Beef cattle are injected with hormones (testosterone/androgens, 'Boldex' - presumably boldenone) and antibiotics to fatten them, so the meat is 'injected'.
Original statement
بتحنوا العجول ايه تتخنها كده اندروجين صح بتحنوها هرمونات تستسترون ذكوره صح
verbatim according to source. Translation by the project; the Arabic wording is authoritative.
Translation
Beef cattle are injected with hormones (testosterone/androgens, 'Boldex' - presumably boldenone) and antibiotics to fatten them, so the meat is 'injected'.
Origin
- Source status
- Video transcript (own words)
- Attribution
- Elawady (machine transcript)
- Video
- Dr Diaa Al Awady د ضياء العوضي is live! مصدر الغذاء الوريد البابي (Open source)
- Published
- 27 July 2025
- Timestamp
- 0:49:58 (location in the original video’s automatic YouTube caption track; confirms where the words occur, not who speaks)
- Attribution uncertainty
- Elawady asks a guest (named as a cattle-farm owner) leading questions; 'بتحنوا' is a likely transcription of 'بتحقنوا' (you inject).
- Claimed mechanism
Anabolic steroids and antibiotics as growth promoters.
- Claimed health effect
Contaminated meat.
- Population concerned
Consumers (Egypt)
- Geographic restriction by Elawady
Speaks about local practice; no explicit restriction.
Diverging source versions
اللحمه البقري فيها مشكله يا شيري جرجس ما انا هتكلم عن اللحمه دلوقتي لان انا محقونه حاجه اسمها بولدكس
- Source status
- Video transcript (own words)
- Attribution
- Elawady (machine transcript)
- Video
- Dr Diaa Al Awady د ضياء العوضي is live! الأكل وراء كل مشاكلك (Open source)
- Published
- 20 July 2025
- Timestamp
- 0:18:36 (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; 'published' is the date listed by the archive. Passage read in context.
Scientific assessment
Unclear / insufficient evidence – The data do not allow an assessment either way.
Certainty of evidence: very low – Any assessment is very uncertain.
1. What was claimed?
Cattle are injected with hormones and antibiotics for fattening.
2. What is demonstrably correct?
Hormonal growth promoters are used legally in beef cattle in several countries: in the USA, FDA has approved steroid hormone implants (estrogen, progesterone, testosterone, trenbolone acetate, zeranol) for beef cattle and sheep (I-CHK-119); a review lists further countries where use is permitted (I-RES-110). The EU prohibits them (I-RES-02). Antibiotics were used as growth promoters until banned in the EU in 2006 (I-RES-04), and a survey found non-therapeutic antibiotic use on 65% of Egyptian farms, including cattle farms (I-CHK-117).
3. What is wrong or exaggerated?
For the EU the claim is not applicable: hormones for growth promotion are prohibited (I-RES-02); vet-drug residue non-compliance was 0.11% (I-RES-07). For Egypt, the extent is undocumented in the literature read; the single Egyptian hormone-residue study (I-RES-09) has major methodological limits.
4. What remains unclear?
Prevalence of illegal anabolic use in Egyptian cattle.
5. Which studies support it?
I-CHK-119 (legal practice in the USA), I-RES-110 (legal in several countries), I-CHK-117 (antibiotic use on Egyptian farms), I-RES-09 (weak Egyptian ELISA data).
6. Which studies contradict it?
I-RES-02, I-RES-04, I-RES-07 (EU).
7. What applies to Germany and Europe?
Not applicable to legal EU production.
8. What is known about Egypt?
Data lacking; I-RES-09 calls for monitoring because no national limits are set.
9. What practical conclusion is appropriate?
Data gap for Egypt; not a demonstrated health effect.
Assessment details
- Rationale for certainty of evidence
No peer-reviewed data on boldenone or other anabolic steroid residues in Egyptian beef were found in PubMed; one Egyptian ELISA study (n=56 beef, 92 chicken) reported estradiol and testosterone levels it judged above acceptable intakes, but ELISA cannot distinguish natural hormones from administered ones and the study is small.
- Source quality
Anecdotal, leading questions to a guest.
- Regional transferability
In the EU, hormonal growth promoters are prohibited (Directive 96/22/EC) and antibiotic growth promoters were banned from 1 January 2006 (Reg. 1831/2003).
