More Consensus on Coffee’s Benefits Than You Might Think

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/12/upshot/more-consensus-on-coffees-benefits-than-you-might-think.html

by mgav • 11 years ago

81 79 11 years ago

mariusz792• 11 years ago

It's a drug. It's full of harmful chemicals because of the way it's processed. It affects mind and body, often negatively. But it's great money maker so we will be hearing more about its "benefits" in a near future.

Kurtz79• 11 years ago

Also tobacco and alcohol are big moneymakers, but there is a large consensus about their negative effects, and that's why their use (or abuse) is discouraged, by doctors and governments alike.

So either:

- The coffee "lobby" is more effective than the tobacco and alcohol lobbies.

- Maybe all drugs cannot be dumped in the same bin, and we should treat them case by case, critically.

erikb3• 11 years ago

The consensus wasn't always focussed on tobaccos/alcohols disadvantages though. If you watch movies about the US's 60s you'll see doctors advising their patients to smoke more.

Turing_Machine2• 11 years ago

Hmmm... seems like I see a new story about the purported health benefits of red wine every few months or so.

dghughes• 11 years ago

Fun fact smokers process/eliminate caffeine from their bodies quicker than non-smokers.

cp9• 11 years ago

you're treating "chemical" as a four letter word

happyscrappy• 11 years ago

To quote RZA watching Bill Murray drink straight from the pot- "Coffee causes serious delirium."

drcube• 11 years ago

What harmful chemicals are those, exactly?

a3n• 11 years ago

Surprisingly few. I would have expected anything arriving in US stores at an industrial level would have suffered from industrial levels of processing and storage-related chemicals, but a quick skim of wikipedia reveals essentially none. Huh.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coffee_production

Ethyl acetate is sometimes used in decaffeination.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decaffeination#Solvents_used_i...

mariusz792• 11 years ago

Trichloroethylene, acrylamide, and many more including pesticides like Aldrin, Dieldrin, Chlordane and Heptachlor.

snissn• 11 years ago

It's full of harmful chemicals because of the way it's processed.

Like which chemicals?

Turing_Machine2• 11 years ago

Dihydrogen monoxide, for one. :-)

pennaMan• 11 years ago

Do you have any evidence for your claims?

MrJagil3• 11 years ago

Coffee itself might not have anything to do with it; rather, coffee follows a certain lifestyle which is healthier than that of non-drinkers. I.e. it is perhaps quite good for you to get up every morning at 9am and go to work. Active lifestyle, continuous stimuli etc. Coffee just so happens to be very ingrained in that culture.

It might not be the actual chemicals and nutrients of coffee that helps you, but the fact that it "forces" you to be active, mentally. It kickstarts your brain. The biggest killers are staying still and loneliness.

sageabilly• 11 years ago

That's my thought too. Is it the coffee itself or is it the lifestyle that goes along with drinking five cups of coffee a day? I'm pretty sure that no one is drinking five or six cups of coffee a day and just sitting on the couch and watching TV.

erikb3• 11 years ago

I'd argue that coffee is connected to a rather unhealthy lifestyle of sitting in an office chair the whole day, eating unhealthy fast-/restaurant food instead of cooking for yourself, working long hours instead of a regular 7 to 5 schedule etc.

mseebach• 11 years ago

I'd argue that you're both middle-browing the f* out of an article that actually quotes several actual scientific studies.

jwcooper• 11 years ago

Coffee is ingrained into the culture of many professions, far beyond just office jobs.

Nursing, landscaping, utility work, construction, you name it...it's a great way to kickstart the body when having to get up at 5am or, stay awake during an overnight shift serving tables at a restaurant.

matwood2• 11 years ago

There is a lot of writing about how coffee fueled the industrial revolution which happened way before people sat in office chairs all day.

http://www.npr.org/programs/wesat/features/2001/coffee/01090...

rubiquity• 11 years ago

I'd argue that coffee is connected to a rather unhealthy [...] working long hours instead of a regular 7 to 5 schedule etc.

Since when did 7-5 (which is 10 hours) become regular?

wimagguc• 11 years ago

Quite some research in rodents supports the statement. That would suggest that coffee works without the typical lifestyle choices, at least unless coffee-high rats are programming till the sun comes up.

