Slashdot Mirror


Coffee Consumption Strongly Linked To Preventing Alzheimer's

An anonymous reader writes "Those cups of coffee that you drink every day to keep alert appear to have an extra perk — especially if you're an older adult. A recent study monitoring the memory and thinking processes of people older than 65 found that all those with higher blood caffeine levels avoided the onset of Alzheimer's disease in the two-to-four years of study follow-up. Moreover, coffee appeared to be the major or only source of caffeine for these individuals."

205 comments

  1. So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by Jerry · · Score: 2, Interesting

    will work just as well?

    If so, why am I so forgetful? I drink two or three cups of tea a day.

    --

    Running with Linux for over 20 years!

    1. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Alzeheimer's disease is very different than being forgetful.

      I would like to see studies on whether eating a lot of dark chocolate has the same effect. mmmmmm....

    2. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 3, Informative

      If I remember correctly, tea will only achieve half the concentration of caffeine that coffee will. Of course, tea has many other benefits, such as protection against cancer, and neuroprotective effects (even some protection against lead poisoning). You should, however, keep in mind that tea can be dangerous in too large a quantity; tea plants absorb quite a bit of Florine from the soil, and lower-quality, older tea leaves can have very high concentrations (these are what you get with Lipton etc.). Japanese teas tend to have less Florine because of the low Florine levels in Japanese soil, and white tea has lower concentrations because the leaves are so young.

      --
      Palm trees and 8
    3. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by bughunter · · Score: 1

      Maybe it's simply because you have a 4-digit UID.

      --
      I can see the fnords!
    4. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by NEDHead · · Score: 5, Funny

      And the Japanese tea has this cool glow-in-the-dark ambiance...

    5. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by m00sh · · Score: 5, Interesting
      No, tea won't work.

      Most recently, they reported that caffeine interacts with a yet unidentified component of coffee to boost blood levels of a critical growth factor that seems to fight off the Alzheimer’s disease process.

    6. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only few teas contain coffein. AFAIK only green and black teas.

    7. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by gestalt_n_pepper · · Score: 2

      I imagine tea plants absorb quite a bit of fluorine too.

      Unless they loose it somewhere. :)

      Yes, I am a spelling Nazi. Get over it.

      --
      Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
    8. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You know, it is not all that hard to test for the presence of radioisotopes. Take a Geiger counter to your local tea shop and scan the Japanese teas if you are really concerned...

      --
      Palm trees and 8
    9. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      If it is caffeine, then I guess you could conceivably get the same benefit from chocolate. However, given the amount of caffeine in even the darkest chocolate, you would need to eat so much of it that you would likely die from diabetes long before you had to worry about Alzeheimers. TFA talks about people who drink 3 cups of coffee per day, which would equate to around 300-350mg of caffeine, which would be around a 1/3 to 1/2 a pound of very dark chocolate.

    10. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 1

      I had thought so, but my spellchecker actually insisted that "Florine" was the right spelling. I guess that's what I get for relying on a spellchecker :(

      --
      Palm trees and 8
    11. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by ILongForDarkness · · Score: 1, Funny

      The article claims 3 cups of coffee a day. Tea has about half the caffeine so you'd be looking at 6 cups a day. No wonder the brits are always taking the piss.

    12. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by cpu6502 · · Score: 1

      The article says other sources of caffeine had no effect. So it's probably not the caffeine but some other coffee component. (Or maybe just the hot water.) Personally I'd rather eat dark chocolate than drink coffee (ick).

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    13. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by Norwell+Bob · · Score: 4, Funny

      Then, as a spelling Nazi, I assume you didn't actually mean "Unless they lose it somewhere.

    14. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by PPH · · Score: 1

      He can't remember any more than four.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    15. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by Jahf · · Score: 1

      That depends entirely on the tea. Some types of tea (not just black tea, either, some green teas have more caffeine than black) brewed to full strength are -equivalent- to a standard cup of coffee.

      You are correct in that most teas are around 1/2 at the strength that is preferred by the U.S. palate. And some green teas are noticeably smaller than that.

      --
      It is more productive to voice thoughtful opinions (reply) than to judge (moderate) others.
    16. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by cpu6502 · · Score: 1

      >>>No wonder the brits are always taking the piss.

      They're drunk???

      --
      My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
    17. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      However, given the amount of caffeine in even the darkest chocolate, you would need to eat so much of it that you would likely die from diabetes long before you had to worry about Alzeheimers. TFA talks about people who drink 3 cups of coffee per day, which would equate to around 300-350mg of caffeine, which would be around a 1/3 to 1/2 a pound of very dark chocolate.

      You'd probably die of Theobromine poisoning far before the onset of diabetes. The darker the chocolate, the more cacao, the less sugar.

    18. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Honestly, as long as the point comes across you shouldn't really care. There are some people that you have to guess a bit to get the point of their statement. Or worse people that use ambiguous language so it only makes sense to themselves. Notably a fair bit of people here probably don't have English as a first language and yet there are very few badly written comments.

    19. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by Billy+the+Mountain · · Score: 2

      Yeah, and while you are at it, scan the brazil nuts and bananas. (two foods with the most radioactivity where the radioactivity occurs naturally)

      --
      That was the turning point of my life--I went from negative zero to positive zero.
    20. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by migloo · · Score: 0

      You might get diabetes from american fattened sweetened "chocolate", not from swiss chocolate.

    21. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by TheLink · · Score: 2

      The article says other sources of caffeine had no effect.

      I bet if people drink lots of Coca Cola everyday the odds of them getting Alzheimer's go way down. The higher the dose the stronger the effect.

      Even reduces the odds of dying of cancer.

      --
    22. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by Dahamma · · Score: 1

      Teas made with *tea plant* leaves have caffeine, and "herbal" teas without it don't. Duh.

    23. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by Baloroth · · Score: 1

      "Florine", capitalized, is a given name. Fluorine, not normally capitalized except where appropriate, is the element (my spellchecker also suggests "Florine" if I spell it "flourine" instead of "fluorine", which I'm guessing is what happened.)

      --
      "None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
    24. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      The article says other sources of caffeine had no effect. So it's probably not the caffeine but some other coffee component. (Or maybe just the hot water.) Personally I'd rather eat dark chocolate than drink coffee (ick).

      Yes, this is perhaps the important quote from the article:

      Since 2006, USF’s Dr. Cao and Dr. Arendash have published several studies investigating the effects of caffeine/coffee administered to Alzheimer’s mice. Most recently, they reported that caffeine interacts with a yet unidentified component of coffee to boost blood levels of a critical growth factor that seems to fight off the Alzheimer’s disease process.

      The interaction between the caffeine and the coffee component appears to produce something that is highly beneficial. Maybe it can be identified and synthesized and patented and sold in pill form. On the other hand, coffee is so cheap that it could be the generic version for those of us who don't mind drinking it.

      Load up on SBUX stock! Doctors will be prescribing three cups a day and insurance will be paying for it!

    25. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 3, Funny

      On the plus side, if the caffeine is the causative agent, supplementation would be pretty easy.

      The one positive side effect of the (otherwise dreadful) fad for leaching perfectly good caffeine out of wholesome caffeinated goods is that it creates a supply of the relatively pure stuff that can be added to things deprived by nature of their rightful share...

    26. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by sdguero · · Score: 1

      FTFA...

      Caffeinated coffee appeared to be the main, if not exclusive, source of caffeine in the memory-protected MCI patients, because they had the same profile of blood immune markers as Alzheimer’s mice given caffeinated coffee. Alzheimer’s mice given caffeine alone or decaffeinated coffee had a very different immune marker profile.

      It sounds like there is something unique to coffee in this case. I.e. chocolate or tea won't cut it.

    27. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by treeves · · Score: 3, Funny

      Well, as a *spelling* Nazi, his expertise is limited to detecting misspelled words, not misused words. He apparently doesn't have the combined spelling/grammar or spelling/usage Nazi certification.

