Association Between Egg Consumption and Risk of Cardiovascular Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

23 prospective studies, median follow-up 12 years, total of 1,415,839 individuals.

Egg consumption, comparing higher (>1 egg/day) with lower consumption (=<1 egg/day):

• Higher was not associated with significantly increased risk of overall cardiovascular disease events.
• Higher was associated with a significantly decreased risk of coronary artery disease.

Conclusions: Our analysis suggests that higher consumption of eggs (>1 egg/day) was not associated with increased risk of cardiovascular disease, but was associated with a significant reduction in risk of coronary artery disease.

These conclusions clearly go against the evidence presented on Nutritionfacts.org, so what's going on ?

My take on this >>

1. The "lower consumption" category combines people eating zero eggs with those eating 1 egg/day, and so the benefits of eating zero eggs has been lost in the noise. (Isn't 1 egg/day rather a lot?)
2. An odd (to me) distinction: the specific references to "cardiovascular disease" and "coronary artery disease".
3. The sample of scientific papers - no mention that it excluded any papers funded by the egg industry (so likely that a few of these were included?)