Eating chicken causes nightmares, panic attacks, hallucinations and psychological harm in children and adults; panic attacks became widespread in the last 20 years because of mass chicken production.
Original statement
الولاد بيجي لهم هلوسه هواجس ضلالات الكلام ده كله مرتبط ارتباط لصيق باكل الفراخ ما فيش حد بياكل كل فراخ وماش ما بيجيلوش بانك اتاكس نوبات الهلع كلها ومنتشره في اخر 20 سنه لان حصل ايه ماس برودكشن الفراخ
verbatim according to source. Translation by the project; the Arabic wording is authoritative.
Translation
Eating chicken causes nightmares, panic attacks, hallucinations and psychological harm in children and adults; panic attacks became widespread in the last 20 years because of mass chicken production.
Origin
- Source status
- Video transcript (own words)
- Attribution
- Elawady (machine transcript)
- Video
- أولي حلقات برنامج الحقيقه والسراب (Open source)
- Published
- 30 October 2025
- Timestamp
- 0:21:47 (location in the original video’s automatic YouTube caption track; confirms where the words occur, not who speaks)
- Attribution uncertainty
- Archive transcript (YouTube CC or AI-generated); wording may contain transcription errors; no timestamps available.
- Claimed mechanism
Not specified.
- Claimed health effect
Nightmares, panic attacks, hallucinations, delusions, obsessive thoughts, enuresis, stuttering.
- Population concerned
Children and adults
- Geographic restriction by Elawady
none found
Diverging source versions
- Source status
- Archive quote (no location given)
- Attribution
- Elawady (archive paraphrase; source video not given)
- Origin
- https://eltayebat.com/rule/industrial-chicken/
- Attribution uncertainty
- The archive presents this in a 'د. ضياء يقول' box without a video reference; exact wording by Elawady not verified.
- Source status
- Video transcript (own words)
- Attribution
- Elawady (machine transcript)
- Video
- الجهاز العصبي و الاحساس بالألم؟ (Open source)
- Published
- 9 February 2025
- Timestamp
- not available (transcript has no timings)
- Attribution uncertainty
- Archive transcript (YouTube CC or AI-generated); wording may contain transcription errors; no timestamps available.
- Source status
- Video transcript (own words)
- Attribution
- Elawady (machine transcript)
- Video
- Dr Diaa Al Awady د ضياء العوضي is live!دردشة صباحية (Open source)
- Published
- 10 December 2025
- Timestamp
- not available (transcript has no timings)
- Attribution uncertainty
- Archive transcript (YouTube CC or AI-generated); wording may contain transcription errors; no timestamps available.
نوبات الهلع دي والاحلام والكوابيس اعرف يا باشا ان هو داخلها فراخ على طول الشخصيه الم فراخ يا باشا فراخ وبيض على طول
These panic attacks, dreams and nightmares: know that chicken is involved, always ... chicken, chicken and eggs, always.
- Source status
- Video transcript (own words)
- Attribution
- Elawady (machine transcript)
- Video
- Dr.D Clinics - Diaa Al Awady is live! الألم و الصداع (Open source)
- Published
- 10 February 2025
- Timestamp
- 0:55:38 (location in the original video’s automatic YouTube caption track; confirms where the words occur, not who speaks)
- Attribution uncertainty
- Archive transcript (YouTube CC or AI-generated); no timestamps; wording may contain speech-recognition errors; speaker turns are not marked, the excerpt was judged to be Elawady's own speech from context.
- Source status
- Video transcript (own words)
- Attribution
- Elawady (machine transcript)
- Video
- Dr Diaa Al Awady د ضياء العوضي is live! (Open source)
- Published
- 27 August 2025
- Timestamp
- not available (transcript has no timings)
- Attribution uncertainty
- Archive transcript (YouTube CC or AI-generated); wording may contain transcription errors; no timestamps available.
Scientific assessment
Mostly false – Essential parts of the statement are not supported by the evidence or are strongly exaggerated.
Certainty of evidence: low – Further research is likely to change the assessment considerably.