      --
      ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
    28. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by DaveAtFraud · · Score: 4, Interesting

      From TFA:

      Since 2006, USF’s Dr. Cao and Dr. Arendash have published several studies investigating the effects of caffeine/coffee administered to Alzheimer’s mice. Most recently, they reported that caffeine interacts with a yet unidentified component of coffee to boost blood levels of a critical growth factor that seems to fight off the Alzheimer’s disease process.

      Cheers,
      Dave

      --
      They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither safety nor liberty.
      Ben
    29. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      maybe it has less sugar, but it still has sugar. and saturated fat. "good sugar" can still give you the sugars.

    30. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tea and coffee have different isomers of caffeine - in other words, they are different chemicals. You can't interchange them at the same measure, and they have different half-lives.

    31. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's Fluorine not Florine. Too much bad tea for you?

    32. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by gestalt_n_pepper · · Score: 2

      The :) after the sentence was supposed to alert you to the fact that the misspelling was an intentional joke. Sorry. I'll try and be less subtle next time.

      --
      Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
    33. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The one positive side effect of the (otherwise dreadful) fad for leaching perfectly good caffeine out of wholesome caffeinated goods is that it creates a supply of the relatively pure stuff that can be added to things deprived by nature of their rightful share...

      And now I have my new .sig for the next decade. Very eloquent sir.

    34. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by Stan92057 · · Score: 1

      His spelling of loose is correct, he didnt however say he was an english nazi :)

      --
      Jack of all trades,master of none
    35. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by Intrepid+imaginaut · · Score: 1

      Shame about the diabetes, tooth loss and obesity though.

      Ease back on the sugar, guys.

    36. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is old news, and there have been other studies that show it's likely not the caffeine levels that provide the protective benefit but something else from the coffee altogether that hasn't been identified. The free radicals in your green tea may have some effect but it's quite a bit less than whatever is in coffee. Nicotine has a similar correlation with decreased incidence of alzheimers as well, and they are actually additive to some extent. Notice it's a correlation, not a causation, as well...

    37. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      No, this was in the news a few weeks ago. It isn't the caffiene, it's some other compound or mixture of compounds in coffee. Decaf works as well as caffeinated, and Coke, Pepsi, Red Bull and tea don't have the effect at all.

    38. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More of a practical concern than fluorosis is the oxalate present in teas and chocolate, which binds to +2 ions like calcium and iron. If not bound at ingestion, oxalate can lower blood concentrations of necessary nutrients by precipitating them out, which can lead to goiter, kidney stones, and that weird feeling like your teeth are wearing sweaters. It seems there's good logic to taking your tea with milk, afterall.

    39. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by arth1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Honestly, as long as the point comes across you shouldn't really care.

      But it didn't come across. I was about to google "florine" to find out what I had missed when I saw the GN's post. Because I'm not a phonetic reader, it never occurred to me that florine might be fluorine.

      The devil is in the details. Being imprecise not only sends someone on a wild goose chase, but also means no distinction between fluorine, fluorene and fluoride, all of which are quite different things. And it's not fluorine that's thought to be a problem, but fluoride compounds, specifically hydrogen fluoride. It's as wrong as saying oxygen when you mean ozone.

    40. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      tea can be dangerous in too large a quantity

      There is little that isn't dangerous in too large a quantity. Even oxygen and water.

    41. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by canajin56 · · Score: 1

      Actually, it claims 3 cups of coffee within a few hours of the blood test for caffeine levels. Presumably the total daily intake would be much higher than 3 cups of coffee.

      --
      ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI
    42. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by Onymous+Coward · · Score: 0

      I bet if people drink lots of Coca Cola everyday the odds of them getting Alzheimer's go way down.

      ...

      Say what?

      Even "moderate" consumption of sodas results in elevated triglyceride levels. Having a daily 12 oz. Coke significantly increases your bad cholesterol levels, your inflammation levels, your propensity for obesity, your risk of atherosclerosis and heart disease.

      Elevated triglyceride levels have been shown to precede Alzheimer's factors (amyloid deposition).

      A Coke-heavy diet stupefies and kills .

    43. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by rrohbeck · · Score: 1

      I don't know. Blood lipids have an effect on Alzheimer's (how much isn't quite sure) and taking in lots of sugar increases blood lipids quite a bit becasue the liver converts fructose to saturated fatty acids.

    44. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by Onymous+Coward · · Score: 1

      The common mispronunciation of the element is FLOHR-een, sounding like the English "floor" or "core". It's supposedly an "acceptable" pronunciation, but it's one of those poor-discernment mistakes that causes a devolution of the language.

      To distinguish it from other similarly-sounding spellings I recommend pronouncing it like "lure".

    45. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by icebrain · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What's that whooshing sound?

      (Ok, I'll explain it... drinking lots of Coke every day does increase cholesterol and lead to obesity and such... and increasing your chances of dying early before Alzheimer's kicks in. So yes, the odds of dying from Alzheimer's go down, because you're much more likely do die earlier from something else.)

      --
      The meek may inherit the earth, but the strong shall take the stars.
    46. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by Onymous+Coward · · Score: 1

      Whilst many things about American culture are lamentable, I would not say that fattened and sweetened chocolate is "American", nor that "Swiss" means "dark". Swiss dark, Swiss milk, and Swiss white are all kinds of Swiss chocolates, and many American companies make dark chocolates and many Americans, myself included, eat them.

    47. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by Quirkz · · Score: 1

      Ugh. I like my coffee, but I'm usually happy with two servings a day. Even assuming they meant literal 8-ounce "cups" and not "mugs full of it" I probably don't hit more than 3 cups total, four on a bad day. A pace closer to 9 cups per day would leave me feeling pretty awful.

    48. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure he was being sarcastic with his "loose" spelling.

    49. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by Onymous+Coward · · Score: 1

      Indeed, Swiss chocolatier Daniel Peter was the fellow who invented milk chocolate.

    50. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by Onymous+Coward · · Score: 1

      Ah. I can usually spot sarcasm. It just gets harder the more I have to interact with stupid people.

      And here I thought my cynicism had been letting up.

    51. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by operagost · · Score: 1

      Even "moderate" consumption of sodas results in elevated triglyceride levels

      "Elevated" could be "by 1".

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    52. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by eth1 · · Score: 1

      And the Japanese tea has this cool glow-in-the-dark ambiance...

      It wakes you up and keeps you glowing all day!

    53. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now you can add doses of radiation in Japanese teas.

    54. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by similar_name · · Score: 1

      Perhaps it's the cigarettes that go so good with coffee :)-~

    55. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by Onymous+Coward · · Score: 1

      And "by 1" could be referring to a unit that specifies a large, critical quantity. But I think you got the idea?

      Each can of soda you drink increases your risk for cardiovascular disease by 20%. Two daily cans results in doubling your risk for hypertriglyceridemia.

    56. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by evil_aaronm · · Score: 1

      You can drink Diet Coke, instead, which doesn't have the sugar. However, Diet Coke has its own drawbacks. In my case, I get kidney stones. In addition to all the goodness that comes with Aspartame.

    57. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by mcgrew · · Score: 4, Funny

      Dew knot truss yore spill checker!

    58. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      Most of us are so adapted, it doesn't do anything. I went to the US once, where tea was in short supply, and suffered two days of headaches before I realised I was going through caffeine withdrawal and resorted to coffee.

    59. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Yep, you can even buy super-dark chocolate with no sugar at all. I'm not sure why anyone would want to eat the stuff though; it's probably used mainly for baking (where the sugar or other sweetener is added by the person doing the baking, rather than the chocolate factory).

    60. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by flyingsquid · · Score: 3, Insightful

      On the plus side, if the caffeine is the causative agent, supplementation would be pretty easy.

      Possibly, but perhaps caffeine doesn't have anything to do with it. I think the phrase "correlation does not equal causation" is something of a cliche, but it's a cliche for a good reason. We know that there's an association, but because this isn't an experiment with a control and a treatment, we don't know why that association exists.

