegetarian (mostly vegan) because it is better for me, the environment, and because it doesn't promote the horrible atrocities that are committed by conventional agriculture in this country to put meat, eggs, and dairy on our tables.
Incidentally, I have a small flock of hens. Their coop is kept in our garden area, which is a fenced half-acre. They are outside every day of the year, by their choice, except when the ground is snow-covered and they choose to stay in the coop. We feed them grain, but their primary source of food during the summer is bugs, weeds, and cover crops that we grow in our garden for green manure. They help us keep our organic garden pest free, and they get to live in the way nature intended. Three of our birds are now seven years old, are still laying eggs, and are beautiful, curious, friendly birds.
I read about the egg study in Mother Earth News and thought about participating, but I knew what I'd find. Our "girls" are getting a healthy, well balanced diet. We've never had them vaccinated, or fed them medicated feed and they are the picture of health and happiness. I know the eggs they produce are better than the eggs produced by factory farmed hens, just as I know the produce we grow in our organic garden is exponentially better than the junk that is grown in pesticide laden fields in Mexico then shipped to our local grocery store.
I am certain I could find studies to support this and spout facts and figures to prove this, but I have my family's robust good health as proof that we are doing the right thing.
Posted by: fat preacher | Jul 27, 2009 9:29:46 PM
@ Sean: I don't get your point. Purdue is a University, not a company. Your reference is talking about how feed is supplied to caged birds "at precise times during the day."
I'm not saying that caged birds are the best way to raise chickens, though it is certainly the most cost effective. My question is, IF you are going to raise them in cages, how else would you deliver food to them?
Posted by: fat preacher | Jul 27, 2009 9:21:14 PM
@ Fred: Well, Judit cited studies. Any first year chemistry student would have. You didn't. Ball's in your court.
Posted by: Sean | Jun 9, 2009 8:43:33 PM
Judit,
ah...so which company do you work for again? Purdue?
"feed is offered to birds via the chain system. ... In general, 2 inches of feeder space is allotted per pullet..."
References:
Posted by: Fred | Feb 8, 2009 7:00:46 PM
Judit,
Get a grip. You are citing old studies and the newest study is focused on one breed. The Mother Earth study looked at various flocks and breeds from across the country. Any scientist will state that controlled studies are called that for a reason. They are looking to identify something negative or positive to sustain their funding and support their cause. Any 1st year chemistry or agriculture student will identify true "free range" eggs as being more nutriant rich than eggs produced from stressed out over medicated poultry raised in a farm factory. Washing the "bloom" from free range eggs, drying and storing properly will eliminate any chance of salmonella. Please do your own research when making these statements. Chicks that are properly cared for and raised in a clean environment will not be harmful egg producers. Chickens raised in close proximity to thousands of others with contact to feces, sick birds and pumped full of chemicals will and do, create unhealthy eggs. Common sense prevails where your biased, flawed logic is spread like so much manure. Your position is more biased than what you claim Mother Earth News is. Their agenda is healthy living, what's yours ??
Posted by: Annabel | Jul 28, 2008 8:12:40 PM
Well, Judit's news is not the news I'd hoped to hear, but I applaud her for citing her sources. I'm researching relative salmonella risks of differently produced eggs, and I can't find a blankety-blank citation anywhere!
Posted by: Laura Evers | Mar 3, 2008 4:48:45 PM
Monica,
Thank you for mentioning us on your Web site! We’re happy you enjoy Mother Earth News.
Loved your post on organic and free-range eggs. Glad our article was useful.
Laura Evers
Mother Earth News
For more great articles check out our new Web site!
www.motherearthnews.com
Posted by: Monica Reinagel | Feb 27, 2008 9:49:48 AM
Judit,
we are all indebted to you for this information. The issue is obviously complex and can't be boiled down to a few isolated findings. It is a shame that we don't have more, solid data on eggs from American producers. As you point out, almost all of the data were collected from European sources.
Personally, I will continue to source eggs from a free-range farmer. Even if the eggs were found to be equivalent to commercial eggs in terms of nutrition and safety, I still think the way birds are handled on large industrial egg farms is inhumane, unsavory, and damaging to the environment.
But thanks again for the valuable counterpoint.
Posted by: Monica Reinagel | Feb 27, 2008 9:43:13 AM
Bogdan,
I'm not opposed to eating animal products on health grounds (although some of the ethical and environmental considerations give me pause), but I think the diet you've described could be a very healthy, if effortful, way to live, as long as you are taking care to meet your daily nutritional requirements, particularly for iron, B12, protein, and total energy (calories).
Posted by: Judit | Feb 26, 2008 9:51:07 PM
I admire your usually objective and scientific approach to nutrition - a subject that clearly needs such an approach.