(A Scientific American article about a similar research from last year: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/coffee-and-tea-may...)

My two cents is in keeping my daily coffee - and leave the causation vs. correlation debate for later.

0359B02149AB2• 11 years ago

Anecdotally, I would agree with you for some, but for others not so much. I get a short boost followed by a long crash when drinking coffee. It's also like an unfocused focus - like as long as what I want to focus on is nearby, I will do that. But if I have to figure out what I want to focus on, that feels like frustration and hypertension.

I prefer tea. I get up at 4:50 am 5 days a week, and I rarely sleep past 7-8 on weekends. I just make sure I'm asleep by 10:00 pm before work nights, and weeknights I stay up til 11:00 max.

I really like thinking that I think slowly, and that I can control my thinking direction using another level of meta-thinking. It's one of my most favorite and dramatic life shifts as an adult, that I have made. Pretending that my mind is a machine that needs to be turned on is a one way ticket to crazy town, and it's pretty hard to leave crazy town.

But otherwise, I don't understand how loneliness has to do with any of this. I'm lonely regardless of whether I drink tea or coffee.

RankingMember• 11 years ago

Agreed, coffee for me is basically a burst of energy/focus followed by a longer period of worse energy/focus than when I began, so really not worth it for me. I like Yerba Mate for this reason - no real crash, but a strong but steady warm buzz, much less peaky than coffee.

Rapzid• 11 years ago

Wow guys, I also have rather bad times on coffee! Its really hard for me to find any information on the subject as well.

Sometimes I have really bad times of it, particularly on low sleep(ironic?). It can cause me to become a bit more anxious, have trouble conversing with people as if I'm hungover, and cause context swiching issues.

jklein112• 11 years ago

The OP was saying that being lonely is worse for your health than drinking coffee.

Raphmedia• 11 years ago

I am very curious. How would a typical day look like when you wake up at 4:50? Do you need to commute very early, or do you use that time for yourself? I personally wake up, get ready and leave, while I do all my things late evening / during the night.

jsbg• 11 years ago

Tea contains l-theanine, which, when combined with caffeine, has been shown to improve concentration. You can get the same effect by drinking coffee and taking l-theanine pills.

rsync• 11 years ago

"Coffee itself might not have anything to do with it; rather, coffee follows a certain lifestyle which is healthier than that of non-drinkers."

I think it's much simpler than even that.

Health fads and science results come and go, but over thousands of years humans develop (just a few) heuristics based on subtle observations along the way. One of the best of those heuristics is "an apple a day keeps the doctor away".

Bear with me here...

Is it flavonoids ? Special anti-oxidants ? Some weird apple chemical that we can isolate and realize all of our dashed resveratrol hopes with ? No. An apple a day keeps the doctor away because it keeps your bowels moving, all else being equal. That's it. Just a big, boring macro effect on your body and your bodies primary consumption/waste pathway.

I suspect the same is true with coffee. Special secret antioxidants ? Natures hidden chemical compounds we can distill into a pill ? No ... coffee is just a good laxative[1] and if you're having 2-3 cups of coffee a day you're (all else being equal) moving waste along (relatively) more efficiently.

Which is great. Nothing to be sneezed at - just like the apples - but also nothing exotic or confounding.

[1] http://www.onemedical.com/blog/live-well/why-coffee-makes-me...

rudolf02• 11 years ago

I also wonder if it's something intrinsic to coffee, or just a result of the caffeine. Stimulants like caffeine can improve blood flow and potentially stave off arterial plaque build-up.

JulianMorrison2• 11 years ago

You are assuming the scientists who did these studies and the scientists attempting to merge them with meta-analysis are asleep at the wheel and have failed to correct for obvious confounding factors that a random member of the public could brainstorm in the seconds it took you to post.

This doesn't seem like a sensible assumption, absent evidence.

MrJagil3• 11 years ago

Hey Julian,

I really wasn't trying to discredit any of the studies done. Whenever I participate in discussion my main motivation is always to try and create nuances. I know before hand that an actual truth is impossible to attain, so I feel it's better to just try and add some color to the discussion.

Causation and correlation is of course always low-hanging fruit, I just felt it was curious that the article did not touch upon it and wanted to fuel a different angle of discussion.

drzaiusapelord• 11 years ago

The biggest killers are staying still and loneliness.