      For an example of how this logic can break down, consider a recent study of coffee (again) that found that nurses drinking lots of coffee suffered lower rates of depression. So coffee has antidepressant effects, right? Well, that's one possible explanation. Here's another possible explanation: symptoms of depression include anxiety and trouble sleeping. So if you're anxious and can't sleep at night, the last thing on earth you want is 4-5 cups of coffee a day making you wired, twitchy, and wakeful. So yes, one reading is "coffee drinking reduces depression" but an equally plausible reading of the data is "depression reduces coffee drinking." The only way to tease it apart is with an experiment: take a population, give half of them coffee, give half of them decaf (to control for placebo effect), and see whether the incidence of depression varies between the two. So what's the answer? Nobody knows.

      Likewise, we have to look at the possibility that decreased coffee consumption is caused by Alzheimer's. If coffee is part of your morning ritual and social functioning, then as you become less functional, you might forget to make that morning cup and have trouble interacting with people at the coffee shop. So perhaps Alzheimer's causes people to drink less coffee. The only way to figure it out is to take a population and give half of them coffee, and half of them decaf, and see how they do.

    61. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by gvaness · · Score: 4, Funny

      God yes, I remember that stuff. My Mom had a huge bar of it in the freezer for baking and told me I wouldn't like it, and not to eat it. Ten year old me thought he was so smart to figure out that Mom was just pulling one over on him to keep all the chocolate for herself. After all, how the hell could they make chocolate that I wouldn't like? Then I snuck a big chunk of it and could only think it had been a trap the whole time.

    62. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Going to the logical conclusion of this train of thought (stronger caffeine), would it not then be even more beneficial to just take a caffeine pill once or twice a day? No sugar downsides, easier to take when on the go.

      I'm sure there's downsides to this as well, but by the sound of it doctors should almost be prescribing those no-sleep caffeine pills college students use to study.

    63. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sugar has been linked to cancer, as well as heart disease, diabetes, hypertension, and numerous other diseases. Don't drink coke.

    64. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by avandesande · · Score: 1

      Caffeine doesn't have cis/trans bonds or a racemate(chiral center)
      Not sure what you are talking about...

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
    65. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, and while you are at it, scan the brazil nuts and bananas. (two foods with the most radioactivity where the radioactivity occurs naturally)

      You might want to learn about the differences in types of radiation and their effects in the body. I suspect you may resist doing so as it will destroy the smugness you enjoy as you belittle real concerns over exposure to harmful radiation with false information.

      You should know that radioactive isotopes of potassium aren't very dangerous because your body expels excess potassium. As you consume a banana with some background level of radioactive potassium isotopes the same number of potassium isotopes are expelled from the body. Surprise, equilibrium is maintained and the net result is no net increase in radiation exposure. Iodine is a completely different story, though.

    66. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by citizenr · · Score: 1

      Whilst many things about American culture are lamentable, I would not say that fattened and sweetened chocolate is "American"

      except you can buy american "chocolate" with no chocolate in it.

      --
      Who logs in to gdm? Not I, said the duck.
    67. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really, so you send people to death camps that can't spell correctly?

      Or do you really mean that you're an asshole that probably ought to be medicated, but decided that other people are the problem?

    68. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *Attention*

      You don't get diabetes from eating a lot of sugar.

    69. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In other words the true teas. White, greeen, oolong, and black teas all have caffeine in them and all come from the same plant, the only differences are what part is used and how they're prepared. Any true tea is going to have caffein in it, as the Camellia sinensis plant from which the buds and leaves are derived has caffeine in it.

    70. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by ILongForDarkness · · Score: 1

      The good thing is in my experience in the US they brew coffee as weak as tea so probably not as much a difference as if you were drinking coffee in Turkey say :)

    71. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by Larryish · · Score: 1

      Note to self:

      Never accept an offer of a "hot" cup of tea in Japan.

    72. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by TheLink · · Score: 2

      It's not sarcasm though. It's a claim that's backed by many scientific and medical studies.

      A reason why some people don't get it is they don't fully realize they will eventually die. They "know" it, but they don't really know it all the way.

      One problem is if they make decisions as if they would live forever. So you have these people putting up with options that they don't like, to live longer, then they get cancer. And they're so surprised... If it's not in your genes to live in good health till 90 (check your blood relatives) and die of pneumonia or something, you are likely to get something nasty when you prolong your life past your "best by date"- dementia, cancer, go blind. It's fine to do so you have a good reason to want to try to prolong your life (live to see your favourite great grandchildren grow up). But it has to be better than "I don't want to die", because you will die.

      Even many scientists/researchers make a similar mistake. For instance when they calculate the economic cost of smoking to society. It is true more smokers die of something expensive earlier in their life.
      But if you don't smoke and so live longer past your retirement age, don't contribute significantly to society (economically or otherwise), and still end up going for one or more expensive treatments in hospitals before eventually dying, you're a greater cost to society than the average smoker that dies early after their retirement- especially if the smoker is also paying very high tobacco taxes (in some countries the taxes are very high). FWIW I'm a nonsmoker.

      Same for many of those game theory and "antigambling" stuff. Often their assumption is that the participants aren't going to die. Whereas if they took that into account, some (not all!) of the things people do start to make more sense. For example if you are uneducated, very poor, with no great connections and your goal is to be as rich as a big lottery winner, working much harder isn't that much more likely to do it, than buying a lottery ticket, when taking into account the personal cost of working harder and that you will eventually die. Social mobility in many countries isn't very high.

      Research into prolonging quality life is good, but always remember you will die eventually.

      And be thankful for that! If it were impossible for you to die, what will you do by yourself for eternity when the last stars in the universe finally burn out? If people really had immortal imperfect souls, they would end up in a hell one way or another, if they weren't "fixed" somehow.

      --
    73. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by quenda · · Score: 1

      You might want to learn about the differences in types of radiation and their effects in the body. ... Iodine is a completely different story,

      Iodine 131 has a half-life of 8 days. Fukushima stopped creating it 15 months ago. Do the maths. A fraction of a million billionth part remains. Not that the tea was ever dangerous anyway. It does not grow on the coast.
      The bananas are far more dangerous.

    74. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oxygen and ozone is a bad example, as ozone is a form of pure elemental oxygen. There is ambiguity there with oxygen referring to the element and also the most stable (but not exclusive) dioxygen form of it.

    75. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by metrix007 · · Score: 1

      Excess sugar does not cause diabetes. Stop spreading myths and misinformation, please.

      --
      If you ignore ACs because they are anonymous - you're an idiot.
    76. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by voidphoenix · · Score: 1

      Diet, Light, Zero. You can have your cake and eat it too :)

    77. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by voidphoenix · · Score: 1

      Technically, the herbal stuff aren't actually teas, they're infusions.

    78. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't forget you get the added benefit of marinating your DNA in Sodium Benzoate... You Can't Beat the Feeling!

    79. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by Disfnord · · Score: 1

      I believe you are getting in a huff over what is known as "a joke".

    80. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by arth1 · · Score: 1

      Ok, oxygen versus hydroxyl radical, then :)

    81. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's an easily acquired taste...

    82. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you think that certain forms of diabetes are not at least partly caused by the sugar spikes that typical Americans slam their systems with, you're an idiot. Please stop posting.

      Your body regulates blood glucose to a maximum of about 104.4 mg/dL, which equates to about 5.2 grams of glucose. That's slightly over a teaspoonful.

      If you consume more sugar than that, and it digests more quickly than your body can use the sugar, it will have to produce insulin. Insulin switches your body's cells from metabolism of fat to metabolism of sugar, meaning it inhibits burning fat. It also taxes the pancreas, particularly if it has to constantly be producing large amounts of insulin to cope with excessive blood sugar levels. If the pancreas can't keep up the pace, we call that diabetes - one kind of diabetes; there is more than one.