However, you clearly have a bias in this case and it shows.
Even a quick look at the literature tells you that the incidence of Salmonella infection can be dramatically cut by immunization of chickens against this bug. In fact, some studies that have looked at this factor noted that far more free-range chicken were immunized than caged production chickens, so some of the lower incidence of infection will undoubtedly be due to that.
Immunizations also explain the large variations in incidence of Salmonella-- something that you again fail to mention. So there will be flocks of non-free-range chicken whose eggs as just as safe as that of free-range chicken because of the immunizations.
And while looking at the issue of Salmonella infections, one should also mention the well-known fact, shown by study after study, that the incidence of parasitic gastrointestinal infestations/worms is MUCH higher amongst free-range chicken than cage-kept chicken. While one would think that this is only in 3rd world countries, unfortunately this is not the case. One of the larger studies comes from Denmark, in an organic free-range system much like we have in North America.
The story only gets worse from here! Free-range eggs have a higher risk of having too high levels of dioxins and dioxin-like polychlorinated biphenyls because these are pollutants that the chicken would pick up from the soil and environment. In fact, one study concluded that "Available data show that current soil levels of dioxins and DL-PCB in residential and agricultural areas in Europe often appear to be too high to produce free-range eggs with dioxin levels below the current limit values in the EU." I doubt that our situation in North America is any better.
With respect to omega-3 fatty acid content being higher in free-range eggs; the ONLY study that has found that is from Mother Earth News. Hardly an unbiased source!!! On top of that, they did not publish details of their own study. I would like to see that study confirmed by others before placing much weight on it, no matter how attractive it looks to someone like you, who consumes free-range eggs.
There are in fact many other studies that did NOT find the omega-3 fatty acid content of free-range eggs to be higher. That is not surprising. If the omega-3 fatty acid content of free-range eggs was higher simply due the fact that they *are* free-range, why would the producers not seek permission to label their eggs as such from the regulatory bodies? It would be a relatively simple step to do, and NOT to do it would not make business sense.
Yet free-range eggs are not labelled as higher in omega-3 fatty acids. That's because on average they are not.
There ARE eggs that are higher in omega-3 fatty acids, and they are of course labelled as such and command a higher price accordingly. However, this has nothing to do with them being free-range, rather, the chickens are being fed flax seed, the source of the higher omega-3 fatty acids. ONLY these eggs have been CONSISTENTLY shown to be higher in omega-3 fatty acids BY AN INDEPENDENT 3RD PARTY TESTER.
Important to also mention here is that the omega-3 fatty acid content of eggs also varies *significantly* by the breed of the hens (e.g. Araucana hens, vs Lohmann Selected Leghorn vs ISA Brown hens) - but not whether they are free-range or cage-kept.
Presumably, Mother Earth News, - hardly an unbiased source of information - compared an egg, one free-range one not, from *two different breeds of hens*! Unless you compare eggs from the same breed of hens, the results are meaningless and will be most certainly due to the breed type.
Don't get me wrong; I am all for organic food and healther eating. But I am also for objective reporting and assessing of the literature.
References:
1. Prev Vet Med. 2008 Mar 17;83(3-4):323-36. Epub 2007 Oct 24. Salmonella in Belgian laying hens: An identification of risk factors. Namata H, Méroc E, Aerts M, Faes C, Abrahantes JC, Imberechts H, Mintiens K
2. Vet Rec. 2001 Dec 8;149(23):699-704. Environmental contamination and detection of Salmonella enterica serovar enteritidis in laying flocks.Davies R, Breslin M.
3. Avian Pathol. 2007 Jun;36(3):187-97. A longitudinal study of environmental Salmonella contamination in caged and free-range layer flocks.Wales A, Breslin M, Carter B, Sayers R, Davies R.
4. Mol Nutr Food Res. 2006 Oct;50(10):908-14. Contamination of free-range chicken eggs with dioxins and dioxin-like polychlorinated biphenyls.Schoeters G, Hoogenboom R.
5. Food Addit Contam. 2006 May;23(5):518-27. Carry-over of dioxins and PCBs from feed and soil to eggs at low contamination levels-- influence of mycotoxin binders on the carry-over from feed to eggs. Hoogenboom LA, Kan CA, Zeilmaker MJ, Van Eijkeren J, Traag WA.
6. Poult Sci. 2006 Jun;47(3):294-300. Lipid profile in eggs of Araucana hens compared with Lohmann Selected Leghorn and ISA Brown hens given diets with different fat sources. Millet S, De Ceulaer K, Van Paemel M, Raes K, De Smet S, Janssens GP.
