Slashdot Mirror


NIH Study Finds That Coffee Drinkers Have Lower Risk of Death

parallel_prankster writes "Older adults who drank coffee — caffeinated or decaffeinated — had a lower risk of death [full paper is paywalled, at the New England Journal of Medicine] overall than others who did not drink coffee, according to a study by researchers from the National Cancer Institute (NCI), part of the National Institutes of Health, and AARP. Coffee drinkers were less likely to die from heart disease, respiratory disease, stroke, injuries and accidents, diabetes, and infections, although the association was not seen for cancer. These results from a large study of older adults were observed after adjustment for the effects of other risk factors on mortality, such as smoking and alcohol consumption. They also found that the association between coffee and reduction in risk of death increased with the amount of coffee consumed. Relative to men and women who did not drink coffee, those who consumed three or more cups of coffee per day had approximately a 10 percent lower risk of death. Researchers caution, however, that they can't be sure whether these associations mean that drinking coffee actually makes people live longer."

164 of 234 comments (clear)

  1. I kinda thought risk of death... by sokoban · · Score: 5, Informative

    ... was roughly one in one. Guess I was wrong.

    --
    09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 is the magic number.
    1. Re:I kinda thought risk of death... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      ... was roughly one in one. Guess I was wrong.

      Speak for yourself- so far, I'm immortal.

    2. Re:I kinda thought risk of death... by KingSkippus · · Score: 2

      I intend to live forever. So far so good. --Stephen Wright

    3. Re:I kinda thought risk of death... by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Oh, Jesus H. Christ. This comment comes up on every story dealing with mortality risk, and it's getting kind of old. Look, the hazard rate function is not that hard to understand. Educate yourself instead of making the same worn-out joke over and over again, okay?

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    4. Re:I kinda thought risk of death... by magarity · · Score: 2

      Speak for yourself- so far, I'm immortal.

      Immortality might be fun right now but I bet the black hole era and following heat death of the universe are going to be seriously boring.

    5. Re:I kinda thought risk of death... by sycodon · · Score: 3, Informative

      Alright Sheldon Cooper, we all get it. And you move your bowls at 8:20.

      --
      When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    6. Re:I kinda thought risk of death... by Joce640k · · Score: 2

      "... less likely to die from heart disease, respiratory disease, stroke, injuries and accidents, diabetes, and infections, although the association was not seen for cancer."

      Fuck that. I'd rather have a heart attack than cancer.

      --
      No sig today...
    7. Re:I kinda thought risk of death... by Aryden · · Score: 1

      They also produced a study last year that indicated that males who drink 2-3 cups of coffee daily had a lower chance of fatal colon cancer than non-coffee drinkers. I guess that it has something to do with the fact that we coffee drinkers tend to shit on a regular basis....

    8. Re:I kinda thought risk of death... by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 3, Funny

      Okay, I'm going to make a computer and car analogy.

      Suppose that on every single story that mentioned RAM in any context, there were guaranteed to be a hundred comments along the lines of "Isn't the Ram a pickup truck?" Some of these comments would be meant as in-jokes, but most would be absolutely serious. The people making the comments (a self-selected group of intelligent, technically minded people who are, supposedly, interested in the world around them) would absolutely refuse to understand, no matter how many times it was explained to them, that the word "ram" has multiple specific meanings, and that only one of those meanings is relevant to the conversation at hand.

      Wouldn't you get just a little tired of this?

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    9. Re:I kinda thought risk of death... by bryan1945 · · Score: 1

      Damn you, Mr. QuickFingers!

      --
      Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
    10. Re:I kinda thought risk of death... by DaveGod · · Score: 1

      ... was roughly one in one. Guess I was wrong.

      No... The probability of death may be roughly one in one, but that's because such wording provides a context whereby there is no time constraint unless one is stated.

      "Risk of death" on the other hand implies a context where time is not a constraint but a factor. Lower risk implies it is less likely to happen sooner.

      Maybe that's just my professional background that leads me to think of the distinction, rather than a general truth, though it's also standard in personal health analysis and reporting so the context would be implied here anyway.

    11. Re:I kinda thought risk of death... by AwesomeMcgee · · Score: 4, Funny

      Where does he put them? Back in the cabinet? Must be when he finishes his breakfast I guess

    12. Re:I kinda thought risk of death... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Oh, Jesus H. Christ. This comment comes up on every story dealing with mortality risk, and it's getting kind of old. Look, the hazard rate function is not that hard to understand. Educate yourself instead of making the same worn-out joke over and over again, okay?

      Jeez! Someone hasn't had their coffee yet!

    13. Re:I kinda thought risk of death... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      No, but I am laid back, have a sense of humor, and no desire to tell the people around me what to do.

    14. Re:I kinda thought risk of death... by sycodon · · Score: 1

      You should know it's all a part of the Slashdot environment...

      Citation needed...
      In soviet Russia...
      I, for one, welcome my new overlord...

      Just how it is. Roll with it.

      --
      When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    15. Re:I kinda thought risk of death... by ArcherB · · Score: 1

      Oh, Jesus H. Christ. This comment comes up on every story dealing with mortality risk, and it's getting kind of old. Look, the hazard rate function is not that hard to understand. Educate yourself instead of making the same worn-out joke over and over again, okay?

      Funny you should mention Jesus Christ. I wonder how much coffee that guy drank!

      *offtopic*
      According to the link in your sig, the government is shrinking. Wonder were that extra $1.5 trillion is going.
      */offtopic*

      --
      There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
    16. Re:I kinda thought risk of death... by sycodon · · Score: 1

      ROFLMAO

      Auto correct is fun!

      --
      When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    17. Re:I kinda thought risk of death... by marcello_dl · · Score: 2

      Sure, but by the time the immortal guy has to reinstall windows 2120 because of driver issues, the rest of his existence will be devoted on how to commit suicide.

      --
      ---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
    18. Re:I kinda thought risk of death... by rrohbeck · · Score: 1

      Speak for yourself- so far, I'm immortal.

      The risk of death decreased by 10% at three cups per day so drink 30 per day and you'll be really immortal.

    19. Re:I kinda thought risk of death... by starfishsystems · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The reason why these jokes keep coming up is because "risk of death" is a ridiculous phrase if not explicitly qualified. So, for slightly different reasons, is "mortality risk."

      If you want the canonical term that's used in a statistical or medical context, just say "mortality". We'll all understand perfectly what you mean, and there will be no snickering. You don't say "mortality risk" because that would be redundant. It makes you look like you don't know what you're talking about. (Of course, if you want to create that impression, you're on the right track.)