My alone time, recreation time, time dedicated to meditation are some of the best/heathiest times for me. Being amped up all the time is messed up, imo, and leads to chronic stress and such.

coffee follows a certain lifestyle which is healthier than that of non-drinkers. I

The fattest slobs drink coffee just like everyone else. It seems you've never watched the clientele in your average breakfast or donut place.

I find people addicted to caffeine and stimulants seem very busy, but often deliver sub-par work as soaking your neurons in excitors feels good to you, but actually doesn't make you better at anything. If anything, it makes you worse than you normally would be.

I think there's a great argument here about how slow and steady wins the race and is healthier overall. Look at US over-working conditions, lack of maternity leave, lack of vacation days, etc compared to our more genteel European peers. I can't imagine anyone thinking our amped up culture is better from a health perspective.

coldtea• 11 years ago

Coffee itself might not have anything to do with it; rather, coffee follows a certain lifestyle which is healthier than that of non-drinkers.

Which is what most competent research controls for in the first place.

Besides, coffee is something so prevalent that even junkies and never exercizing couch potatos do it, so it kind of controls itself.

anu7df• 11 years ago

This is all well and good. I drink my locally roasted, manual ground, aeropress brewed coffee for pleasure and taste. Everything else.. meh.. Actually most/all coffee lovers I know drink coffee because they like it, not because they expect a lot of health benefits from it. But... good to know..

gadders• 11 years ago

I use it as a caffeine delivery system primarily.

Loque• 11 years ago

Tablet form is probably more effective :`)

Diederich• 11 years ago

For some people with GERD, coffee is very bad for them. My wife switched from coffee to tea for this reason. Tea is pretty fabulous for her, and I gather there's at least some documented health benefits on that front as well.

Edit: GERD = http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gastroesophageal_reflux_disease

Second Edit: To be clear: I agree with the parent article, I think coffee is close to harmless for MOST people, and very well might have some positives.

matwood2• 11 years ago

Tea is awesome. It has the caffeine, but has another drug which is more calming. For people who get a bit manic with coffee, tea is often the thing that works for them.

YorkianTones2• 11 years ago

L-Theanine one of those other drugs found in green/black/white tea, and it produces a calming effect. The Japanese even put it in bubble gum.

bkmartin• 11 years ago

This is very true. I have LPR (not GERD, but often mistaken for it) and reducing coffee consumption to reduce stomach acid production is the driver here. Tea can, I'm sure have benefits... but what kind of tea? You can make "Tea" out of anything. Coffee is very specific, Tea is way to general. You would have to study so many specific types of tea to see where and how much benefits exists.

marvel_boy• 11 years ago

GERD?

jklein112• 11 years ago

commonly known as acid reflux

kohanz• 11 years ago

Anyone else surprised that 3 to 5 cups a day is considered "moderate"? I thought it would be 1 to 3 or so.

3JPLW• 11 years ago

In the US, at least, there's a strange convention that a "cup" of coffee is 6 ounces[1]. 2 mugs is typically about 4 of these "cups". I'm not sure what convention the NY Times is using, but the quantities are quite muddled.

1. http://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/25041/is-a-cup-on...

globuous• 11 years ago

I always hated that "cup" measure in the US... Anywho, I don't think the volume of coffee one drinks in a day is relevant without stating how concentrated it is. I'm assuming 6 oz of americano coffee doesn't have quite the same effect as a 6 oz cup of esspresso (oh Lord.)

I know that, technically, a glass of beer should contain the same amount of alcohol as a shot of vodka or a glass of wine in a bar. Of course in practice it's probably not exactly the case, but when someone tells me "drinking 2 glasses before driving isn't such a good idea," I'm supposed to be able to tell how much 2 glasses is regadless of the alcohol consumed.

Isn't it the same in the article ? Shouldn't a cup of esspresso contain the same amount of coffee as a (medium ?) americano ? If not, how do these 2 coffee dilutions compare ?

