argumentA line of reasoning from premises to a conclusion. Like a claim, it belongs to no one who makes it.constitution →

Biomarker / mechanistic argument

forThis argument, if it holds, bears in favour of the claim.constitution →Regular egg consumption increases cardiovascular disease risk in healthy people

The argument

Because linked claim and linked claim, regular egg consumption would be expected to raise cardiovascular disease risk by shifting a causal biomarker in the adverse direction.

Does it work?

Does it follow?: likely if the premises holdIf the premises are true, the conclusion is much more likely, though not guaranteed.constitution →
Do the premises hold?: 1 supported1 verified

Granting both premises, a small increase in risk becomes likely. It is not guaranteed, because eggs could have other effects that offset it and the result depends on which food eggs replace. The argument shows only that some increase is likely, not that the increase is large. Both premises hold: eggs raise LDL is supported, about 0.10 mmol/L per egg a day, and LDL causes cardiovascular disease is verified. The weak point is the size of the effect. The predicted increase is a few percent per daily egg, too small for the cohort data to confirm. The argument is not decisive.

Premises

SupportedThe evidence favors the claim, but the examination is incomplete or the evidence is indirect.constitution →Adding eggs to the diet raises LDL cholesterol compared to a no-egg diet.
VerifiedThe evidence, examined directly, establishes the claim.constitution →Elevated LDL cholesterol causes cardiovascular disease

Where it is made

Passages where sources make, criticize or mention this argument. They record where it appears, not how strong it is, and none has precedence over another.

No source is recorded as making it.