      Another conventional term is "death rate". Both "mortality" and "death rate" refer to the relative frequency of deaths in a given population under given conditions.

      --
      Parity: What to do when the weekend comes.
    20. Re:I kinda thought risk of death... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't you get just a little tired of this?

      Do you mean like an R14 or R12 tire, or a little trailer tire?

    21. Re:I kinda thought risk of death... by BattleApple · · Score: 1

      This is the second time I saw that typo in this thread.. I thought it was some new meme I hadn't heard about

      http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=2857157&cid=40030605

    22. Re:I kinda thought risk of death... by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 1

      Mortality is an attribute of a population; mortality risk (or, yes, damn it, "risk of death" -- no qualification needed for those who know what they're talking about) is an attribute of individuals. If you say "smokers are 80% more likely to die of cancer than non-smokers," you're talking about mortality. If you say "smoking increases your probability of dying of cancer by 80%," you're talking about mortality risk, because you can't be 80% more dead. You can claim that this isn't a standard medical or biostatistical usage, but about 218,000 results from a Google Scholar search on the phrase "mortality risk" argue against you.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    23. Re:I kinda thought risk of death... by starfishsystems · · Score: 1

      I think you make a fair case that there is a contextual distinction between populations and individuals. But let's be precise: when talking about a specific individual, we're no longer in the realm of population statistics. "Mortality" in this context - separated from notions of statistics - simply means the attribute of being mortal. To an individual person, death is an singular event, whereas mortality is a condition of existence.

      Since you want to appeal to frequency of usage, let's look at the numbers a bit more closely. According to Google Scholar there are twice as many occurrences of "death rate" (that is, the individuated death event explicitly converted to a relative frequency) as your preferred term "mortality risk", and the use of "mortality" not followed by "risk" is seven times more frequent.

      --
      Parity: What to do when the weekend comes.
    24. Re:I kinda thought risk of death... by Johann+Lau · · Score: 1

      yet that's what exactly what you're trying to do. you just fail at it, then try to pass it off as not trying haha :P

    25. Re:I kinda thought risk of death... by Johann+Lau · · Score: 1

      "Herp derp" is your idea of a party? Huh.

    26. Re:I kinda thought risk of death... by Greyfox · · Score: 1

      Guess what I'm posting on the next story about RAM...

      --

      I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

    27. Re:I kinda thought risk of death... by djlowe · · Score: 1

      Suppose that on every single story that mentioned RAM in any context, there were guaranteed to be a hundred comments along the lines of "Isn't the Ram a pickup truck?"

      Wouldn't you get just a little tired of this?

      Nah, this is Slashdot, where few ever get tired of pointing out that "RAM" and "Ram" are spelled differently.

    28. Re:I kinda thought risk of death... by Internetuser1248 · · Score: 1

      ... was roughly one in one. Guess I was wrong.

      Actually this is a common misconception, a study of all the humans that ever lived, found that 2/3 have died at some point in time. Therefore the odds of dying are rough 66%

    29. Re:I kinda thought risk of death... by FreedomOfThought · · Score: 1

      Perhaps -- but as I recall, 30 cups a day could cause Urinary Incontinence, Shivering, Hot Flashes, Flushed Skin, Paranoia, anxiety, insomnia, muscle twitching, mania, depression, delusions, hallucinations, psychosis, and rhabdomyolysis. Please consult with your physician before beginning a large coffee-intake regimen. Large coffee-intake regimens are not for everyone and therefor you should monitor your stool for any unusual formation or discoloration. If this occurs, please ween yourself from coffee use over 48 hours and immediately consult a doctor.

      Of course, since this study also include caffeine-free coffee, you could take that route and risk whatever consequences may arise from that. There are some skeptics on caffeine-free coffee that would argue its safety.

      Citation

    30. Re:I kinda thought risk of death... by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      From your link:

      Extreme overdose can result in death.[48][49] The median lethal dose (LD50) given orally, is 192 milligrams per kilogram in rats. The LD50 of caffeine in humans is dependent on individual sensitivity, but is estimated to be about 150 to 200 milligrams per kilogram of body mass or roughly 80 to 100 cups of coffee for an average adult.

      30 cups is three pots of coffee. You'd have a damned hard time ingestin that much, but you could perhaps OD on those energy drinks or caffiene pills.

    31. Re:I kinda thought risk of death... by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      According to the link in your sig, the government is shrinking. Wonder were that extra $1.5 trillion is going.

      We're in a recession, so tax reciepts would be down, food stamp costs would be up, older folks getting laid off are collecting Social Security when they'd rather be working (the fools!) and we're paying interest on what we already borrowed.

      Did they even have coffee in Israel back then? I could be mistaken but I thought it was native to South America. He was known do be a winebibber and a glutton [citation: Matthew 11:19]. Seeing as how he was executed, I doubt coffee would have helped much.

    32. Re:I kinda thought risk of death... by FreedomOfThought · · Score: 1

      I used to drink 2-4 pots daily (more on a few occasions) and it messed my digestion system up badly as well as my urinary system. So I stopped, completely. When withdrawals came into play (and they were pretty strong effects), I started drinking again but went down to one pot a day and it has been that way since. So yes, hard to ingest that much, but still not unlikely to happen.

      As far as any actual major problems, I was obviously joking about the seeing a doctor thing.

  2. Already debunked. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Lousy study with terrible controls, indicates that coffee drinkers also smoke more, eat more red meat, get less exercise, etc. But still have a lower chance of death? I call bullshit.

    1. Re:Already debunked. by SirGarlon · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So what you're saying is that any study whose result disagrees with your preconceptions must be garbage.

      --
      [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
    2. Re:Already debunked. by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 2

      Pretty Much

      "The investigators caution that coffee intake was assessed by self-report at a single time point and therefore might not reflect long-term patterns of intake. Also, information was not available on how the coffee was prepared (espresso, boiled, filtered, etc.); the researchers consider it possible that preparation methods may affect the levels of any protective components in coffee. "

      It's an Epidemiology study, which looks at patterns. Which can be helpful in locating real effects but findings are quite meaningless.

      You could just as easily say it was because each coffee drinker had a pet rock or a sunny disposition. Need hard concrete proof that coffee is providing real health benefits. Interestingly enough, if you include smokers and drinkers - then you don't see a benefit. Which tells me there isn't a real benefit here. Because if there was you should see an improvement among drinkers and smokers.