- Regional scope of the claim
- refers to Egypt
- Last reviewed
- 26 October 2026 provisional
Scientific evidence in detail
Insufficiently studied – There is too little research to say whether the claim is right or wrong.
Research question: Are beef cattle (particularly in Egypt) treated with anabolic hormones such as boldenone/testosterone and with antibiotics for fattening, and do residues occur in meat?
Research question in detail (PECO)
- Population
- Beef cattle and beef consumers
- Intervention or exposure
- Anabolic hormones and antibiotics for fattening
- Comparison
- No use (legal bans)
- Geographic scope
- production-dependent (legal in USA and others; banned in EU; Egypt undocumented)
- Outcomes
- legal status
- documented practice
- residues in meat
Study results as reported by the authors. Our assessment follows below.
What speaks for the claim?
US: hormone implants allowed in beef cattle, not in poultry
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. FDA web page 2024 Guideline / position statementfull text checkednewly addedFDA regulatory page.
- Actual result
- Steroid hormone implants (estrogen, progesterone, testosterone, trenbolone acetate, zeranol) approved for beef cattle and sheep in the USA.
- Methodological quality
- high (regulatory)
- Relevance
- direct for the USA; indirect for Egypt
- Limitations
- US only.
Hormones in Egyptian meat (ELISA)
Kamaly HF & Sharkawy AA. Food Chem Toxicol 2023 · PMID 37956705 · DOI 10.1016/j.fct.2023.114172 Measurement / residue studyabstract checkedEgyptian ELISA study of hormone residues in chicken and cattle meat (Assiut).
- Actual result
- Estradiol intake above ADI in almost all samples (authors); no Egyptian limits.
- Methodological quality
- low (ELISA; natural vs administered not distinguishable)
- Relevance
- direct for Egypt but weak
- Limitations
- Small sample, screening method.
What speaks against the claim?
EU veterinary drug residues 2023
EFSA. EFSA news 2025 Measurement / residue studyabstract checkedEU veterinary residue monitoring 2023.
- Actual result
- 0.11% non-compliant samples.
- Methodological quality
- high
- Relevance
- direct for EU
- Limitations
- Not Egypt.
EU hormone ban in livestock
Council of the EU. Official Journal of the EC 1996 Guideline / position statementabstract checkedEU Directive 96/22/EC.
- Actual result
- Hormonal growth promoters prohibited in the EU.
- Methodological quality
- high (law)
- Relevance
- direct for EU
- Limitations
- Article text not extracted in earlier phase.
What does the overall evidence say?
Editorial assessment based on the studies above – not itself a study result.
Which position is better supported?
Hormone implants for cattle fattening are legal and common in some countries (e.g. USA), banned in the EU; for Egypt there are no reliable data on use or residues, and boldenone use is undocumented.
Why some studies weigh more
Regulatory sources are clear by country; Egyptian evidence consists of one ELISA study and farm antibiotic-use survey data (I-CHK-117, which includes cattle farms).
Is a causal relationship established? Not applicable Practice question.
Remaining uncertainty
Illegal anabolic use in Egyptian cattle; residue levels.
Justified conclusion
Unclear for Egypt; true for some countries' legal practice; not applicable to legal EU production.
Does this depend on the country?
- General biological effects
- Anabolic effects of steroids in cattle are established.
- Eating habits
- Not relevant.
- Origin of the food
- Imported beef from countries allowing implants may contain approved hormone residues within limits.
- Contaminants
- Natural hormones in meat complicate screening.
- National production conditions
- Egypt: NFSA lists Codex limits for trenbolone, zeranol, ractopamine; authorisation of use undocumented (the project's research files).
- Legal rules
- EU: banned; USA: approved for beef cattle and sheep.
- Actual monitoring data
- No Egyptian confirmatory monitoring.
A regional difference that changes the conclusion is not supported by robust data.