1. What was claimed?
Chicken causes nightmares, panic attacks, hallucinations and other psychiatric symptoms; mass chicken production explains a rise of panic attacks.
2. What is demonstrably correct?
Gastrointestinal discomfort and late eating are associated with worse sleep and more nightmares in self-report surveys. Anxiety disorders have become more common: the Global Burden of Disease study found an increase in age-standardised prevalence of anxiety disorders between 1990 and 2023 (I-CHK-107), but it gives no evidence that chicken is a cause.
3. What is wrong or exaggerated?
No evidence links chicken specifically to nightmares, panic attacks or psychosis. In two surveys, people most often blamed dairy and sweets for disturbing dreams. Attributing a 20-year trend in panic attacks to chicken ignores many other factors (diagnosis, awareness, stress).
4. What remains unclear?
Not applicable beyond the general lack of studies.
5. Which studies support it?
None found.
6. Which studies contradict it?
Indirect only: I-CHK-105 (3,362 Iranian adults: white meat intake not associated with anxiety, depression or distress); I-CHK-106 (meta-analysis: meat eaters had slightly lower anxiety and depression than meat abstainers); I-CHK-140 (WHO: anxiety disorders have social, psychological and biological causes, no food is named, and effective treatments exist); I-EGG-12, I-EGG-13 (foods blamed for dreams are mainly dairy and sweets).
7. What applies to Germany and Europe?
Not region-specific.
8. What is known about Egypt?
Not region-specific.
9. What practical conclusion is appropriate?
Panic attacks, hallucinations and persistent nightmares need medical or psychological assessment; stopping chicken is not an evidence-based treatment.
Assessment details
- Rationale for certainty of evidence
No study was found linking chicken consumption to nightmares, panic disorder or psychosis. Food-and-dream surveys point to dairy and sweets as the foods most often blamed (I-EGG-12, I-EGG-13), but neither survey reports chicken separately (only 'meat', 13-16% of the few food mentions for disturbing dreams) and neither measured panic attacks or hallucinations, so this evidence is very indirect. The universal wording is contradicted by everyday experience, and attributing a population trend to chicken production is an unsupported ecological inference. Rated like the comparable egg claim C-EGG-01; certainty low because the topic is little studied.
- Source quality
Own words in several machine transcripts, plus archive paraphrase; evidence consists of caller anecdotes.
- Regional transferability
Universal claim.
- Individual exceptions
Some people associate specific foods with poor sleep; food intolerance with gastrointestinal symptoms was associated with nightmares in a survey (I-EGG-13).
- Regional scope of the claim
- general (biological/medical)
- Last reviewed
- 26 October 2026 provisional
Scientific evidence in detail
Not supported by high-quality evidence – There is no good evidence for the claim; this alone does not prove it wrong.
Research question: In children and adults, does eating chicken cause nightmares, panic attacks, hallucinations or other psychiatric symptoms, and did mass chicken production cause a rise in panic attacks over the last 20 years?
Research question in detail (PECO)
- Population
- Children and adults
- Intervention or exposure
- Chicken/poultry consumption; population trends in chicken production
- Comparison
- Low/no chicken intake; earlier time periods
- Geographic scope
- universal biology
- Outcomes
- panic attacks/anxiety disorders
- nightmares
- hallucinations/psychosis
- population prevalence trends
Study results as reported by the authors. Our assessment follows below.
What speaks for the claim?
No high-quality evidence supporting the claim was found.
What speaks against the claim?
White meat was not linked to anxiety in Iranian adults
Kazemi S et al.. Front Nutr 2021 · PMID 34386515 · DOI 10.3389/fnut.2021.710555 Cross-sectional studyabstract checkednewly addedCross-sectional study of 3,362 Iranian adults on red and white meat intake and mental symptoms.
- Actual result
- White meat not associated with anxiety, depression or distress; in overweight/obese adults inverse associations (distress OR 0.64; 0.42-0.99).
- Methodological quality
- low (cross-sectional)
- Relevance
- indirect (white meat incl. fish; no panic or hallucination outcome)
- Limitations
- Reverse causation; subgroup findings.