    3. Re:Already debunked. by Anubis+IV · · Score: 5, Informative

      Even though a larger proportion of coffee drinkers may engage in those activities (I'm not saying they do, but let's grant it, for the sake of argument), if you control for the different variables, you can still draw correlations out of the data. For instance, a coffee drinker who also smokes may, on average, live longer than someone who smokes but doesn't drink coffee as well. Likewise for red meat, less exercise, etc.. They're not suggesting that coffee drinking cancels out the effects of all those other things. They're merely suggesting it may provide some benefits over similar people not drinking coffee.

      You've alleged that their controls are terrible. Please elaborate on how, exactly, since they explicitly mentioned controlling for smoking in the article, which was one of your points.

    4. Re:Already debunked. by arth1 · · Score: 1

      Was it corrected for reply bias? There could be a correlation between being a healthy coffee drinker and likelihood of submitting a self-report.

      Or could it be that rich people, who are healthier for other reasons, also can afford to drink coffee more than someone who's dirt poor or spends his money on booze? An average of three cuppas a day at average price would mean $4 per day, or $120 per month, which not everyone can afford.

      Or that coffee consumption is higher in geographical areas where people are healthier for other reasons, including heridity, temperature and eating habits? Minnesotans live on average six years longer than people in Mississippi, and with a relatively large Scandinavian heritage also likely consumes far more coffee.

      At least the people who did the study didn't attempt to say there's a causation.

    5. Re:Already debunked. by aesiamun · · Score: 1

      It costs me less than a dollar to make a pot which is roughly 4 large cups of coffee...what is this $4 for 3 cups you speak of?

    6. Re:Already debunked. by buglista · · Score: 1

      Fantastic argument there. I'm sure the Lancet will print your letter in full!

    7. Re:Already debunked. by Aryden · · Score: 2

      pretty sure he is referring to Starbucks or Caribu or some other such nonsense. I don't buy the cheap stuff, but I get roughly 64 cups for about $10.

    8. Re:Already debunked. by pesho · · Score: 1

      For instance, a coffee drinker who also smokes may, on average, live longer than someone who smokes but doesn't drink coffee as well. Likewise for red meat, less exercise, etc.. .

      This approach may be applicable for a study looking at factors, where we have a good idea how tho weight the contribution of each factor. The people who did the study not only did not to verify that the statements were true, they didn't even bother to follow up with the same question one more time while the study was running. How do they know that a snapshot they took back in 1996 was still true for the population in 2000, 2005 and 2008?

    9. Re:Already debunked. by Kreigaffe · · Score: 1

      Stop buying coffee from coffee shops, for one -- if you buy ground coffee and use a drip or percolating coffee pot, it's absurdly cheap. 4-5 cents a cup, iirc. I've got a coffee grinder and french press, but I buy bags of beans as opposed to freshly roasted because those.. those are absurdly pricey, honestly. At least around here. Works out to about 60 cents for my pot of coffee, which is about 3 cups of deliciousness. Jumps to about 1.50 a pot if I get the fresh roasted beans, which still isn't that bad compared to Starbucks or some such but is more than I care to spend, since I'm quite happy with the bags.

      Over a month I'll spend probably $50 on my coffee. That's not that bad, considering my consumption is above average.

      --
      ... still waiting for this free-as-in-beer free beer I keep hearing about. :|
    10. Re:Already debunked. by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

      The snapshot doesn't need to be representative of the population since they're not extrapolating from their sample group to the population at large. They're merely establishing correlation between coffee drinking and longer life. You don't need to weight the different factors either. You could simply map them in an N-dimensional space (where N is the number of factors + 1 for lifespan) and see where the coffee drinkers clustered compared to everyone else. Which isn't to say that they did it this way, merely that it could be done this way.

      I won't disagree that the study would have been better if they had sampled more data and verified it more carefully, but that doesn't mean that their results should be ignored.

    11. Re:Already debunked. by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      The fact that they say the results showed a decrease in death due to accident and injury is a pretty good indicator that this is correlation as opposed to causation. It would be a pretty big leap to claim that coffee will save you from falling down the stairs.

    12. Re:Already debunked. by arth1 · · Score: 1

      The average cost of a cup of coffee is $1.38 (or was, a couple of years ago). Average. Not lowest possible.

      Also, those who have the least can not afford to make a pot, because they don't have a home to plug the coffee maker in, or if they do, can't pay the electricity. So they drink less coffee. Telling them to brew a pot so they can have their three cups a day is a modern equivalent of asking why they don't eat cake.

    13. Re:Already debunked. by JATMON · · Score: 1

      I assume that would be if you got your coffee from a coffee shop. But in that case, I think that the $4 for 3 cups would be a little low.

    14. Re:Already debunked. by arth1 · · Score: 1

      The fact that they say the results showed a decrease in death due to accident and injury is a pretty good indicator that this is correlation as opposed to causation. It would be a pretty big leap to claim that coffee will save you from falling down the stairs.

      Would it? I'd think that sleepy people might have more accidents than those who refuse to do anything before they've had their joe.

    15. Re:Already debunked. by swalve · · Score: 1

      I assume the difference is that the people who were susceptible to death from things like high blood pressure from the caffeine already died.

    16. Re:Already debunked. by sudon't · · Score: 1

      My friends all know that when I begin with, "studies show...", they're about to hear some bullshit. Look, I know we have to keep grad students busy somehow, but has anyone noticed that all of these studies end up being forgotten, unreproducable, or refuted? Bananas cure cancer, vitamin C cures cancer, so-called second-hand smoke causes cancer, "whatever" prolongs life...pick a study, any study, it's more likely than not, bullshit.

      --
      -- sudon't

      Air-ride Equipped

    17. Re:Already debunked. by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      Decaf coffee isn't really know for actually waking people up.

    18. Re:Already debunked. by Internetuser1248 · · Score: 1

      I especially love the ones that contradict each other. Still they make for good storytelling over a beer or a cup of coffee. My favourite one was the one where they synthesised beta-caroteine (proven to reduce cancer risk) as a supplement and found that its only effect was to increase the risk of cancer for smokers. That one was an actual clinical trial so its probably more reliable than this, but its still a fun anecdote.

