Daily Press/The Times-Herald

Virginia egg producers are still reeling from a one-two punch that kept many consumers away from their product in 1988, says a Virginia Cooperative Extension specialist.

"The egg industry is in a sorry state," says Paul Ruszler, Extension scientist specializing in commercial eggs. "We've gone through a considerable time of very poor prices."

The dip in demand for eggs can be traced to two major developments - public concern about cholesterol and some widely-publicized cases of salmonella poisoning.

Together, they have caused producers losses of up to $3 a bird, estimates C.J. Martin, owner of Brickland Breeders in Lunenburg County.

While eggs have received some truthful publicity in connection to cholesterol and salmonella, some of the negative news has been unfair to the product, Ruszler says.

"People have gotten sick from salmonella poisoning - that's reality," he says, "and a few have died, but they were either elderly or infirm, people whose immunity systems couldn't handle it. The bacteria can grow in any animal product. Eggs have been implicated by a process of elimination - it's not necessarily positive identification. In almost every case, the implicated eggs were improperly handled, or poor preparation techniques were involved."

A typical person's chances of eating an egg with the harmful bacteria is less than one in a million, Ruszler says.

The salmonella that has been associated with raw eggs is caused by a bacteria species of the bacteria, Salmonella enteritidis, that has been showing up particularly in the northeast part of the country, says John Marcy, Extension food scientist for poultry products.

While this type of bacteria cannot be eradicated in nature, chickens are tested for it and whole flocks are destroyed if even one bird tests positive for it, he says.

But even if the bacteria does slip through tests and gets into eggs, cooking the eggs will kill it, Marcy says.

"The problem's gotten bad press in that all of a sudden, it's not safe to eat an egg - period," he says. "That's not the case. It's not completely safe to eat a raw egg, but if it is cooked top and bottom to the point where the yolk thickens but is not hard, it's safe. And any cooking past sunny side up will reduce the risk of salmonellosis."

The second worry about eggs has been cholesterol. Eggs, particularly the yolks, are high in cholesterol, but eggs may have gotten some unfair press in this area too, says Jo Anne Barton, Extension specialist in foods and nutrition.

"I think the cholesterol content of foods is probably not the most important factor influencing one's blood cholesterol level," she says. "Right now, studies show that only one-fourth to one-third of those diagnosed with high cholesterol are actually affected by the amount of cholesterol in their diets. So from that standpoint, eggs have gotten bad press."

Saturated fat seems to play more of a role in affecting cholesterol levels, Barton says. Eggs are lower in saturated fat than some other protein foods.

Convenience factors may have as much to do with decreased consumption of eggs as anything else.

"People's eating styles have changed," Barton says. "Whereas before it was common to have eggs for breakfast, people not tend to want a quick meal. Cold cereal or a bread product such as a croissant may just fit their lifestyles better."

In any case, Barton says, moderation is the best policy, which means there is no reason to eliminate eggs from the average diet.

Both Ruszler and Martin hope consumers get that message soon.

And in the meantime, how's the farmer feeling?

"I'd say I'm hopefully, cautiously optimistic about 1989," Martin says. "We couldn't go through another year like this past one."

Copyright © 2018, Daily Press