Meat eaters reported slightly less anxiety than people who avoid meat
Dobersek U et al.. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 2023 · PMID 34612096 · DOI 10.1080/10408398.2021.1974336 Meta-analysisabstract checkednewly addedMeta-analysis of 20 studies comparing meat eaters and abstainers.
- Actual result
- Meat eaters had lower anxiety (g = 0.17; 0.03-0.31) and depression (g = 0.216).
- Methodological quality
- low to moderate (observational, heterogeneous)
- Relevance
- very indirect (meat in general)
- Limitations
- Not chicken-specific; no causal inference.
WHO: anxiety disorders are common and treatable
World Health Organization. WHO fact sheet 2026 Guideline / position statementfull text checkednewly addedWHO fact sheet on anxiety disorders.
- Actual result
- Lists social, psychological and biological causes; no food named; highly effective treatments exist.
- Methodological quality
- authoritative agency statement
- Relevance
- indirect
- Limitations
- Not a study.
What does the overall evidence say?
Editorial assessment based on the studies above – not itself a study result.
Which position is better supported?
There is no evidence that chicken causes nightmares, panic attacks or hallucinations; the limited indirect data show no association of poultry/meat with anxiety.
Why some studies weigh more
No study supports the claim. Indirect observational studies point in the opposite direction or show no association. The rise in anxiety disorders (I-CHK-107) is real but has many documented determinants and no data link it to chicken.
Is a causal relationship established? Not established No mechanism, no exposure-outcome study, ecological reasoning only.
Remaining uncertainty
No study has directly measured chicken intake and panic attacks or hallucinations; individual food-symptom associations cannot be excluded.
Justified conclusion
The claim is unsupported and very likely false as a general statement; panic attacks and hallucinations need medical assessment.
Why do studies seem to disagree?
The premise that panic/anxiety became more common is partly correct (I-CHK-107: age-standardised anxiety prevalence increased 1990-2023), but this is a population trend with many possible causes and does not conflict with the null individual-level data.
Does this depend on the country?
- General biological effects
- Universal claim; no biological mechanism proposed.
- Eating habits
- Not relevant.
- Origin of the food
- Not relevant.
- Contaminants
- Not relevant.
- National production conditions
- Mass chicken production grew in parallel with many other social changes; ecological co-trends are not evidence.
- Legal rules
- Not relevant.
- Actual monitoring data
- GBD prevalence data (I-CHK-107) show increases in all regions, with or without high chicken consumption.
A regional difference that changes the conclusion is not supported by robust data.
Statistical re-check
- Conversion of Hedges g to approximate OR – Anxiety OR about 1.36 (1.06-1.75), depression about 1.48 (1.29-1.72) for abstainers vs consumers; small, opposite to the claim. recalculated
Certainty of the overall evidence (GRADE, simplified)
- Main outcome
- Panic attacks/anxiety, nightmares, hallucinations with chicken intake
- Starting level
- low (observational studies)
- Reasons for downgrading
- indirectness: no study measures chicken and these outcomes
- imprecision
- Result
- low
Simplified assessment by a single reviewer, following the GRADE approach; not a formal GRADE panel. GRADE rates the body of evidence for one outcome, not individual studies.
Clinical guidelines and official statements checked
- WHO: Anxiety disorders (fact sheet) (2026) · Original publication
Anxiety disorders, including panic disorder, are common and highly treatable with psychological interventions and, in adults, SSRIs; diet is not listed as a cause.
Search strategy
Documented literature searches for this review (search strings in the original database syntax).