    83. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by Onymous+Coward · · Score: 1

      I can't point to any studies, but my guess is that diet Cokes are not particularly healthy "foods".

      Give it another 10 years before the science clearly shows it. Then they'll move on to the next formulation. Again.

    84. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by Onymous+Coward · · Score: 1

      Yes, killing yourself early reduces the chance of disease later. But, lots of Cokes every day is not a straightforward answer to the implied context of "What is healthy?" Killing yourself through methods that expedite your getting a different disease like diabetes instead of waiting for Alzheimer's is not a serious answer.

      Given a lifespan of roughly 90 years, living healthfully, with a good diet, good exercise, good sleep patterns, and good stress levels means you live that span, and in enjoyable health. Over-indulgence or other kinds of self-abuse means suffering for great lengths from illness and dying early.

      A six pack of Coke daily isn't the right solution to having a finite life. So it really is a kind of sarcasm, the fact that it's offered as a good idea.

      Your speculation about immortality being hell is just speculation. You don't know. This is one of those situations where the right idea changes one's outlook, and the right idea takes knowledge, insight, and imagination. For example, "What's the big deal about using Facebook or companies that keep tabs on you? What could possibly go wrong?"

      http://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2012/02/16/how-target-figured-out-a-teen-girl-was-pregnant-before-her-father-did/

      http://www.antipope.org/charlie/blog-static/2012/03/not-an-april-fool-1.html

      Your lack of knowing how to survive and thrive in immortality is not the same thing as there being a lack of ways. And your lack of knowledge is not a good argument for giving up trying to live a long, healthy life.

    85. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by onemorechip · · Score: 1

      Coffee has about 1000 chemical compounds in it. So what did this study do to show that it wasn't one of the many other compounds besides caffeine? And if it is, your tea (or Mountain Dew or whatever) may not have the same beneficial effect.

      There was a recent study showing that coffee drinkers live longer than non-coffee drinkers, and IIRC in this study, those drinking decaf had the same benefit as those who drank regular coffee...So in that particular study the effect wasn't from the caffeine.

      --
      But, I wanted socialized health insurance!
    86. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Surely it's "I'll try to be less subtle", rather than "I'll try and be less subtle" ?

    87. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by metrix007 · · Score: 1

      Yet all peer reviewed research and international diabetes associations state the claim that sugar causes diabetes as a myth.

      --
      If you ignore ACs because they are anonymous - you're an idiot.
    88. Re:So, I suspect that a good strong cup of tea ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Honestly, as long as the point comes across you shouldn't really care.

      But it didn't come across. I was about to google "florine" to find out what I had missed when I saw the GN's post. Because I'm not a phonetic reader, it never occurred to me that florine might be fluorine.

      The devil is in the details. Being imprecise not only sends someone on a wild goose chase, but also means no distinction between fluorine, fluorene and fluoride, all of which are quite different things. And it's not fluorine that's thought to be a problem, but fluoride compounds, specifically hydrogen fluoride. It's as wrong as saying oxygen when you mean ozone.

      Agree. The world turns whether or not you fuck things up. It only doesn't matter if you don't care if the world gets fucked.

  2. Excellent... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 2

    Truly, drugs are nature's hugs.(and parasitic filarial nematodes are nature's psycho abusive stepparents...)

  3. Green tea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Apparently green tea might also be helpful against Alzheimer's.

    1. Re:Green tea? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Apparently green tea might also be helpful against Alzheimer's."

      I prefer that my herbs are helpful against Glaucoma.

  4. Dang. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And I cain't drink caffeine laced drinks because I talk too fast and blur at the edges. All it takes is one coffee or glass of tea at the Chinese restaurant.

  5. Yeah, yeah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Apples have the same effect if I remember right, and without the giant list of negative effects coffee/caffeine have.

    1. Re:Yeah, yeah. by jones_supa · · Score: 1

      I agree in the sense that aside the positive effects of coffee it also deserves much more criticism.

    2. Re:Yeah, yeah. by slimjim8094 · · Score: 2

      What are the giant list of negative effects, exactly? The wiki doesn't seem to show more than a few Aside from the high blood pressure stuff (which kicks in with more than the study's amount of coffee), everything else is either benign or a reason people drink it in the first place (it keeps you awake)

      --
      I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
    3. Re:Yeah, yeah. by PCM2 · · Score: 1

      I know what the negative effects on me are... about ten years ago I overdosed on caffeine by taking two No-Doz pills and washing them down with two pots of strong black coffee. That resulted in me feeling intensely nauseated and tweaked-out for 24 hours straight. I've never been the same since. Sometimes a little bit of coffee is just fine. But other times (probably depends on how much/what I've eaten) a single kitchen coffee cup worth of coffee will make me nauseated, I'll have hot and cold flashes, my limbs will tremble, I'll feel slightly confused and unable to concentrate, and on rare occasions it'll trigger a panic attack -- that is, I don't actually "panic," but my hands will shake violently and go numb, I'll have overall muscle weakness (I'll walk really slowly), and I'll probably throw up.

      I know what you're thinking: Yeah, I kinda decided I wouldn't drink coffee anymore. Which sucks, because I really like coffee.

      The interesting thing (relative to this article) is that I don't remember ever having a bad caffeine reaction from anything but coffee. I never drink more than the basic 8 oz Red Bull, but that's always fine. The same amount of coffee, though, could really set me off.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    4. Re:Yeah, yeah. by slimjim8094 · · Score: 2

      Interesting. The brain is quite powerful, specifically with regards to psychosomatic issues. As a kid, I used to love kettle popcorn, but I ate too much of it and it ... well, let's just say that it was sharp on the other side and I was in agony for a few days. Since then, even the thought of kettle corn makes me quite nauseous. I tried to eat some a few weeks later and it made me so sick I couldn't leave the house. I'd throw up if I tried to stand.

      It was all in my head, of course. The intensely bad experience spoiled it for me, and my brain made my body react very strongly to it. There wasn't anything about the popcorn that had changed. Even though I know now that it's all in my head, I still can't eat the stuff.

      Perhaps that's what happened to you? It explains the Red Bull situation.

      --
      I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
    5. Re:Yeah, yeah. by PCM2 · · Score: 1

      Perhaps that's what happened to you? It explains the Red Bull situation.

      I won't rule it out, but the sensations I get when I have an "attack" are very acutely physical. It's not in my head. I can be doing ... whatever ... and all of a sudden I'll think, "Hold on. I feel really... weird." Maybe 20 minutes later the nausea will kick in and who knows what's next. No matter what degree the reaction will be, pretty much all I'll want to do is walk around outside. The fresh air in my face staves off the nausea, and since I can't concentrate on anything and I'll just fidget if I sit down, I might as well walk. I've ended up doing laps in a parking lot more than once. The previous day I might have drank the same amount of coffee and felt fine. The fact that I can't seem to predict my reaction anymore is what makes me think it's better just to knock it off completely.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    6. Re:Yeah, yeah. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I had a similar experience with peanut butter, except in my case it probably wasn't the peanut butter itself - it was the fact that I threw up the peanut butter I'd eaten due to whatever stomach flu I probably had.

      It was a year or more before I could stand just the thought of tasting peanut butter without it making me nauseous. Strangest thing I've ever experienced - there was no logical reason for me to go nauseous at the thought of peanut butter, but the taste of it actually made me involuntarily gag. I couldn't stomach it.

  6. Anecdotal Evidence by eternaldoctorwho · · Score: 0

    My Grandma suggests the opposite. She has drank coffee just about every day of her adult life. She is in her eighties and has Alzheimer's. So the headline is not necessarily true.

    1. Re:Anecdotal Evidence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      was it decaf?

    2. Re:Anecdotal Evidence by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 2

      Nothing is guaranteed in life; if I tell you that drinking coffee reduces your chance of getting Alzheimer's by 90%, that does not mean that you will definitely not get Alzheimer's if you drink coffee. This is not math, where a single counterexample is sufficient.