    19. Re:Already debunked. by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      Chemically no, but since it (supposedly) tastes just like the real thing, I would be incredibly surprized if the association of that taste with caffeine's real effect didn't have a fairly powerful placebo effect. It may not rival the real thing but I am sure it beats nothing. Brains are quite complicated things, which sometimes have cause/effect patterns that appear to violate the laws of physics (note that I say "appear to" ) - they don't actually do so, but they are sufficiently complicated that we have to up our game.
      Think of "I must go to work or I'll get fired" - this seems to be a future event causing something in the present. In reality the causality is fine - but only if you expand your thinking to a broader range (the firing isn't causing the trip - the FEAR of firing is - and that's a present event).
      Same goes here. The drinking of coffee has a known effect and the brain is well aware of that effect on itself. Now if you simulate the conditions of the cause without the actual cause being present, you find that the brain may recreate the same effect anyway - it will simply use other materials to do so. ...and that whole long bloody tangent just to say that at least a significant portion of decaf drinkers probably do feel sharper and more awake after drinking their cup than non-coffee drinkers.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    20. Re:Already debunked. by FreedomOfThought · · Score: 1

      Homemade percolator? Its actually a simple concept I learned while camping as a child. Being stuck out of the house can bring creativity and ingenuity to many. The homeless often group around source of heat, be it the stereotypical bums around a burning drum or something less stereotypical. So, dig through some crash, find an old coffee can, easily use scrap objects to turn it into a percolator (a few holes and some paper clips to hold the lid in place). They could get used coffee grounds from a restaurant, coffee shop, or convenience store. If they want fresh, they could always scavenge for coins and buy a small amount of grounds from the local grocer for a buck to buck-fifty. Now the heating source? That's used to heat the water (obviously), and if hot enough could also be used to run a survival water filtration system using a few containers and possibly some hosing (survivorman -citation needed). Pour the water over the grounds in the percolator. And thus the city boy's guide to being homeless was issued.

    21. Re:Already debunked. by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      Which is why it is correlation instead of causation. It isn't the coffee that is reducing the accidents and injuries. It is the belief that they drank a stimulant. There just happens to be a very high correlation between people who actually drink coffee and people that believe they are drinking a stimulant.

      I don't deny placebo effects and I would say that we agree far more than disagree on this subject.

    22. Re:Already debunked. by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      The article didn't claim causation, just correlation. But I think it's a little more than you said. For those who DO drink a stimulant, the effect is real and can reduce accident risk. For those who just have the belief of drinking one, the placebo is strong enough to have a measurable effect, but quite likely not as effective as the real thing.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    23. Re:Already debunked. by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      The article was clear to specifically not make any guess as to whether or not there was causation. I made the guess that it is strictly correlation given that the effects (reduced accident and injury) pretty much would need to be due to either stimulant intake or placebo. If there is no difference in rate between the placebo and the stimulant, placebo all the way is the more likely answer.

    24. Re:Already debunked. by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      The article was clear yes, the discussion was pointing out a possible causation for one of the many things that correlated. Somebody discounted that causation on the basis that the effect seems to hold for decaf as well - I pointed out that placebo effect can cause the same causation to hold true even for those.
      Now if the placebo effect is weaker than the actual effect, then it would mean the correlation would be smaller over-all (reduces the average) but the correlation would still result, you would just find that if you were to single out the non-decaf drinkers the risk (in this particular case) would be reduced even further.
      However the study didn't do that, this is just speculation.

      Your suggestion however is silly. That caffeine is a stimulant has long been proven beyond any reasonable scientific doubt. We know what it does and exactly how it does it (caffeine binds to the same neural receptors that Ritalin does). You are effectively suggesting that real caffeine's effect is just a placebo and we know for a fact that this is not true because we've seen it's effect in action chemically.
      That said - the most likely real difference between a real and placebo caffeine effect would be duration. If you take either one in the morning it will help you wake up - but the placebo will wear off sooner. Either way you'd be fully awake by the time it wore off - so the effect may not actually have a measureable impact on this particular study (accident risk) while it certainly does have a measureable impact on other studies that have been done.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    25. Re:Already debunked. by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      We know that caffeine is a stimulant. We don't know that it would stimulate you in such a way as to reduce accidents or injury. And yes, we are just making wild speculations.

    26. Re:Already debunked. by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      I think it's practically axiomatic that *any* stimulant would at least somewhat reduce the risk of preventable accidents.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    27. Re:Already debunked. by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      Unless it increases them. Would you feel safer driving in rush hour traffic if every other driver was hopped up on meth?

    28. Re:Already debunked. by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      Well I don't think anybody has done *that* study... but based on the studies I do know about, and the well-known fact that driver-fatique is the number one cause of accidents on long roads... I would probably feel safer with every other driver on meth than with every other driver asleep.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    29. Re:Already debunked. by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      Most driving isn't done on long roads. Being less fatigued isn't helpful if that means you are energetically doing things other than paying attention to your driving. There are all sorts of activities that would make driving on a long boring road safer, while being more dangerous in other driving situations.

      The idea that stimulants would make driving on a long boring road (boring is the real culpret in those studies) less dangerous in no way implies "it's practically axiomatic that *any* stimulant would at least somewhat reduce the risk of preventable accidents." in general driving conditions.

    30. Re:Already debunked. by LunaticTippy · · Score: 1

      I've seen homeless people making coffee camp style, heating over a fire. A can of low grade coffee will last weeks for a few dollars. Shelters, churches, AA, etc. all offer free coffee. A lot of homeless people gather at fast food restaurants, spending hours drinking bottomless $1 cups. I don't think the poorest in our society have trouble getting coffee.

      --
      Man, you really need that seminar!
  3. Risk of death by SirGarlon · · Score: 5, Funny

    The risk of death must be lower than the risk of taxes, though, because I pay taxes every year and I haven't died even once.

    --
    [Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
    1. Re:Risk of death by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      and the risk of death around me increases if I don't get my coffee.

    2. Re:Risk of Death by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

      If you're asking that question, try switching from decaf.

  4. Headline by girlintraining · · Score: 4, Funny

    NIH Study Finds That Coffee Drinkers Have Lower Risk of Death.

    In other news, death is avoidable.

    --
    #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    1. Re:Headline by dbet · · Score: 2

      Death is avoidable. Some people are going to die today. Some are going to almost die, but successfully avoid it.

    2. Re:Headline by flibbidyfloo · · Score: 1

      Exactly my thought on reading this summary! I'm pretty sure everyone has the exact same risk of death. It's 100%.

  5. Extrapolating ... by PPH · · Score: 1, Funny

    ... that studies data, it looks as if I'm never going to die.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
    1. Re:Extrapolating ... by Pieroxy · · Score: 1

      ... that studies data, it looks as if I'm never going to die.

      No no, you have a lower chance of dying.

    2. Re:Extrapolating ... by Creepy · · Score: 1

      You mean a lower chance of dying before someone that does not drink coffee; you still have 100% chance of dying until immortality drugs are created, but even then you may still die in a traffic accident or from my brother-in-law's farts, which I'm fairly certain is the most toxic gas on the planet.