| Database | Date | Search | Looking for | Hits | Included |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Europe PMC | 26 October 2026 | (chicken OR poultry) AND ("panic disorder" OR "panic attack" OR nightmare* OR hallucinat* OR psychosis) | supporting evidence | 3571 | |
| Europe PMC | 26 October 2026 | (TITLE:"poultry consumption" OR TITLE:"chicken consumption" OR TITLE:"poultry intake" OR TITLE:"white meat") AND (ABSTRACT:anxiety OR ABSTRACT:panic OR ABSTRACT:nightmare OR ABSTRACT:psychosis OR ABSTRACT:hallucination OR ABSTRACT:"mental health" OR ABSTRACT:depression) | supporting evidence | 4 | |
| PubMed | 26 October 2026 | (poultry[tiab] OR chicken[tiab]) AND (consumption[tiab] OR intake[tiab]) AND (panic[tiab] OR anxiety[tiab] OR nightmare*[tiab] OR hallucinat*[tiab] OR psychos*[tiab]) AND humans[mh] | both directions | 20 | |
| Europe PMC | 26 October 2026 | TITLE:"meat" AND (TITLE:"mental health" OR TITLE:depression OR TITLE:anxiety) AND (systematic review OR meta-analysis in title/pub type) | contradicting evidence | 6 | |
| Europe PMC | 26 October 2026 | TITLE:"Global Burden of Disease" AND TITLE:"mental disorders" AND (TITLE:"1990" OR TITLE:"2019" OR TITLE:"2021") | contradicting evidence | 39 | |
| WHO website | 26 October 2026 | fact sheet: anxiety disorders | guidelines | 1 |
Open questions
Whether specific individuals report sleep effects after heavy late meals (general meal timing) rather than chicken specifically.
How deeply was this checked?
7 linked studies: 3 checked in full text (2 of them with a structured risk-of-bias assessment), 4 on the basis of the abstract, 0 bibliographically only. No formal assessment with two independent reviewers and no independent human expert review has taken place yet.
Last scientific review: 26 October 2026
History of the verdict
- 25 October 2026 · Phase 1 · Initial assessment: Mostly false (low)
- 26 October 2026 · Phase 4 (systematic evidence review) · Re-examined with extended evidence; verdict unchanged: Mostly false (low)
New evidence is indirect (white meat and meat in general show no harmful association; WHO lists no dietary cause). A “False” verdict would require direct evidence; certainty stays low. The safety note is preserved and sharpened.
New sources: I-CHK-105 I-CHK-106 I-CHK-107 I-CHK-140
In plain language
Dr. Elawady said that chicken causes nightmares, panic attacks and even hallucinations in children and adults. No research supports this. In surveys about food and dreams, people mostly blamed dairy products and sweets, not chicken. Panic attacks and hallucinations are real medical conditions that can be treated, so they should be checked by a doctor.
Studies on this claim
Studies supporting the claim (0)
No studies in this group.
Studies contradicting or limiting the claim (5)
-
Which foods do people blame for bad dreams?
Nielsen T, Powell RA. Front Psychol 2015 · PMID 25741294 · DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00047Cross-sectional studyindependent cross-checkfull text, structured risk-of-bias assessmentAbout one in six students thought food affected their dreams, mostly dairy.
Does the study support the specific claim? No · Methodological quality: low · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim
Original publication · Scientific details
Study explained simply
- What did the researchers want to find out?
How common is perceived food-dependent dreaming, and which foods are blamed?
- How was the study done?
Questionnaire survey of students
- How many people, animals or samples were studied?
396 students; Students
- What was actually found?
17.8% (68/382) thought food or late eating affected their dreams. Among the few who named foods (32 and 26 people), dairy was blamed most (44% for disturbing, 39% for bizarre dreams); sweets, spicy and starchy foods and meat followed; eggs and chicken were not mentioned.
- How large was the observed effect?
Associations
- What do the results mean in everyday life?
Bad dreams relate more to poor sleep and eating habits.
- What are the study's limitations?
Psychology students given course credit; self-reported beliefs; only about 30 people named foods; many untested-for-chance comparisons
- What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?
Does not support egg/chicken claims.
- Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?
Moderate.
- What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?
Cannot show that any food causes bad dreams, and says nothing about snoring, sinusitis or headaches.
-
Food sensitivities and nightmares
Nielsen T et al.. Front Psychol 2025 · PMID 40667395 · DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1544475Cross-sectional studyindependent cross-checkfull text, structured risk-of-bias assessmentOnly 5.5% of students thought food affected their dreams, mostly sweets and dairy; eggs were rarely named. People with food allergy or lactose intolerance reported more nightmares.