      --
      Palm trees and 8
    3. Re:Anecdotal Evidence by gestalt_n_pepper · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Or necessarily false either. Had she not been drinking coffee, the onset might have started a decade earlier.

      --
      Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
    4. Re:Anecdotal Evidence by alen · · Score: 1

      i think the study used real coffee. not the crap like Folgers which is 1/3 tree bark and full of crazy chemicals to hide the crappy taste

    5. Re:Anecdotal Evidence by avandesande · · Score: 2

      She made it to her eighties? My grandfather died of Alzheimer at a much younger age which means I am at risk. If I can keep it at bay until I am eighty I will be quite pleased!

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
    6. Re:Anecdotal Evidence by mcgrew · · Score: 2

      Yeah, well, my great uncle started smoking at age 12 and quit at age 82, and lived another decade. But I wouldn't suggest that his longevity disproves the fact that smoking is bad for you.

      Were it not for the coffee, your granny might well have shown symptoms earlier and been dead by now.

  7. Spice by Megane · · Score: 5, Funny

    It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion. It is by the beans of Java the thoughts acquire speed, the hands acquire shaking, the shaking becomes a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion.

    --
    #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
    1. Re:Spice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I like this, i'll keep it for later use :)

    2. Re:Spice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dear Sir or Madame,

      Thank you for making my day, and, if history is any teacher, a lot of other anonymous readers as well. We shall not forget your good attitude and ability to tell jokes which involve excellent science fiction.

      [Any Anon reading -this- who hasn't read the urtext of the above: Check out Frank Herbert's Dune. It's fantastic. You won't be sorry you took some time to review it.]

      -Anon

    3. Re:Spice by m00sh · · Score: 1

      And then you crash and you are fatigued, depressed, irritated, ravenous, edgy and anxious until you ride the caffeine train again.

    4. Re:Spice by chinton · · Score: 2

      This (para)phrase is the best thing to come from Lynch's Dune.

    5. Re:Spice by avandesande · · Score: 1

      Very good- deserves a t-shirt!

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
    6. Re:Spice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      http://www.caffeineweb.com/

      Probably 1% of the population is driven nuts by caffeine exposure. I had 25 years of hell till I discovered I was in that category.

    7. Re:Spice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      And then you crash and you are fatigued, depressed, irritated, ravenous, edgy and anxious until you ride the caffeine train again.

      And that's what the beer is for!

    8. Re:Spice by PCM2 · · Score: 2

      Yeah, except as I recall, the quote his joke references doesn't come from Frank Herbert's Dune. Only the movie.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    9. Re:Spice by kermidge · · Score: 1

      Yup, coffee is WD-40 for the brain.

    10. Re:Spice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you kindly for the correction.

      I could have sworn I saw the quote in the book as well! It's been a while since I read it, though. I see that google books does not appear to locate the reference either, but as Hume would say, the evidence of past experiences cannot completely define the future. I'll return after reading Dune again and provide you with a second round of thanks for encouraging me to revist the text.

      Until then, be well!

  8. Small Sample? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    124 people in the study is pathetic. Why wouldn't they get a bigger sample size for a study like this? Not like it should be difficult. Apparently a study published in the New England Journal of Medicine included over 400,000 older adults in similar study.

    1. Re:Small Sample? by leuk_he · · Score: 2

      Agreed, but it can be even worse. The study does not give a cause reason that this happens. It just show 2 factors that correspond. Some other factors might even cause this. e.g. some of the people with Alzheimer do not drink coffee because their health is too bad for if, or the medicins they use do not allow coffee. Or the shakes coffe gives them causes them not to drink coffee. I do not know.

      Without a cause reason this makes great headlines, but is only a very tiny to do with resolving the disease.

      AND EVEN besides this points, the science might by very valid. It describes very well how they came to the conclusions. But the major conclusions should be that there must be investigations with bigger test groups and that the root cause must be found in futher investigations. But that conclusions make bad headlines in the press.

    2. Re:Small Sample? by jpate · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah! There's no way that trained scientists would be able to calculate reliable a difference is given a certain sample size with an observed variance! That's just wayyyy too hard. The only way to do real science is to get 400,000 data points for every comparison; it's the only way to be sure.

      In all seriousness, huge sample sizes are only important if we are comparing several variables, where a large sample size can give us good estimates for rare combinations of events, and/or small effects, where a large sample size allows us to achieve small confidence intervals over the relevant comparisons. It's quite possible for a sample size of 124 to yield a significant difference for one effect if the effect is of at least moderate size.

    3. Re:Small Sample? by sdguero · · Score: 1

      There have been dozens of studies over the last 5 years confirming this finding. This one jsut had more information on the exact level of caffeine in people's systems.

    4. Re:Small Sample? by Rogue+Haggis+Landing · · Score: 1

      Similar studies have even been on Slashdot before, in 2002 and in 2009.

    5. Re:Small Sample? by Rich0 · · Score: 2

      However, significance is only accurate if you propose a hypothesis BEFORE you collect data, or you account for the number of hypotheses that you COULD have tested when you started hunting for correlations.

      If you ask 100 people for a list of everything they do and eat and everything wrong with them, and find a correlation, I don't care what test you claim you've done, it isn't going to truly be significant.

      If you want to determine if caffeine prevents lung cancer, survey 100 people and just ask about caffeine intake and lung cancer, then MAYBE I might believe claims you've made. However, I will only do so if you didn't just survey 100 people the week before about orange juice and heart disease without publishing the negative result.

      The problem with most hypothesis testing is that people rarely account for all of their negative results. This is why clinical trials are one of the most unreliable forms of data in science (the problem is that nobody has a better alternative, though some reforms like advance registrations of trials might help).

    6. Re:Small Sample? by jpate · · Score: 2

      However, significance is only accurate if you propose a hypothesis BEFORE you collect data, or you account for the number of hypotheses that you COULD have tested when you started hunting for correlations.

      Wagenmakers et al (2011) make a similar but slightly different point. The important thing is to distinguish between exploratory studies and confirmatory studies. In an exploratory study, hypotheses are based on correlations found after gathering data, while in a confirmatory study, the examined hypotheses are planned in advance. Both are important. Without confirmatory studies, exactly your point criticism applies, but, without exploratory studies, non-intuitive insights are difficult to come by.

      This is why replications of previous studies, with new data, are so important. Research is messy enough that the first examination of a hypothesis is at least partly exploratory, and it's up to the next five research papers to replicate the original instantiation of the hypothesis on the way to exploring the next elaboration of it.

    7. Re:Small Sample? by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      Well, we don't all have infinite funds. There are also ethical issues: it's unethical to use more subjects than you need.

      124 is pretty good for a study to identify an effect. I imagine these guys are biochemists who are after the active ingredients, not population health specialists who want to make recommendations for the general public.

    8. Re:Small Sample? by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      I'm reminded of the statistical rule of thumb that "infinity" (as in, when a t-distribution becomes essentially the same as a z-distribution) is about 45 (42 if you're a Douglas Adams geek).

    9. Re:Small Sample? by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      It's quite possible to correct for multiple comparisons when you're doing a study, careless researchers just don't do it.

      A proper clinical trial is one of the most reliable forms of data. Real clinical trials are registered, including their hypothese and analysis methods, so that you can't get away with testing a bunch of things and forgetting to mention all the ones that didn't work out.

    10. Re:Small Sample? by rve · · Score: 1

      The article said nothing about any mechanism. When I read a headline like this, my first thought is that either the early symptoms of Alzheimer make people drink less coffee, or whatever biological trait causes Alzheimer also causes people to drink less coffee. Unless they can propose a mechanism, supported by evidence, I'm not inclined to believe in the magical, medicinal properties of a common beverage.

    11. Re:Small Sample? by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      Sure, it is possible to correct for multiple comparisons. The problem is that it is almost impossible for anybody else to verify whether you did it or not. You say you checked for 3 things and you accounted for that. How do I know that you didn't check for 347 things, pick the 3 most interesting, and then account for only those?