RockyMcNuts• 11 years ago

Google says 6 oz. of coffee has 71mg of caffeine. https://www.google.com/search?q=caffeine+in+a+cup+of+coffee

Starbucks 'tall' has 260mg of caffeine. http://www.cspinet.org/new/cafchart.htm

mironathetin• 11 years ago

Without the information who financed these numerous research results, they are not worth the time to read them or to write about them, imho.

chatwinra• 11 years ago

You have to view it at an individual study/paper level (ie: go to the link and pdf via the article). They have to declare sources of funding in the papers, so you can trace funding origins and conflicts of interests from those declarations in each study.

The article itself does a nice job of linking to every necessary study - sometimes they don't bother and then you do start to get worried about how much of the content is accurate.

josefresco3• 11 years ago

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

recuter• 11 years ago

No, that would be calling out the author by name as a shill. Remarking that the source the author is relying upon could possibly be biased/tainted is not an ad hominem in any way.

kenbellows4• 11 years ago

Careful, OP isn't claiming that a lack of funding data makes the article false or inaccurate. The point is simply that (in OP's opinion) some of the most critical information needed to determine whether or not this article's conclusions should be taken seriously is missing. This is not an instance of an ad hominem fallacy.

floppydisk2• 11 years ago

The article also relies heavily on a metaanalysis, not just individual studies. Meta analyses are designed to take a large multitude of studies in the same area and ascertain an effect size. By examining everything in aggregate, this should counteract any funding bias -- or reveal it if the results get skewed (i.e. lots of positive results and lots of negative results but no middling results). Additionally, meta analyses usually consist of a "file drawer" search where they get their hands on a bunch of the unpublished papers and analyze those as well to ensure they counteract any publishing bias for printing papers that only show positive results.

WalterSear• 11 years ago

I don't know where you got the idea that metanalysis is mostly unpublished work. I've never seen a published meta analysis like that. Most journals wouldn't print it.

Lancey2• 11 years ago

Remember when moderate consumption of alcohol also reduced cardiovascular risk?

leephillips2• 11 years ago

Yes. Doesn't it still?

Lancey2• 11 years ago

No, it was debunked.

Speakeasys• 11 years ago

This article brought to you by Starbucks. The great tasting and dependable coffee you love.

stephengillie• 11 years ago

It's fun to watch the health pendulum swing to and fro, and occasionally given a gentle shove from a marketing article.

Replace coffee with cigarettes, and it reads as a tobacco ad from the 1920s.

INTPnerd• 11 years ago

This article is completely worthless because it is all about looking at studies about drinking coffee. If you really want to get educated about health, you need to learn the details of taking care of your entire person, how all your body parts are interdependent and affect each other, and what different habits actually do. Instead of looking at whether or not long term it lowers or raises your risk of certain problems, it would be better task these questions: What is coffee? What are the immediate affects of drinking it on different body organs and functions? What is the purpose of those organs and is that purpose disrupted? How does it affect digestion? It is well known among those that actually know stuff about health, that taking care of your digestive process and things that affect your bowel movements is where the root of most disease and healing begins. So how does coffee affect this? According to the book "Tissue Cleansing Through Bowel Management", coffee will kill the good bacteria necessary for this faster than anything else. If that is true, it makes a strong case toward coffee being bad for you. Of course not all coffee is created equal. Some coffee is naturally less acidic than others. A lot of coffee is polluted with high levels of heavy metals. But if coffee is generally bad for digestion, and digestion is one of the main keys to healthy living, why do so many studies show long term benefits from drinking it? Here is where I don't like studies for this kind of thing. Most people come nowhere near living in harmony with what is now known about healthy living, myself included. So these studies are mostly about the affects of coffee on people who otherwise do not live a healthy lifestyle. Also, who funded, setup, monitored, and published the results? Who gamed the system by deciding who be included in the study and what type of coffee they would use? Who was paid off to change the numbers? There is no way to know. And yes, I drink coffee, at least for now. But I am on a constant journey of always improving my health in some way. Some day, I may stop drinking coffee altogether.

TheLoneWolfling• 11 years ago

A thought.

Coffee is a (relatively mild) stimulant. I wonder how much of coffee's benefits can be attributed directly to that, as opposed to whatever else caffeine may do?

Given that these studies tend to be done in first-world countries, where obesity and people being underactive are a problem... Overgeneralizing of course.

If nothing else, sitting still for long periods of time is known to be bad for you, and caffeine helps people avoid that.

More Consensus on Coffee’s Benefits Than You Might Think

Related Stories