    3. Re:Extrapolating ... by rrohbeck · · Score: 1

      Hmm, I only drink around 12 cups per day so I'll have to improve that.

    4. Re:Extrapolating ... by dudpixel · · Score: 1

      but it asymptotes, so you'll keep getting really really close to dying.

      I suspect that means the time between coffees would get more critical - say your risk of death from other factors outweighed the lessening of the risk due to coffee...

      --
      This seemed like a reasonable sig at the time.
  6. My prof dranks coffee like water by cpu6502 · · Score: 1

    He stayed up late working on his experiments, then got up early to teach the 8 o'clock class.
    He was very jittery.
    I can't see how this is "good" for you and reduces risk of death.

    --
    My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    1. Re:My prof dranks coffee like water by Hatta · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I can't see how this is "good" for you and reduces risk of death.

      And yet, the data says it is. This is why we do science, because not everything is obvious, and sometimes tests come back with unexpected results. That's how we learn things.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    2. Re:My prof dranks coffee like water by cpu6502 · · Score: 1

      Except science is based upon MULTIPLE studies that can be replicated (with same results), not just one. I am questioning the validity of this ONE study and doubt other studies will sustain it.

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    3. Re:My prof dranks coffee like water by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      Flushing out your system with water does remove toxins in the blood. Caffeine is diuretic, so your kidneys are working harder. Though you have to be careful not to flush out too many electrolytes. I'm willing to bet that if tea was as diuretic, it would be just as healthy too if not more so.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    4. Re:My prof dranks coffee like water by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

      As someone who regularly tries to do science, I have to ask... "Results"? "Data"?

    5. Re:My prof dranks coffee like water by Aryden · · Score: 1

      Caffeine is a diuretic, thus, tea with caffeine would also work.

    6. Re:My prof dranks coffee like water by Caratted · · Score: 2

      At least this study has a sample size bigger than one professor.

    7. Re:My prof dranks coffee like water by Hentes · · Score: 1

      No, the data says that it reduces the risk of certain causes of death. They didn't measure whether it has an effect on expected lifetime. A shot in the head would make all those risks zero, but it's not something that will make you live longer.

    8. Re:My prof dranks coffee like water by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      Both coffee and tea (particularly green tea) contain antioxidants that have been shown in hundreds of studies to be beneficial. AFAIK tea is probably the superior beverage from a health standpoint.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    9. Re:My prof dranks coffee like water by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      The summary says that the effects are also there for decaf coffee. While I know that decaf coffee still has some caffeine, it is in small enough less that they would have seen some difference between the decaf and the caffeinated. Thus, this study would not point to caffeine as the beneficial active ingredient.

      Also, it states that coffee drinkers showed a lower rate of death due to accident and injury. This SCREAMS correlation.

    10. Re:My prof dranks coffee like water by BlueParrot · · Score: 1

      Sometimes things that are harmful in one way can help in other ways.

      Taking coffee as an example, it is known that heavy coffee consumptions
      stunts breast development in women. As it happens, the same effect also
      reduces her risk of developing breast cancer.

    11. Re:My prof dranks coffee like water by Aryden · · Score: 1

      Yeah... it could be something to do with heightened awareness from the caffeine or something to that tune. I have no idea, but I wonder if they take into account the people that drank regular coffee for long periods of time and have only been on decaf for a short period.

    12. Re:My prof dranks coffee like water by MagusSlurpy · · Score: 1

      No, what the data says is that, as a coffee drinker, he is less likely to die than the majority of his peers, not that coffee specifically is good for his health. My guess is that coffee drinkers, overall, have better health because they're drinking coffee as opposed to soda, hence the better diabetic, respiratory, immune, and cardiovascular health (note that there was no difference in cancer rates). Doesn't really explain the difference in accidental death/injury, but maybe the full article reveals that the ratio of caffeinated to decaf coffee drinkers is higher than the ratio of caffeinated soda to non-caffeinated soda drinkers (and milk/juice/water drinkers, but they're such a small subset of the American population), implying that the ratio of stimulant intake is responsible for additional environmental awareness.

      --
      My sister opened a computer store in Hawaii. She sells C shells by the seashore.
  7. Meanwhile, on the West Coast.... by Nidi62 · · Score: 5, Funny

    A statement is released saying that coffee is known in the State of California to cause cancer

    --
    The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    1. Re:Meanwhile, on the West Coast.... by bughunter · · Score: 1

      Maybe it's not the coffee, but the California water used to brew the coffee?

      --
      I can see the fnords!
    2. Re:Meanwhile, on the West Coast.... by Bucc5062 · · Score: 1

      I'm confused...In the State of California, coffee is know to cause cancer or when in the State of California, coffee causes cancer. That is some pretty selective cancer and one state I think I'll avoid in the future....Whew!

      --
      Life is a great ride, the vehicle doesn't matter
    3. Re:Meanwhile, on the West Coast.... by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

      I work at a lab in California. Another lab moved in down the hall. They brought their coffee maker with them, and it appeared in the break room. With a certification from Princeton that it was Carcinogen free.

      A week later, it was no longer there, and they put up a note saying "Whoever stole our coffee maker, please give it back."

      My guess is that it was a lawyer for the university, on nightly patrol for something that wasn't properly labeled as being likely to give you cancer. He saw the sign, muttered "Oh no no no, this will never do! HUGE LIABILITY!", took Mr. Cancer-free coffee maker out to a field, and put a bullet in it's carafe.

  8. Fiber by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    It's just all the extra fiber they get from the coffee.

  9. Statistics, statistics... by bobgap · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is probably because people with bad hearts, etc., do not drink coffee, hence only people who are healthier drink coffee when they are old. Isn't it amazing that they would have a reduced death rate. Imagine what the relative death rate would be for old people who skydive, compared to those who don't?

    1. Re:Statistics, statistics... by clarkn0va · · Score: 1

      I'd like to see the life expectancy of those who receive chemotherapy compared to those who don't. Until then, I'm going to stay away from it, just to be safe.

      --
      I am literally 3000 tokens away from the chaotic crossbow --Stephen
    2. Re:Statistics, statistics... by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 1

      And I'm sure the researchers who conducted the study, the agencies that paid for the study, and the editors and peer reviewers who read the paper before publication never ever once thought of controlling for risk factors. You'd better contact the NEJM and NCI immediately and tell them what idiots they are to have missed something so obvious. I'm sure they'll be blown away by your critique.

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    3. Re:Statistics, statistics... by timeOday · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Sounds kind of sensible, except...