      Registering clinical trials is a relatively new trend, and I'm not sure how often it actually happens. It is supposed to happen with FDA-regulated areas, but I don't see anything in the article linked in this story that references any kind of pre-registration.

    12. Re:Small Sample? by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      No issues with that. There is nothing wrong with stabbing around in the dark when you're doing research. The problem is when those results are heralded as "discoveries" - especially when all kinds of people change their behavior as a result.

    13. Re:Small Sample? by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      How do I know you didn't just fake your data completely? Or the analysis? The average researcher who doesn't know how to do multiple comparison correction properly doesn't just publish their significant result, they publish everything they tried, in a great big table, and it's blindingly obvious what they did. There probably is some fraud going on, but it's in the same category with outright fakery - either it gets uncovered over time or everybody publishes all their data.

      The FDA modernization act of 1997 requires that all trials of interventions to treat life threatening diseases be registered no later than 21 days after a trial is opened for enrolment. For other agents, even though the trial might not be required to be registered, it's unlikely either the FDA or an ethics review board would accept a major trial that had not been registered. http://www.fda.gov/downloads/RegulatoryInformation/Guidances/UCM126838.pdf

      Even without trial registration, a (blinded) randomized clinical trial is the best source of evidence. These by definition are planned in advance, including a hypothesis and a planned analysis. Yes, inconclusive results (NOT negative results) might not be published. But in any other form of scientific study, inconclusive results are unlikely to be published, hypotheses are frequently made up after the fact, AND the analysis is often ad hoc.

    14. Re:Small Sample? by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      I'll agree with everything you say, certainly. I wasn't saying that double-blind controlled trials were useless, or that they were worse than other methods in the same field. I was just saying that their value was limited because they are prone to error. The recent reforms about trial registration will certainly help, for those trials that are subject to them (not every clinical trial is done by a drug company).

      The fact that nothing better exists doesn't mean that clinical trials are without problems. They're certainly better than anecdote, but their error rates are FAR higher than in other fields of study that don't involve people/doctors/etc.

      You also raised a very good point about the fact that publications rarely include the raw data, which makes any kind of criticism of the publication difficult. That actually applies to more than just clinical trials - it is a big problem in all fields. In today's era of computers I have no idea why journals don't just require full submission of all raw data necessary to fully arrive at the conclusions. I can understand why they wouldn't print it in the paper version, but there is no reason it couldn't be made downloadable. For areas regulated by privacy legislation I'd probably require that the full uncensored data be made available to reviewers (that is, any data the investigators themselves would have), and then publish anonymized data to the public. Trials would need to include this provision in their consent forms, otherwise they would not be publishable.

    15. Re:Small Sample? by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      "I wasn't saying that double-blind controlled trials were useless, or that they were worse than other methods in the same field."

      "This is why clinical trials are one of the most unreliable forms of data in science"

      Kinda sounds like that's what you were saying, actually.

      The regulations don't just apply to drug companies. They apply to ANYONE testing a medical intervention for a life threatening condition. Clinical trials, when done properly as most serious ones are, are quite reliable. The biggest complaint today is that they work too well - too many compounds that look promising in pre-clinial studies are failing to pass clinical trials.

      There were some journals that required submission of raw data. They quickly backed off on that requirement, or folded. For much of science, the raw data is simply too big for a journal to effectively collect, store (indefinitely) and make available. My papers usually depend on somewhere between 200 GB and 1 TB of private data. All data must be stored and available for audit in FDA regulated clinical trials though.

    16. Re:Small Sample? by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      I'll actually stand by those comments. They're one of the most reliable forms of data in medical science, and one of the least reliable forms of data in science. :)

      Compared to experimental disciplines in physics/etc, or even biology, the medical areas are practically witchcraft. This is largely due to the ethical issues with experimenting on humans, and that is just the nature of the field - it isn't like doctors don't WANT to generate reliable data. This isn't unlike being an astronomer - you can't make your own stars and galaxies, so you're stuck building arguments on whatever observations can be gleaned from the world around you. In an experimental science you could actually generate your data on demand, in much more controllable conditions. Your data is also much easier to reproduce.

      I do recognize the challenges with reliably storing data, and being able to read it is even a bigger issue (good luck reading a few GB of raw data generated by some random piece of scientific software 15 years ago). However, the cost to store data only goes down with time, and compared to the cost of actually generating the data the cost to retain it is usually small (it just isn't as glamorous).

      In any case, I wasn't trying to snub your profession. Medical research is obviously important. I just find it very frustrating since even good trials can be misleading, and many important ones over the last few decades cannot be reproduced. The costs are high, and the power of the trials are low - we're just stuck with what we can do, which will no doubt improve over time.

    17. Re:Small Sample? by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      Physics? Biology? Note, the biology link is not about clinical science, it's about basic petrie dish and rat cell biology, biochemistry and genetics. Note also that clinical trials have been very good at failing drugs based on incorrect or non-transferrable basic biology findings.

      Every branch of science has screwups. In every branch of science you can do your stats, design your experiments, correctly, or incorrectly. When there's a failure in clinical research you tend to hear about it because it affects a lot of people. Not so much when someone in a physics lab misplaces a decimal point.

  9. So I wonder.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wonder if Adderall has the same... oh look, a Thrive for under $200... 8 facebook messages!? Mmmmm... coffee sounds good about now....

  10. Re:To my wife..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You do know your Real Doll can't actually hear you, right?

  11. Next week - coffee gives you cancer by trevc · · Score: 0

    I am sure a study will come out next week saying 2 to 3 cups of coffee a day increases your risk of getting cancer (if that study has not already been published - I am too lazy to google).

    1. Re:Next week - coffee gives you cancer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That was studied long time ago. Just search for "mutagenic action of caffeine" or "DNA repair inhibition by caffeine".

    2. Re:Next week - coffee gives you cancer by treeves · · Score: 1

      Another study will come out soon that says that observational studies sometimes produce erroneous and/or conflicting results.

      --
      ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
    3. Re:Next week - coffee gives you cancer by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      Actually, there have been publications that MOST observational studies produce erroneous results. My thinking is that this means that an arbitrary statement is MORE likely to be true if it has no scientific backing at all, than if it is backed by a peer-reviewed observational study.

      The main issue is that you can keep testing hypothesis until you find something that sticks and never report negative results. That is no different than doing a survey, throwing out all the answers you don't like, and then reporting the results has having unanimous support.

    4. Re:Next week - coffee gives you cancer by Smauler · · Score: 1

      So what the fuck will that have to do with this study?

      Seriously, you want the scientists to tell you what is "good" and what is "bad"? You don't want the scientists to publish their results, and show evidence that some things may have a positive or negative effect?

      You comment makes as much sense as someone complaining that the radiotherapy their mother received didn't cure her alzheimer's.

      gah... The web always conspires against me.

  12. simple by mechanicaladvantage · · Score: 1

    i guess i just have to hope i don't forget where i put my coffee cup....

  13. Correction Factors? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How do they correct for the social factors in this study? People who drink coffee might be doing it at work, which keeps you alert and prevents dementia. They might be going to coffee shops and reading, talking, or working puzzles which keeps you alert and prevents dementia. Coffee in general may attract people who have a desire to remain alert, which prevents dementia. etc...

    1. Re:Correction Factors? by PPH · · Score: 2

      People who drink coffee might be doing it at work, which keeps you alert and prevents dementia.

      Depends on where one works. At some companies, dementia seems to be a prerequisite for employment.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    2. Re:Correction Factors? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At some companies, dementia seems to be a prerequisite for employment.

      Or maybe even preferred.

  14. Too late for a new drug? by MrEricSir · · Score: 0

    Looks like this amazing new Alzheimer's drug came out too late.