Does the study support the specific claim? No · Methodological quality: low · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim
Original publication · Scientific details
Study explained simply
- What did the researchers want to find out?
Why do people perceive that food affects dreams?
- How was the study done?
Online survey
- How many people, animals or samples were studied?
1,082; Online participants
- What was actually found?
5.5% (59/1,076) reported food affected dreams; sweets (30%) and dairy (21%) were blamed most, meat 8%, eggs 2% (3 mentions, none for disturbing dreams). Food allergy and lactose intolerance were linked with higher nightmare scores, the latter partly via gut symptoms.
- How large was the observed effect?
Associations; mediation
- What do the results mean in everyday life?
Digestive discomfort may disturb sleep.
- What are the study's limitations?
Students given course credit; everything self-reported; only 59 people perceived food effects; cross-sectional; many tests
- What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?
Partly supports individual food-sensitivity effects on dreams; does not support a general effect of eggs or chicken (eggs rarely named, chicken not separated).
- Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?
Moderate.
- What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?
Cannot show causation, and says nothing about snoring, sinusitis or headaches.
-
White meat was not linked to anxiety in Iranian adults
Kazemi S et al.. Front Nutr 2021 · PMID 34386515 · DOI 10.3389/fnut.2021.710555Cross-sectional studyindependent cross-checkabstract checkedIn 3,362 Iranian adults, eating more white meat was not linked to anxiety or depression.
White meat intake was not associated with anxiety or distress; no sign of harm.
Does the study support the specific claim? No · Methodological quality: low · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim
Original publication · Scientific details
Study explained simply
- What did the researchers want to find out?
Are red and white meat intakes associated with depression, anxiety and psychological distress?
- How was the study done?
Cross-sectional study with FFQ, HADS and GHQ
- How many people, animals or samples were studied?
3,362
- What was actually found?
White meat intake was not associated with mental disorders overall. In overweight/obese participants, high white meat intake was associated with lower odds of psychological distress (OR 0.64; 0.42-0.99) and depression (OR 0.68; 0.45-1.00). Red meat top quartile: depression OR 1.43 (1.09-1.89).
- How large was the observed effect?
White meat intake was not associated with mental disorders overall. In overweight/obese participants, high white meat intake was associated with lower odds of psychological distress (OR 0.64; 0.42-0.99) and depression (OR 0.68; 0.45-1.00). Red meat top quartile: depression OR 1.43 (1.09-1.89).
- What do the results mean in everyday life?
No sign that poultry eaters have more anxiety.
- What are the study's limitations?
Cross-sectional; reverse causation possible; White meat includes fish; Subgroup findings, multiple testing
- What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?
Indirect contradiction; does not measure panic attacks, nightmares or hallucinations.
- Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?
Regional (Iran); limited transfer.
- What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?
Cannot prove absence of an effect; cross-sectional.
-
Meat eaters reported slightly less anxiety than people who avoid meat
Dobersek U et al.. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 2023 · PMID 34612096 · DOI 10.1080/10408398.2021.1974336Meta-analysisindependent cross-checkabstract checkedPooling 20 studies, meat eaters had slightly lower anxiety and depression than meat avoiders.
Meat eaters had slightly lower anxiety than abstainers; not chicken-specific.
Does the study support the specific claim? No · Methodological quality: low · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim
Original publication · Scientific details
Study explained simply
- What did the researchers want to find out?
Do meat consumers and meat abstainers differ in depression and anxiety?
- How was the study done?
Meta-analysis of 20 primary studies comparing meat consumers and abstainers
- How many people, animals or samples were studied?
171,802 participants (157,778 meat consumers; 13,259 abstainers)
- What was actually found?
Meat consumption associated with lower depression (Hedges g = 0.216; 0.14-0.30) and lower anxiety (g = 0.17; 0.03-0.31) vs abstention. Study quality explained 58% and 76% of heterogeneity; more rigorous studies showed more consistent results.
- How large was the observed effect?
Meat consumption associated with lower depression (Hedges g = 0.216; 0.14-0.30) and lower anxiety (g = 0.17; 0.03-0.31) vs abstention. Study quality explained 58% and 76% of heterogeneity; more rigorous studies showed more consistent results.