      These results from a large study of older adults were observed after adjustment for the effects of other risk factors on mortality, such as smoking and alcohol consumption.

      So your explanation would be that people growing old and sick tend to give up coffee, but keep smoking and drinking alcohol? I guess it's possible, but I it's not obvious to me why that would be.

    4. Re:Statistics, statistics... by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      The vast number of studies that have huge holes you could drive a truck through would be why you see people pointing out the holes so often. It's a study. It was presented for discussion. The most notible thing about it is that it doesn't try to draw a conclusion. Every day on every subject we work from "the best of our knowledge". Studies like this can add to that. Part of successfully adding "best knowledge" is looking close enough to see if information should be added as knowledge.

      Which would you rather people do? Pick studies apart to find the flaws, or accept studies at face value? I know which I would prefer.

    5. Re:Statistics, statistics... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      What they found is a correlation between drinking coffee and lower mortality. The correlation appears to be unrelated to other factors they studied such as smoking or alcohol. So I interpret that to mean either 1) Coffee lowers mortality or 2) There's another factor related to both drinking coffee and mortality that they missed, such as general health or activity level...

    6. Re:Statistics, statistics... by volmtech · · Score: 2

      Anecdotal, one of my grandmothers lived to be 99, she drank three pots of coffee a day. The other one smoked and drank alcohol, she died at 57. She was shot a killed by some guy she picked up at a bar so that might skew the results somewhat.

  10. Risk of Death by djbckr · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm not sure I understand. My risk of dying decreases with coffee? Is this the new fountain of youth?

  11. Re:Risk of death (Not) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    An NIH article should be more accurate. We all have the same risk of death, 100%. It's the when that coffee affects.

  12. Swallowing saliva by stevegee58 · · Score: 1

    This just in: Swallowing small amounts of saliva over the course of decades eventually causes death.

    1. Re:Swallowing saliva by idontgno · · Score: 1

      Great. Some of the mouth-breathing trolls around here drool so hard they're gonna live forever, with or without coffee.

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
    2. Re:Swallowing saliva by hazah · · Score: 1

      Causes??

    3. Re:Swallowing saliva by hazah · · Score: 1

      Ah... lol.

  13. starbucks by P-niiice · · Score: 1

    they should outfit Starbucks with those neck injector stations like in the Chronicles of riddick games. save time.

  14. Re:Princess Bride by dkleinsc · · Score: 1

    Well, whatever it was, the key ingredient was actually the chocolate coating.

    --
    I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
  15. Control for sugar by XanC · · Score: 5, Interesting

    My guess is that people who don't drink coffee more likely DO drink sugary sodas.

    1. Re:Control for sugar by I_am_Jack · · Score: 2

      I say move the study to Utah and use Mormons as a control group.

  16. Typical Buzzkill Bias by bughunter · · Score: 1

    Researchers caution, however, that they can't be sure whether these associations mean that drinking coffee actually makes people live longer.

    You can be certain, however, if the correlation had been between coffee drinking and decreased life expectancy, then there would have been no such disclaimer discouraging the inference of any causation.

    --
    I can see the fnords!
    1. Re:Typical Buzzkill Bias by T+Murphy · · Score: 1

      I don't feel that's a fair assumption, but even if it were we would be certain coffee-related industries would be making that disclaimer loud and clear (while if this study didn't include the "correlation not causation" disclaimer on coffee's benefits, the coffee industry wouldn't be the one to point it out).

  17. Re:is it just me or by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    it should be noted that coffee also shares about 11 of the same chemicals as rat poison

    Sweet Zombie Jesus! Next you'll be telling me that it contains dihydrogen monoxide!

  18. Quite right by Lord+Grey · · Score: 2

    Of course those of us who drink massive quantities of coffee won't die from heart disease, respiratory disease, stroke, injuries and accidents, diabetes, or infections. We'll die by lunging at the coffee machine early one morning, slipping on the wet floor, then failing to catch our jittery selves because we're busy protecting the ceramic mug our child gave us fifteen years ago.

    --
    // Beyond Here Lie Dragons
    1. Re:Quite right by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      The report shows a lower death rate due to injury and accident as well. Unless your implying that the wet floor causing you to slip and die wasn't an accident. The report didn't say anything about homicide after all....

  19. I think by now we should deduce by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    I think by now it should be obvious .. California causes cancer.

    1. Re:I think by now we should deduce by vmlemon · · Score: 2

      California IS cancer?

    2. Re:I think by now we should deduce by FishOuttaWater · · Score: 1

      Now now, correlation does not imply causality. Personally, I rather think it's all this sunshine. I'm staying indoors, just in case.

  20. Re:WTF?? by FreeFire · · Score: 3, Funny

    It's evident to me that Grandma didn't drink enough coffee.

  21. Really??? by Larry_Dillon · · Score: 2

    This sounds like it could be correlated to other lifestyle choices. e.g., People who have a routine or work in an office and drink coffee are safer than other occupations.

    It's really hard to control for all of the other possible factors.

    --
    Competition Good, Monopoly Bad.
    1. Re:Really??? by buglista · · Score: 1
      Didja not even read the fine summary? I can see your accident thing, kind of. But it's a half dozen risk factors, only cancer doesn't change.

      You would expect diabetes to be higher in sedentary occupations, because Bob knows that a lot of office workers are fat bastards.

      "Coffee drinkers were less likely to die from heart disease, respiratory disease, stroke, injuries and accidents, diabetes, and infections, although the association was not seen for cancer. "

  22. Sleeper by BetaDays · · Score: 1

    his morning for breakfast he requested something called "wheat germ, organic honey and tiger's milk." Dr. Aragon: [chuckling] Oh, yes. Those are the charmed substances that some years ago were thought to contain life-preserving properties. Dr. Melik: You mean there was no deep fat? No steak or cream pies or... hot fudge? Dr. Aragon: Those were thought to be unhealthy... precisely the opposite of what we now know to be true. Dr. Melik: Incredible.

    --
    Paul: Father... father, the sleeper has awakened! - Dune
  23. Re:100% by jd2112 · · Score: 4, Funny

    There was an immortal coffee drinker in the study. There may have been an immortal non-coffee drinker in the study but the coffee drinker chopped his head off.

    --
    Any insufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.
  24. Did they weight it with known Asthma Risk? by medv4380 · · Score: 1

    It's already well known that Coffee is good for treating Asthma in a pinch, and I'd say if it can save you from an Asthma Attack then it can surely reduce the risk of respiratory death from that asthma attack. If they remove it's affects on Asthmatics from the study will the benefit remain.