    --
    There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
  15. Some issues by brian0918 · · Score: 1

    Besides correlation != causation, did they actually determine that those individuals with reduced Alzheimer's risk were actually consuming more caffeine? Higher blood caffeine levels does not necessarily indicate higher caffeine intake, any more than a person with high blood alcohol levels - who happens have to have slow alcohol metabolism - can be said to be drinking more alcohol than others.

    1. Re:Some issues by avandesande · · Score: 2

      FTFA

      "“We found that 100 percent of the MCI patients with plasma caffeine levels above the critical level experienced no conversion to Alzheimer’s disease during the two-to-four year follow-up period,” said study co-author Dr. Gary Arendash."

      100% is a extremely strong correlation....

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
    2. Re:Some issues by canajin56 · · Score: 1

      They drew a post hoc line. The line is DESIGNED so that nobody above it got Alzheimer's. So it's interesting that its possible to draw such a line, but the "100%" part isn't interesting at all. To talk about significance we have to know how many people total were above the line. According to TFA, 15% of people with MCI go on to develop Alzheimer's. If only 20 out of those 124 people were above the line, the expected number result is that 3 of the heavy drinkers would get Alzheimers, so 0 isn't as strong a correlation as you think. But maybe 60 of the 124 were heavy drinkers, in which case it is a pretty strong correlation.

      --
      ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI
  16. Correlation or causation? by m00sh · · Score: 1

    Maybe coffee drinkers are correlated with something else that prevents Alzheimer's. I see no mention in the article that this is more than statistical correlation they have found.

    Doing a controlled experiment where the only dietetic difference is the coffee is near impossible due to the cost.

    Most recently, they reported that caffeine interacts with a yet unidentified component of coffee to boost blood levels of a critical growth factor that seems to fight off the Alzheimer’s disease process.

    Typical conclusion section speculation from a correlation study IMHO.

    I think it would be dangerous for people to drinking coffee assuming they are warding off Alzheimer's. Coffee has know to have bad effects on the body. It is a diuretic and a stimulant.

    1. Re:Correlation or causation? by 0123456 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Maybe people with Alzheimer's forget where they left their coffee and never drink it.

    2. Re:Correlation or causation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Doing a controlled experiment where the only dietetic difference is the coffee is near impossible due to the cost.

      Also, it's not necessarily a dietetic difference that's having the effect. If "older people who drink coffee" largely overlaps with "older people who are mentally active" then we should expect a correlation (hopefully, they controlled for this somehow, but speculating) if either 1) people with pre-detectable Alzheimers tend to find mental activity harder and start doing less of it, or 2) mental activity itself helps keep the brain healthy. Neither of these would be surprising.

    3. Re:Correlation or causation? by canajin56 · · Score: 5, Informative

      They didn't do a random test, say "oh hey look coffee did something lets make wild conclusions". They worked from mice studies, the most recent in 2006, then specifically did a human test by taking people with minor cognitive impairment (which often progresses into Alzheimer's), they tested them for their blood caffeine levels, and looked for further cognitive decline. What they found was that in mice with Alzheimer's, coffee prevented further mental decline. And, in those mice, there was a specific and identifiable immune response connected with this effect. What they also found was that decaff coffee produced neither the protective effect, nor the correlated immune response. And caffeine alone or from other sources did not have this effect, either. This new 4 year study took patients and looked at their blood caffeine levels, and found that those who drink a lot of coffee had the SAME identifiable immune response as the mice did, and that this immune response is also strongly correlated with protecting from further mental decline in humans.

      So, if you weren't paying attention, this isn't a correlation study, that isn't "conclusion section speculation". There's an identifiable response, they know this identifiable response doesn't occur with decaff, or with non-coffee caffeine sources, so they conclude it is some combination of caffeine with some unknown agent in coffee. But the actual response is identified. The correlation is not between coffee and Alzheimer's per se, but between Alzheimer's and this specific immune response that is almost certainly triggered by coffee, because although it's hard to do a controlled experiment with people, it's not hard to do with mice! And they did. Six years ago.

      At any rate, what they don't know is what other chemical is causing this, how this response is protecting against cognitive decline, and if having smaller amounts of coffee will have a lesser effect, or be just plain ineffective. (Some people have quoted 3 cups of coffee per day, but TFA says 3 cups of coffee shortly before being tested, which would indicate a lot more than 3 cups per day total)

      --
      ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI
    4. Re:Correlation or causation? by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 1

      so caffeine == brain steroids?

      --
      ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
    5. Re:Correlation or causation? by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      Boo on you. You just ruined somebody's day. He got to sound all knowledgeable by saying "correlation does not equal causation!" and then you interfered with facts and stuff.

    6. Re:Correlation or causation? by voidphoenix · · Score: 1

      +1 Informative. Good summary for all the didn't-RTFA-regulars who _must_ post criticism for lack of anything better to do.

    7. Re:Correlation or causation? by m00sh · · Score: 1

      What you describes still makes it a correlation study, just a well organized correlation study.

      Taking your own quotes,

      At any rate, what they don't know is what other chemical is causing this

      blood caffeine levels, and found that those who drink a lot of coffee had the SAME identifiable immune response as the mice did, and that this immune response is also strongly correlated with protecting from further mental decline in humans.

      It is still correlation.

      Assuming there is causation, correlation is two way but causation might not be. Just because blood caffeine levels correlates with reduction of mental decline doesn't mean drinking more coffee will reduce mental decline. It could very well be that the reduced mental decline leads to the immune system pattern (or blood caffeine level).

      Anyway, what you describe up there is not in the original article so you must know the research work from beyond the article I read.

  17. what did you say? by ILongForDarkness · · Score: 3, Funny

    Who are you, why are you here?

    1. Re:what did you say? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am Cornholio. I'm here to get some teepee for my bunghole.

  18. Simple scientifically viable reason by wisnoskij · · Score: 1

    Sure caffeine possibly could, by itself, prevent Alzheimers.
    But I would say a far more likely reason for the correlation is the correlation between drinking a good amount of coffee and being active and exercising your brain on a daily basis.

    --
    Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
    1. Re:Simple scientifically viable reason by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      And the mice who were randomly selected for the coffee vs. placebo group?

    2. Re:Simple scientifically viable reason by wisnoskij · · Score: 1

      The only study I heard of was one involving humans, and it was not a blind one either.
      Not that this can can be blind. I would still say that it was the alertness that the coffee caused that more likely prevented Alzheimers then the coffee itself.

      --
      Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
    3. Re:Simple scientifically viable reason by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      And you would be wrong. From TFA:

      Since 2006, USF’s Dr. Cao and Dr. Arendash have published several studies investigating the effects of caffeine/coffee administered to Alzheimer’s mice. Most recently, they reported that caffeine interacts with a yet unidentified component of coffee to boost blood levels of a critical growth factor that seems to fight off the Alzheimer’s disease process.

  19. Coffee Miracle by berlinerkindl · · Score: 1

    Recently I have seen all these reoccurring stories about how coffee prevents a slew of different forms of cancer, specifically prostate and colon, so I have taken to giving myself hot coffee enemas (3 cups per the articles recommendations) every morning. So now based on this speculative and partial study I am concerned if this is enough, should I continue on my current path or start a coffee IV drip instead?

    1. Re:Coffee Miracle by Khyber · · Score: 2

      Bypass blood/brain barrier and just inject coffee directly to brain!

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    2. Re:Coffee Miracle by berlinerkindl · · Score: 1

      Not a bad idea

  20. Obligatory... by tool462 · · Score: 4, Funny

    ... SMBC ;)
    Had you for a second there, didn't I?

    It's not that caffeine prevents Alzheimer's, caffeine dilates time itself. We live a lifetime of productive bliss in only a few moments. Why else do non-coffee drinkers never appear to age? In what feels like 60 years for us, only a short time passes for them. They look younger because they are younger. But, they also live long enough to get Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, cancer. In a twist of irony our lives are shorter but our years are longer. We looked to the internet for the Singularity, but we should have looked inside. The Singularity is us.