Statistical re-check
- Recalculation possible? – No: abstract gives no concentrations; ELISA screening cannot separate endogenous hormones. not recalculable from the published data
Certainty of the overall evidence (GRADE, simplified)
- Main outcome
- Anabolic hormone use in Egyptian beef cattle
- Starting level
- low (observational studies)
- Reasons for downgrading
- indirectness
- imprecision
- risk of bias (screening method)
- Result
- very 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
- FDA: Steroid Hormone Implants Used for Growth in Food-Producing Animals (2024) · Original publication
Steroid hormone implants are approved for beef cattle and sheep; none are approved for growth in dairy cows, veal calves, pigs or poultry. - EU: Council Directive 96/22/EC (hormonal substances and beta-agonists in stockfarming), as recorded in the project's research files (RS-EU-15) (1996) · Original publication could not be retrieved; content not used
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 | (boldenone OR trenbolone OR "anabolic steroid" OR "anabolic steroids" OR testosterone OR estradiol OR zeranol) AND (Egypt OR Egyptian) AND (meat OR beef OR cattle OR bovine) AND (residue OR residues) | both directions | 615 | |
| PubMed | 26 October 2026 | (boldenone[tiab] OR trenbolone[tiab] OR zeranol[tiab] OR anabolic[tiab]) AND (residue*[tiab]) AND (Egypt*[tiab] OR Arab*[tiab] OR Saudi[tiab] OR Iraq*[tiab]) | supporting evidence | 3 | |
| Europe PMC | 26 October 2026 | TITLE:boldenone AND (cattle OR bovine OR calves OR meat OR urine) | supporting evidence | 72 | |
| Web search | 26 October 2026 | FDA steroid hormone implants used for growth in food-producing animals | both directions | 9 |
Open questions
LC-MS/MS survey of anabolic residues in Egyptian beef; market availability of boldenone for cattle.
How deeply was this checked?
7 linked studies: 1 checked in full text (0 of them with a structured risk-of-bias assessment), 6 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: Unclear / insufficient evidence (very low)
- 26 October 2026 · Phase 4 (systematic evidence review) · Re-examined with extended evidence; verdict unchanged: Unclear / insufficient evidence (very low)
The FDA source confirms that hormone implants in beef cattle are a real, legal practice in some countries, and a review notes wide legal use outside the EU; for Egypt, the subject of the claim, no new data were found. Verdict unchanged; review text updated to acknowledge the correct general part.
New sources: I-CHK-119 I-RES-110
In plain language
Dr Elawady says cattle are injected with male hormones and antibiotics to make them grow. In the EU, hormones for fattening are banned, and antibiotics as growth promoters have been banned since 2006. For Egypt, almost no reliable data exist. One small Egyptian study reported high hormone levels in meat, but its method cannot tell natural hormones from added ones.
Studies on this claim
Studies supporting the claim (2)
-
Hormones in Egyptian meat (ELISA)
Kamaly HF & Sharkawy AA. Food Chem Toxicol 2023 · PMID 37956705 · DOI 10.1016/j.fct.2023.114172Measurement / residue studyindependent cross-checkabstract checkedA small study reported high hormone levels, but its method cannot tell natural from added hormones.
Does the study support the specific claim? Unclear · 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?
Measure hormones.
- How was the study done?
ELISA.
- How many people, animals or samples were studied?
148 samples.
- What was actually found?
High estimated intake.
- How large was the observed effect?
HI > 1.
- What do the results mean in everyday life?
Data gap in Egypt.
- What are the study's limitations?
Weak method.
- What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?
Unclear.
- Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?
Low.
- What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?
Illegal use.
-
US: hormone implants allowed in beef cattle, not in poultry
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. FDA web page 2024Guideline / position statementindependent cross-checkfull text checkedFDA approves hormone implants for beef cattle and sheep, but none for poultry or pigs.
In the USA, beef cattle legally receive steroid hormone implants (incl. testosterone, trenbolone, zeranol); this confirms the practice exists in some countries, not in Egypt.
Does the study support the specific claim? Yes · Methodological quality: high · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim
Original publication · Scientific details
Study explained simply
- What did the researchers want to find out?
For which food-producing animals are steroid hormone growth implants approved in the USA?
- How was the study done?
Regulatory agency information page
- How many people, animals or samples were studied?
not applicable
- What was actually found?
FDA 'has approved a number of steroid hormone drugs for use in beef cattle and sheep', including natural estrogen, progesterone, testosterone and synthetic versions such as trenbolone acetate and zeranol. 'No steroid hormone implants are approved for growth purposes in dairy cows, veal calves, pigs, or poultry.' FDA sets acceptable safe limits for hormones in meat.
- How large was the observed effect?