  25. PR department gone wild by pesho · · Score: 1

    The NCI Office of Media Relations apparently were a little clueless on the facts they were reporting. The study actually finds that relatively elderly people (50 to 71) who said that they drink coffee (the question was asked once, actual coffee intake was never confirmed) were less like to die within a period of about 12 years. The study is garbage. Luckily the PR department's interpretation made it sound comical. Who says that PR departments are useless?

  26. Re:Drink coffee? by jd2112 · · Score: 1

    Water! That stuff is full of dihydrogen monoxide. It can't be good for you.

    --
    Any insufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.
  27. Re:is it just me or by FSWKU · · Score: 1

    it should be noted that coffee also shares about 11 of the same chemicals as rat poison...[citation needed]

    I guess the shared chemicals aren't what makes rat poison harmful then, given the amount of people who drink coffee like their lives depend on it. Also, FTFY.

    --
    "So after all this, you make my case for me. To end this stalemate, you must die..."
  28. Re:Drink coffee? by Lumpy · · Score: 1

    Water is ok, same for that leg thing.

    The problem is that it has been proven that people who breathe oxygen in any concentration are guaranteed to die.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  29. Re:is it just me or by jd2112 · · Score: 1

    My guess is someone just bought a bunch of Starbucks shares.

    --
    Any insufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.
  30. Re:I kinda thought most pedants... by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

    I read GP as a joker rather than a pedant.

  31. Maybe Coffee drinkers take less risk by na1led · · Score: 1

    I can imagine that people who spend time drinking 3-4 cups of coffee a day, probably don't get outside much. If you're indoors most of the time, drinking coffee, than chances of you dieing from an accident, or getting shot is probably low. I mean, there could be many other factors involved that could explain why coffee drinkers live longer, not just because they drink coffee.

    --
    -- By all means let's be open-minded, but not so open-minded that our brains drop out.
    1. Re:Maybe Coffee drinkers take less risk by Creepy · · Score: 2

      The study was 400,000 people - that is a pretty massive sample size, and covers any amount of coffee and even decaf coffee, which contains very little caffeine. My family follows this exactly - if I use my grandparents as an example, my dad's side drank no coffee and both died of natural causes at 83 and 87. My mom's side both drank coffee (grandma decaf) and died at 94 (complications from a broken hip) and 95 (natural causes). Both of my grandpas were farmers, and had relatively sedentary housewife wives, and my grandpa on my mom's side farmed a 4x larger farm. My oldest aunt on my dad's side (since dad was a whoops when grandma thought she was in menopause - my aunt already had kids by the time my dad was born) drinks coffee and is 94.

  32. I nominate this for sloppiest criticism ever by blueg3 · · Score: 1

    I've been on slashdot for over a while now and this has got to be the blatantly sloppiest headline I have ever seen. If there has ever been a headline that has made the case for the need for a professional editor this has got to be it.

    Everyone has a 100% of death, coffee drinker or not. For (insert diety's sake) would slashdot please hire at least one professional editor? How about an intern? I understand unemployment among college students is too high right now and interns are cheap!

    I'm sure many of a college student would jump at a change to edit for a site like slashdot for an intern's salary. Seriously, an intern could do a better job, I've got them at my work place and they a little motivation goes a long way....

    While there are terms more clear than "risk of death", I see two major problems with your criticism:
    1. Many people have already made the exact same comment, but more clearly and succinctly.
    2. The evidence suggests that Slashdot editors, while perhaps having some faults, should not take criticism from you on grammar and language clarity seriously.

    1. Re:I nominate this for sloppiest criticism ever by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      2. The evidence suggests that Slashdot editors, while perhaps having some faults, should not take criticism from you on grammar and language clarity seriously.

      Not a valid complaint. Just because someone isn't good at a task doesn't mean that they cannot recognize someone else's incompetence. My 8 year old son can point out that the guy running the stop sign is a bad driver. That neither indicates that he is a better driver, nor does it make him wrong. Most tasks take far less skill to identify whether it is done well or not than they do to actually perform well.

  33. Including liquid candy bars? by wcrowe · · Score: 3, Funny

    I assume they mean people who actually drink real coffee, and not those that drink mocha-frappa-whatever liquid candy bars.

    --
    Proverbs 21:19
    1. Re:Including liquid candy bars? by ChunderDownunder · · Score: 1

      Yeah, they should do a study on the correlation between drinking hot beverages and obesity.

      For many people that's 8+ teaspoons of sugar a day. (Including my late father, a tea drinker switched to substitutes later in life)

      If the coffee tastes so bad people need to sweeten it, they're doing it wrong.

  34. Fails to take into account by Sir+Realist · · Score: 1

    The study fails to take into account the number of suicides caused by not being able to drink coffee.

  35. HAHAHA by rebelwarlock · · Score: 3, Funny

    Oh man! It was so funny when those thirty people posted comments about immortality! We need that joke some more!

  36. Re:Drink coffee? by Aryden · · Score: 3, Informative

    There was an interesting article a year or so ago that showed a correlation between coffee drinking and bowl movements vs water drinking. I will try to find it for citation, but the gist of it was: Due to the diuretic properties of coffee, the coffee drinkers had more regular bowl movements than those who drank water which meant that toxins spent less time in the intestines thus creating a lower likelihood of some intestinal diseases.

  37. Re:Drink coffee? by Aryden · · Score: 1

    *bowel..... spellcheck sucks.

  38. Re:100% by bigrockpeltr · · Score: 1

    after reading this the theme song from highlander started playing in my head. maybe a coffee drinker is near.

    --
    $ unzip, strip, touch, finger, grep, mount, fsck, more, yes,fsck,fsck,fsck,umount, sleep
  39. Have Lower Risk of Death? by mapkinase · · Score: 1

    Lower than usual 100%

    --
    I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
  40. Re:I nominate this for sloppiest slashdot story ev by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

    Everyone has a 100% of death

    Yes, now re-read the headline making sure to remember that everyone knows what you just said, and instead of being a twat who sees something that interpreted one way doesn't make sense and then jumps into the comments to complain, re-interpret in a way that does make sense (i.e. as "premature death from the factors listed in the summary") like every human does automatically without even having to consciously think about it who isn't a Slashdot Pedantard.

    Thank you and have a nice day.

    --

    The enemies of Democracy are
  41. Key components by jones_supa · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The study made me think whether some other drink would work as well (or better)? Fruit juice, cocoa, tea, even plain water? What's the secret component(s)?