- What do the results mean in everyday life?
No sign that eating meat makes people anxious; the link is weak and not causal.
- What are the study's limitations?
Mostly cross-sectional; Not poultry-specific; Possible reverse causation (people with mental illness may change diet)
- What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?
Very indirect evidence against the claim.
- Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?
Mostly Western populations.
- What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?
Cannot say that meat protects mental health.
-
WHO: anxiety disorders are common and treatable
World Health Organization. WHO fact sheet 2026Guideline / position statementindependent cross-checkfull text checkedWHO names effective psychological and drug treatments and does not list any food as a cause.
WHO lists no food (including chicken) as a cause and names effective treatments.
Does the study support the specific claim? No · Methodological quality: moderate · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim
Original publication · Scientific details
Study explained simply
- What did the researchers want to find out?
What are anxiety disorders, their causes and treatments?
- How was the study done?
Agency fact sheet
- How many people, animals or samples were studied?
not applicable
- What was actually found?
Anxiety disorders affected 470 million people in 2023; panic disorder = 'panic attacks and fear of continued panic attacks'; 'There are highly effective treatments for anxiety disorders'; psychological interventions are essential treatments; SSRIs can be useful. Contributing factors listed: social, psychological and biological factors and adverse experiences; diet is not listed as a cause (only 'eat a healthy diet' as self-care).
- How large was the observed effect?
Anxiety disorders affected 470 million people in 2023; panic disorder = 'panic attacks and fear of continued panic attacks'; 'There are highly effective treatments for anxiety disorders'; psychological interventions are essential treatments; SSRIs can be useful. Contributing factors listed: social, psychological and biological factors and adverse experiences; diet is not listed as a cause (only 'eat a healthy diet' as self-care).
- What do the results mean in everyday life?
Panic attacks should be assessed and treated; diet change is not a treatment.
- What are the study's limitations?
Fact sheet, not a systematic review
- What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?
Supports the safety note.
- Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?
Applies globally.
- What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?
Not a study of chicken.
No study in this group is marked as key.
Studies with mixed or unclear results (2)
-
Anxiety disorders became more common worldwide since 1990
GBD 2023 Mental Disorder Collaborators. Lancet 2026 · PMID 42167272 · DOI 10.1016/S0140-6736(26)00519-2Systematic reviewindependent cross-checkabstract checkedAge-standardised prevalence of anxiety disorders increased between 1990 and 2023.
Anxiety prevalence rose since 1990 (premise partly correct), but the data give no causal link to chicken.
Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: moderate · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim
Original publication · Scientific details
Study explained simply
- What did the researchers want to find out?
How did the prevalence and burden of mental disorders change from 1990 to 2023?
- How was the study done?
Systematic analysis and Bayesian meta-regression (GBD 2023)
- How many people, animals or samples were studied?
204 countries
- What was actually found?
1.17 billion prevalent cases in 2023; age-standardised prevalence of all mental disorders +24.2% (11.4-41.4) since 1990; notable increases in age-standardised prevalence for anxiety disorders, major depressive disorder and others. Anxiety disorders ranked 11th of 304 causes of DALYs.
- How large was the observed effect?
1.17 billion prevalent cases in 2023; age-standardised prevalence of all mental disorders +24.2% (11.4-41.4) since 1990; notable increases in age-standardised prevalence for anxiety disorders, major depressive disorder and others. Anxiety disorders ranked 11th of 304 causes of DALYs.
- What do the results mean in everyday life?
The observation that anxiety is more common is partly right; the cause is not shown.
- What are the study's limitations?
Modelled estimates, sparse data in many countries; No information on causes of trends; Erratum published (Lancet 2026;408:698)
- What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?
Supports only the trend observation, not the attribution to chicken production.
- Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?
Includes European and North-African countries.
- What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?
Cannot attribute the trend to any food.
-
How much do we know about poultry and health?
Connolly G et al.. Adv Nutr 2022 · PMID 36351778 · DOI 10.1093/advances/nmac074Systematic reviewindependent cross-checkabstract checkedA map of 525 studies found little direct research on poultry itself and no randomised trials.