FDA 'has approved a number of steroid hormone drugs for use in beef cattle and sheep', including natural estrogen, progesterone, testosterone and synthetic versions such as trenbolone acetate and zeranol. 'No steroid hormone implants are approved for growth purposes in dairy cows, veal calves, pigs, or poultry.' FDA sets acceptable safe limits for hormones in meat.
- What do the results mean in everyday life?
Hormones are a real practice in US beef, but not in chicken.
- What are the study's limitations?
US-specific
- What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?
Supports the broiler statement; partly supports hormone use in cattle (other countries).
- Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?
EU bans hormonal growth promoters (Directive 96/22/EC, I-RES-02).
- What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?
Says nothing about illegal use in other countries.
No study in this group is marked as key.
Studies contradicting or limiting the claim (3)
-
EU hormone ban in livestock
Council of the EU. Official Journal of the EC 1996Guideline / position statementindependent cross-checkabstract checkedThe EU prohibits hormonal growth promoters in farm animals.
Does the study support the specific claim? Unclear · Methodological quality: high · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim
Original publication · Scientific details
Study explained simply
- What did the researchers want to find out?
Ban hormones.
- How was the study done?
Directive.
- What was actually found?
Prohibition.
- What do the results mean in everyday life?
No legal hormone fattening in EU.
- What are the study's limitations?
Title only read.
- What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?
Contradicts claim for EU.
- Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?
High.
-
EU ban on antibiotic growth promoters
European Parliament and Council. Official Journal of the EU 2003Guideline / position statementindependent cross-checkabstract checkedSince 1 January 2006, antibiotics may not be used as growth promoters in EU animal feed.
Does the study support the specific claim? Unclear · Methodological quality: high · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim
Original publication · Scientific details
Study explained simply
- What did the researchers want to find out?
Ban growth promoters.
- How was the study done?
Regulation.
- What was actually found?
Ban from 2006.
- What do the results mean in everyday life?
No legal antibiotic fattening in EU.
- What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?
Context.
- Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?
High.
-
EU veterinary drug residues 2023
EFSA. EFSA news 2025Measurement / residue studyindependent cross-checkabstract checkedOnly 0.11% of over half a million samples were non-compliant.
Does the study support the specific claim? No · Methodological quality: high · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim
Original publication · Scientific details
Study explained simply
- What did the researchers want to find out?
Monitor vet residues.
- How was the study done?
EU plans.
- How many people, animals or samples were studied?
548,194 samples.
- What was actually found?
0.11% non-compliant.
- What do the results mean in everyday life?
Rare violations in EU.
- What are the study's limitations?
News page only.
- What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?
Contradicts 'contaminated meat' for EU.
- Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?
High.
No study in this group is marked as key.
Studies with mixed or unclear results (2)
-
Hormones for fattening cattle: legal in some countries, banned in the EU
Skoupa K et al.. Animals (Basel) 2022 · PMID 36009705 · DOI 10.3390/ani12162115Narrative reviewindependent cross-checkabstract checkedAnabolic steroids are permitted for fattening in countries such as the USA and Australia but banned in the EU.
Confirms that anabolic hormones are used in cattle fattening in several countries (legal there), banned in the EU; gives no Egyptian data.
Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · 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 are anabolic steroids used in fattening animals, what are their effects and how are they detected?
- How was the study done?
Narrative review
- How many people, animals or samples were studied?
not applicable
- What was actually found?
States that in many countries (USA, Canada, China, Argentina, Australia and other large meat producers) use of steroids is permitted, whereas the EU strictly bans anabolic steroids in fattening animals; illegal 'cocktails' at very low concentrations are hard to detect.
- How large was the observed effect?
States that in many countries (USA, Canada, China, Argentina, Australia and other large meat producers) use of steroids is permitted, whereas the EU strictly bans anabolic steroids in fattening animals; illegal 'cocktails' at very low concentrations are hard to detect.
- What do the results mean in everyday life?
Whether beef comes from hormone-treated cattle depends on the country.
- What are the study's limitations?
Narrative review; non-systematic; Health effects described are those of abuse doses in humans
- What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?
Supports that the practice exists; does not show it in Egypt.
- Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?
EU bans the practice (Directive 96/22/EC).
- What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?
No residue or Egyptian data.