    As the text also notes:

    "The mechanism by which coffee protects against risk of death — if indeed the finding reflects a causal relationship — is not clear, because coffee contains more than 1,000 compounds that might potentially affect health," said Freedman.

    Coffee is known to be rich in antioxidants, so that could be one sporadic blind guess. But yeah.

  42. Their findings can also be stated as... by hsthompson69 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    People who live longer have a higher risk of being coffee drinkers.

    Correlation is not causality.

  43. I'm okay with this study... by hahn · · Score: 1

    There's probably some kind of sampling bias that they didn't think of, but anything that let's me rationalize my habit is valid to me. Hmm, I wonder if the researchers are coffee drinkers...

    --
    "The only normal people are the ones you don't know very well."
  44. Who submitted this? by MiniMike · · Score: 2

    parallel_prankster writes

    a.k.a Juan Valdez.

  45. Don't drink coffee by MM-tng · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I stopped drinking coffee a few years ago and feel a lot better. It upsets my stomach. It made me a lot more tense. I tended to sleep badly. Waking up at 5am. Headaches during the day. Generally felt misserable. It took about 6 months to kick off. Coffee is an adiction. And a pretty bad one. I can not understand these studies, probably funded by the coffee makers. Because generally if you drink coffee you will feel awful.

    1. Re:Don't drink coffee by ItMustBeEsoteric · · Score: 1
      I drink coffee. I feel fantastic. I've ran three marathons in the past year and about 3,000 miles total. I sleep like a baby. I practice zazen and am the most laid-back person I know. I haven't had a headache in over a year and a half.

      Generally if you (singular) drink coffee, you (singular) will feel awful. The same cannot be applied broadly to everyone. Neither can my experience. This is why broad studies are always needed.

  46. coffee == melange by badpool · · Score: 1

    He who controls the beans...

  47. You do what you gotta do by DaveAtFraud · · Score: 1

    Coffee got me through my undergraduate years. I worked nights (11:00 pm to 7:00 am), went to classes until early afternoon and then slept until time to get up for work. Probably drank 10 to 15 cups of coffee a day. The worst was the day I noticed my desk shaking and it was my own left arm twitching.

    Still drink abot six cups a day of the "real stuff" (not decaf). Love the taste of coffee. I'll even drink decaf in the evening just so I can enjoy the taste. I got "the habit" long before college from my parents. Dad passed away at 90 but mom is still going at 97 (and still drinking coffee).

    Cheers,
    Dave

    --
    They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither safety nor liberty.
    Ben
  48. So be a coffee achiever by Ralph+Spoilsport · · Score: 1

    And SHAKE your way to success!!!!

    --
    Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
  49. nonsense by codepunk · · Score: 1

    Nonsense, the risk of death is always 100% no matter the circumstances.

    --


    Got Code?
  50. Do you want to live forever? by Intrepid+imaginaut · · Score: 1

    Not sure, ask me when I'm 300.

  51. Coffee talk? by schlachter · · Score: 1

    Ever heard the expression "coffee talk"
    There's a known correlation b/w life span and social interaction.
    Perhaps this is reflecting this?

    --
    My God can beat up your God. Just kidding...don't take offense. I know there's no God.
  52. It feels good.... by InspectorGadget1964 · · Score: 1

    I'll send a link to this article to everyone that has complained to me for the last ten years because of my high caffeine consumption! I'll have to put some copies on a few graves though ;-)

  53. Coffee Is Not Enough by assertation · · Score: 1

    Coffee does hurt people's stomachs, contribute to osteoporosis, anxiety and sleep problems.

    Americans drink a huge amount of coffee, yet we still have a huge amount of caridovascular disease, cancer, diabetes, obesity etc killing us.

    If coffee is an aide to health it is not enough to override all of the bad habits we have.

    People just like hearing good news about their bad habits.

    I'm not saying quit coffee.

    A cup ( you know 8 fluid ounces ) a day without cream and sugar probably wouldn't hurt anybody, but how many coffee drinkers drink that little?

  54. Re:Risk of death (Not) by thej1nx · · Score: 1
  55. A single factor does not a guideline make.. by Knutsi · · Score: 1

    I guess the most interesting point in this article is what is written towards the top: "we believe these results do provide some reassurance that coffee drinking does not adversely affect health.". If it was poison, this study would show. I remember learning about cafestol at some point (by a researcher), and how recommendations should be given to make sure to only drink filtered coffee. It's, according to our teacher, the most "cholesterologenic" substance know. So I guess a single factor does not a guideline make.

    On a funny personal note, this news came exactly on the day I decided to cut down my own consumption :p

  56. As Cliff Clavin would explain ... by Rambo+Tribble · · Score: 1

    ... the high coffee consumption crowd has been weeded out by the time they reached the threshold age of this study. Survival of the fittest, one cup at a time.

  57. Re:100% Dead by s0nicfreak · · Score: 1

    So then how can you prove they all will?

  58. Re:Risk of death (Not) by mcgrew · · Score: 1

    It's a pity this guy has no account, because I was going to post the exact same thing. Screw it, my karma's excellent. AC said "We all have the same risk of death, 100%. It's the when that coffee affects".

    Ok, so as not to waste a bunch of people's time reading a redundant comment, when I saw this story my thought was "oh shit!" When my grandmother was 95 she said "I don't know why anybody wants to live to be a hundred, it ain't no fun bein' old." I can't quit drinking coffee because my brain doesn't work as well without it.

    Maybe I should start smoking...

  59. Opinions of people who have not actually by ToddInSF · · Score: 1

    Read the ENTIRE study. Opinions of abstracts, and opinions on opinions of people who have only read the abstracts, are absolutely, indisputably, corrupted.

    Most of what the media report when it comes to any study is utter, unmitigated, horse shit.

    I have zero respect for people that are so gullible. You're not sing your opinions on "science", you are not "scientific". You aren't even particularly intelligent.

    You're just a bunch of parrots, a bunch of tools. You don't even know you've been mislead, don't care that you've been manipulated, and play your little petty roles in agendas you have not even bothered to consider.

    Sickening. Most of these types of declarations to the media by the NIH are bullshit - but YOU don't know it because YOU have "faith" in "science". Without even bothering to be critical or informed.

  60. depression link? by GregNorc · · Score: 1

    Maybe this is because people who drink coffee are less depressed?

    One of the symptoms of severe depression is tireness. People with severe depression often sleep all day. People who are not severely depressed want to get up and out of bed, into the world, and drink coffee to help them do so.

    Thus, mortality numbers are skewed by the suicides of the depressed (and thus more likely to fall ill, abuse drugs/alcohol, and/or commit suicide.)