@saulius Any update on this point ?

Thanks for your reply Bob :)

@Laura Duffy @Bob Fischer 
A question about your methodology : If I understand correctly, your placeholders are probability-of-sentience-adjusted, but your key takeaways are not (since they are "conditional on sentience").
Why having adjusted for sentience in your placeholders but not in your key takeaways ?

Yep, we agree. I meant that the degree of certainty of "an egg meal produces more suffering than one beef meal" is much bigger than your formulation implied. ie : "higher, by some calculations"

I think that my message was poorly written. I'm really not a specialist on this question so I don't know if there exists an egg brand that doesn't produce net suffering. 
I just wanted to say that the beginning of your post ("I'm not a vegan, but I've long felt troubled by the fact that eggs have such a high suffering-to-calorie ratio — higher, by some calculations, than beef") seemed inaccurate. 

I'm french so I have nothing to say directly about your question, but I would like to emphasize that most types of eggs are almost certainly way worse than beef and pig when considering animal suffering.
Using Faunalytics estimates, eating these different dishes creates this quantity of suffering : 
 

• chicken : 0,1 animal live et 5,2 days in farm
• pork : 0,002 animal life and 0,33 days in farm
• beef : 0,0004 animal life and 0,33 days in farm
• egg (omelette) : 0,01 animal life and 4,9 days in farm 

And it doesn't account for the relative badness of being a broiler vs a laying hen vs a pig vs a beef. 

Also, the Welfare Footprint project estimates that cage-free hens live better lifes than caged hens, but still painful lifes.