Mental-health outcomes appear only among 'other' topics; no evidence base for the claim.
Does the study support the specific claim? Unclear · Methodological quality: moderate · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim
Original publication · Scientific details
Study explained simply
- What did the researchers want to find out?
What research exists on poultry intake and human health?
- How was the study done?
Systematically searched scoping review (protocol on OSF)
- How many people, animals or samples were studied?
525 of 13,141 articles
- What was actually found?
525 articles: 212 cancer, 41 CVD, 52 CVD risk factors, 32 T2D, 33 T2D risk factors, 42 body weight, 181 other (incl. mental health). 366 observational, 64 experimental, 76 reviews. No RCT and only 1% of observational studies assessed processed poultry. 'A paucity of research exists to support poultry as health-promoting foods'.
- How large was the observed effect?
525 articles: 212 cancer, 41 CVD, 52 CVD risk factors, 32 T2D, 33 T2D risk factors, 42 body weight, 181 other (incl. mental health). 366 observational, 64 experimental, 76 reviews. No RCT and only 1% of observational studies assessed processed poultry. 'A paucity of research exists to support poultry as health-promoting foods'.
- What do the results mean in everyday life?
Science has not studied chicken alone very much.
- What are the study's limitations?
Scoping review: no effect estimates or quality rating; Funding not stated in abstract (PubMed: non-US government support)
- What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?
Explains why certainty about chicken-specific effects is low.
- Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?
General.
- What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?
Gives no effect sizes.
No study in this group is marked as key.
Regional context
Germany / EU
Not region-specific.
Egypt
Not region-specific.
- Antibiotic (veterinary drug) residues in poultry meat and eggs
- Antimicrobial use in food animals and antibiotic growth promoters
- Hormones in poultry, meat, milk and farmed fish
- Salmonella in laying hens, eggs and broiler chicken
- Drinking water quality
- Import controls and the meaning of RASFF notifications for Egyptian products
What applies in my country?
General scientific assessment
Mostly false There is no evidence that chicken causes nightmares, panic attacks or hallucinations.
The following areas of food safety are relevant to this statement:
- Veterinary medicines and antibiotics
- Hormonal growth promoters
- Contaminants (heavy metals, PFAS, PCBs, dioxins, nitrate)
- Pathogens (Salmonella, Campylobacter, etc.)
- Animal husbandry and feed
- Controls, imports, recalls, labelling
Poultry
Choose a country to see the checked information for it.
Limits: legal rules describe what is allowed, not what every single food contains. Measurement data come from samples and are meaningful only together with their method details.
Country of residence or purchase Compare with another country
References
- Dreams of the Rarebit Fiend: food and diet as instigators of bizarre and disturbing dreams.. Nielsen T, Powell RA. Front Psychol 2015 · PMID 25741294 · DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00047
- More dreams of the rarebit fiend: food sensitivity and dietary correlates of sleep and dreaming.. Nielsen T et al.. Front Psychol 2025 · PMID 40667395 · DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1544475
- Red and White Meat Intake in Relation to Mental Disorders in Iranian Adults.. Kazemi S et al.. Front Nutr 2021 · PMID 34386515 · DOI 10.3389/fnut.2021.710555
- Meat and mental health: A meta-analysis of meat consumption, depression, and anxiety.. Dobersek U et al.. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 2023 · PMID 34612096 · DOI 10.1080/10408398.2021.1974336
- WHO fact sheet: Anxiety disorders (15 September 2026). World Health Organization. WHO fact sheet 2026
- Updated trends in the global prevalence and burden of mental disorders, 1990-2023: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2023.. GBD 2023 Mental Disorder Collaborators. Lancet 2026 · PMID 42167272 · DOI 10.1016/S0140-6736(26)00519-2
- Poultry Consumption and Human Health: How Much Is Really Known? A Systematically Searched Scoping Review and Research Perspective.. Connolly G et al.. Adv Nutr 2022 · PMID 36351778 · DOI 10.1093/advances/nmac074