Paul Saladino· MD
if you haven't cracked the yolk with a raw egg the risk of contamination there is extremely low because the shell didn't even really touch the yolk
The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
if you haven't cracked the yolk with a raw egg the risk of contamination there is extremely low because the shell didn't even really touch the yolk
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
i would probably use a raw egg yolk because a raw egg yolk is not going to touch the shell of an egg the shell of an egg is where the nutri the excuse me the shell of an egg is where the contaminants are clostridial species can flu back or salmonella we don't want babies to get sick but i think i would probably use a raw egg yolk again this is not medical advice do not do this because you don't have to cook the egg yolk preserve the nutrients and if the egg yolk is still in the membrane it's unbroken it should be free of those bacterial contaminants on the outside of the egg shell
I don't worry about getting sick from raw egg yolks because they don't touch the outside shell of the egg which is where bacteria would be