Slashdot Mirror
Coffee Maybe Not a Health Drink!
perbert writes "Canadian researchers have published a study in the Journal of the American Medical Association indicating that excess coffee drinking (4+ cups a day) could lead to an increased risk of heart disease if you have the wrong gene. In light of other studies linking antioxidants in coffee to a reduction in heart disease, who is right? Or will they cancel out in a coffee death-match?"
As with anything related to toxicology, the dose is the poison.
"the difference between medication and poison is the dose"
So say we all
What happens is that conflicting summaries get posted around the Internet and everyone thinks scientists are just having them on.
If you look carefully the summary for the research is saying the caffeine is bad for you, and that the study concluded this based on research into coffee consumption. The other studies that claim coffee is good for you were actually referring to other chemicals in coffee, not the caffeine, nor the entirety of the coffee.
Also people seem to think that scientists study everything about a topic before releasing results. But that is a misunderstanding about how science works. Generally scientists focus on very small areas of large topics and then propose more sweeping conclusions. Usually the media then make even more generalised conclusions that result in complete misunderstanding in non-scientists.
Peer review is also important, often these studies are fundamentally flawed and even though the submitted paper offers a conclusion, the scientist writing it is well aware that in science, nothing is proved by one paper. Instead wait ten years for more supporting evidence, rinse, repeat and progress.
Blame the media's lousy science reporting or poor reading comprehension skills, but what people see as conflicting results are often nothing of the kind, they just miss the details.
I saw one study that said a single cup of coffee a day was good for athletic training, and another that said that the more coffee you drink, the lower the risk of heart disease.
This study says that more than four cups of coffee a day are bad for you if you have a particular gene.
None of these things are contradictory-- just like how a glass of wine may be beneficial, but 10 glasses may cause liver disease. Or how some types of cholesterol are good, but others are bad.
A lot of who is right depends on who funded each study and what they set out to prove (or disprove) in their study.
Open your mind, most junkies are just normal people who made some bad choices. Given that we can't stop them from using, we may as well try to minimize the damage those choices inflict.
Opiates to build tolerance on their own, so said legal junky will still need more and more.
People on heroin maintenance programs tend to acclimate to a dosing schedule that keeps them functional. They're so tolerant that they literally can't get enough to get high, so it's barely worth considering them intoxicated.
Sure, like alcoholics aren't? Good example there, alcohol = legal drug, and a large portion of the population is directly harmed by it. Be it through drunk drivers, domestic abuse, or just the general unpleasantness that exists in being around them
So your solution is to prohibit alcohol? Look how well that worked... Besides, the comparison between alcohol and heroin is very tenuous. The violence caused by alcohol is pharmacological, the violence caused by heroin is sociological.
Ignoring a fact that they are incapible of actually living a normal life.
That's just ignorant prejudice. Heroin maintenance works.
If you hate heroin addicts so much, why not advocate legalization so it will be easier for the bastards to get what's coming to them?
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!