-
Egyptian farms report routine antibiotic use, often without medical need
ElSayed N et al.. J Egypt Public Health Assoc 2025 · PMID 39828782 · DOI 10.1186/s42506-024-00180-wCross-sectional studyindependent cross-checkabstract checkedAll 111 farms used antibiotics; 65% also used them for prevention or growth.
Documents routine antibiotic use on Egyptian farms including cattle farms (antibiotic part of the claim); gives no data on hormones.
Does the study support the specific claim? Yes · 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?
What antimicrobials are used on Egyptian animal farms, for what purposes, and why?
- How was the study done?
Cross-sectional survey of farm personnel
- How many people, animals or samples were studied?
111 of 150 farms (74% response)
- What was actually found?
All surveyed personnel reported antimicrobial use; 65% used them for non-therapeutic purposes (prevention or growth promotion). Non-therapeutic use had no impact on FCR in any farm type. Most used: penicillins 81%, macrolides 78%, tetracyclines 72%. Half used colistin; 55% of these non-therapeutically.
- How large was the observed effect?
All surveyed personnel reported antimicrobial use; 65% used them for non-therapeutic purposes (prevention or growth promotion). Non-therapeutic use had no impact on FCR in any farm type. Most used: penicillins 81%, macrolides 78%, tetracyclines 72%. Half used colistin; 55% of these non-therapeutically.
- What do the results mean in everyday life?
In Egypt, routine antibiotic use in animals is common.
- What are the study's limitations?
Self-report; Farms selected from a private platform list; Small sample
- What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?
Supports 'routine antibiotics' for Egypt.
- Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?
Not applicable to the EU (growth promoters banned since 2006).
- What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?
Not representative of all Egyptian farms.
No study in this group is marked as key.
Regional context
Germany / EU
Not applicable to legal EU production.
Egypt
Data lacking; I-RES-09 calls for monitoring because no national limits are set.
- Food-safety governance and official controls
- Pesticide residues in fruit and vegetables on the EU/German market (incl. imports from Egypt)
- Pesticide residues in produce sold on the Egyptian domestic market
- 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
- Dioxins, PCBs and PFAS in eggs and other animal foods
- Aflatoxin M1 in milk and dairy products
- Aflatoxins in groundnuts (peanuts)
- Heavy metals in fish
- Farmed fish (aquaculture): drugs, water source and controls
- Import controls and the meaning of RASFF notifications for Egyptian products
What applies in my country?
General scientific assessment
Unclear / insufficient evidence Hormone implants are legal for beef cattle in some countries (not the EU); for Egypt there are no reliable data.
The following areas of food safety are relevant to this statement:
- Pesticides and pesticide residues
- Veterinary medicines and antibiotics
- Hormonal growth promoters
- Contaminants (heavy metals, PFAS, PCBs, dioxins, nitrate)
- Pathogens (Salmonella, Campylobacter, etc.)
Eggs · Poultry · Dairy · Fish and seafood · Red meat · Fruit and vegetables
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
- Hormonal residues in chicken and cattle meat: A risk threat the present and future consumer health.. Kamaly HF & Sharkawy AA. Food Chem Toxicol 2023 · PMID 37956705 · DOI 10.1016/j.fct.2023.114172
- FDA: Steroid Hormone Implants Used for Growth in Food-Producing Animals (content current as of 24 October 2024). U.S. Food and Drug Administration. FDA web page 2024
- Council Directive 96/22/EC concerning the prohibition on the use in stockfarming of certain substances having a hormonal or thyrostatic action and of beta-agonists. Council of the EU. Official Journal of the EC 1996
- Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003 on additives for use in animal nutrition, Article 11. European Parliament and Council. Official Journal of the EU 2003
- Report for 2023 on the results from the monitoring of veterinary medicinal product residues and other substances in live animals and animal products (EFSA news: 'Veterinary drug residues in food - non-compliance stays low in 2023'). EFSA. EFSA news 2025
- Anabolic Steroids in Fattening Food-Producing Animals-A Review.. Skoupa K et al.. Animals (Basel) 2022 · PMID 36009705 · DOI 10.3390/ani12162115
- Antimicrobial use in animal farms in Egypt: rates, patterns, and determinants.. ElSayed N et al.. J Egypt Public Health Assoc 2025 · PMID 39828782 · DOI 10.1186/s42506-024-00180-w