    1. Re:Obligatory... by Luyseyal · · Score: 1

      Reminds me of the only funny thing in Over the Hedge, where Hammy downs the energy drink.

      -l

      --
      Help cure AIDS, cancer, and more. Donate your unused computer time to worldcommunitygrid.org. Join Team Slashdot!
  21. I doubt this is a good study by Khyber · · Score: 1

    My grandfather, major coffee drinker, died from Alzheimers.

    And despite the coffee I consume, I'm already noticing my memory slipping and fading. Of course it doesn't help I was already dead twice back in 2007.

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    1. Re:I doubt this is a good study by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 2

      And my grandfather recently died at the age of 103, after a lifetime of smoking, drinking, getting hardly any exercise, and eating crappy food. None of which means that these are recommended practices for extending your lifespan. The plural of "anecdote" is not "data."

      --
      The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    2. Re:I doubt this is a good study by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      actually the plural of anecdote IS data. They had 126 of them for this study.

    3. Re:I doubt this is a good study by Hatta · · Score: 1

      Gee. I wonder if there could be anything else that could cause you to have memory problems. Hmm, what could it be? I'm having trouble remembering myself too.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    4. Re:I doubt this is a good study by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      The plural of anecdote is [sociological,anthropological] data.

      The plural of anecdote is definitely not data.

    5. Re:I doubt this is a good study by boarder8925 · · Score: 1

      Of course it doesn't help I was already dead twice back in 2007.

      Is this how you introduce yourself at parties?

    6. Re:I doubt this is a good study by Khyber · · Score: 1

      Nope, I start that out with "I work in a porn shop, you need anything?"

      --
      Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
    7. Re:I doubt this is a good study by boarder8925 · · Score: 1

      Oh, so it's that kind of death!

  22. Diclofenac-Phenol or Ibuprofen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    or the true "wundermittel" against Alzheimer!!

    Against current "scientific belief" Alzheimer has nothing - absolute nothing - do to with those "dark" spots within the brain.
    Truth is, that Alzheimer disease does statistically effect people less which use one of the named medicines. This is because Alzheimer is a chronic inflammation of the brain. and both "wundermittel" are repressing inflammation (in any part of the human body).

    Pharmaceutics won't tell you as Ibuprofen is really cheap, and Diclofenac-Phenol is - even if a bit more expensive than Ibuprofen - still much cheaper then those medicines they are touting against Alzheimer...

  23. I also found some texts that suggest the opposite by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    With these studies, it's very important to know WHO finances them, because this fact has an overwhelming influence onto the results. I was looking here:
    http://www.patrickholford.com/index.php/blog/blogarticle/1184/
    and found this text:
    Coffee and Alzheimer’s

    There’s no doubt that coffee raises homocysteine levels, which are strongly associated with increased risk of Alzheimer’s disease.

    A group of doctors from the University Hospital Nijmegen tested the effects of coffee by assigning volunteers to drink a litre of unfiltered coffee a day – that’s about four cups – for two weeks. At the start of the two weeks their average H score was 12.8 M, slightly above the national average of 10 to 11. At the end of the two weeks their H score was 14.

    A study by Dr Verhoef and co. at the Wageningen Centre for Food Sciences in the Netherlands showed that two cups of regular coffee increased homocysteine by 11% after only four hours, while caffeine tablets without coffee increased it by 5%.

    However, whether coffee drinking actually increases Alzheimer’s risk is not yet clear. There are study pointing both ways.

    In summary, the research does suggest that, if you are going to drink coffee it is best to do it on its own, without either a sweetener or carb snack, then wait at least 30 minutes before eating. Also, it is best to not overdo it having perhaps one or two coffees at most. More than this is likely to make your more stressed and agitated Almost all the benefits of coffee are also reported for decaf, which eliminates a fair amount of the downsides. So, a decaf a day may actually help rather than hinder your health as far as diabetes and blood sugar control is concerned.

    Now, who can prove me which one is right? :-).

  24. Lies, damned lies, and statistics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Everything I needed to know I learned from Mark Twain...

  25. Not sure about validity... by ilikenwf · · Score: 1

    My beloved granddad drank at the peak probably 1-2 carafes of coffee a day single handed. He was a trucker in his younger years and after that built fence for 10 years or so, and he loved his coffee. (In fact, he started me out drinking it at age 7 - great memories). Anyway, I can't be sure what caused his mind to go there 3-4 years before he passed, but it was one of two things - low blood oxygen levels and low bloodflow to the brain because of his past heart issues, or it could've been Alzheimer's.

    If this turns out to be true it'd affirm that his heart, not Alzheimer's caused his dementia.

  26. By blind luck.. by nanospook · · Score: 1

    Yeah! I'm saved!

    --
    Have you fscked your local propeller head today?
  27. caffeine the cause or a symptom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I find myself wondering if the cause is the caffeine or is that a symptom... If you are elderly, retired, don't do much and sleep in everyday, perhaps you don't drink as much coffee as the active elderly person who gets up early to go snow skiing when he's 85 years old - and I seem to remember studies saying that staying active has many health benefits.

  28. So if I forget my morning coffee by toygeek · · Score: 1

    then I might forget the next morning's cup, then I'm totally screwed.

  29. And many other things too. by overshoot · · Score: 1

    I bet if people drink lots of Coca Cola everyday the odds of them getting Alzheimer's go way down. The higher the dose the stronger the effect.

    Even reduces the odds of dying of cancer.

    Not to mention reducing the odds of death from auto collision, gunshot, malaria, HIV, ...

    --
    Lacking <sarcasm> tags, /. substitutes moderation as "Troll."
  30. emoticon Nazi by Onymous+Coward · · Score: 1

    Emoticon usage panels have agreed in majority that the simple smiley emoticon to indicate archness or conspiratorial irony is unacceptable. The overwhelming vote for appropriate emoticon to indicate these things is the winky. ;)

    :|

    1. Re:emoticon Nazi by gestalt_n_pepper · · Score: 3, Funny

      A thousand pardons ;)

      --
      Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
  31. Not caffeine's effects, but coffee's. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just wanted to point out that since the majority of the caffeine was from coffee, this does not demonstrate that caffeine was the agent responsible. Higher concentrations of caffeine just means that the participant drank more coffee. Thus it could be an entirely unknown agent in coffee itself and the caffeine just demonstrated the amount of coffee consumed.

  32. Correlation != causation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just because nursing homes, hospitals and relatives don't trust Alzheimer patients with coffee does not mean that coffee would prevent Alzheimer's.

  33. This video is apropos by Whammo_777 · · Score: 1

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2rea-yBgOSo It's not creepy at all, honest?

  34. Wait just a minute by liz_oh · · Score: 1

    Please keep in mind this study only found a correlation between the two, not a direct causational outcome. It should be interesting to see what further studies show researchers about the effects of coffee or caffeine. This doesn't mean that guzzling coffee for the rest of your life will keep you 100% clear of Alzheimer's, however.

  35. Most people have never had good coffee. by bdwoolman · · Score: 2

    Roasted coffee starts to get stale after about a week. And is at its peak about 24 hours after roasting. Only a very few coffee houses consistently serve freshly roasted specialty coffee. (Places that serve Counter Culture coffee do a pretty good job.) Vacuum packing roasted coffee does not prevent the deterioration (It helps a bit, but then the coffee stales almost immediately after exposure to air.) Nor does freezing help either.

    The darker roasts served up by the mass market coffee houses are actually eschewed by real coffee geeks, who prefer to roast their own and to a lighter degree. And, in any case, the dark roasted beans at these joints are usually stale anyway. Dude. Once you have tasted, say, a freshly roasted Yirgacheffe from Ethiopia, or a great Kenyan AA you will not say "ick". And here is another fact. Green coffee lasts for two years. And is roughly half the price per pound as roasted coffee. Which is why I roast my own coffee in a home roasting appliance. (I use a Nesco). I make about a third of a pound at a time, It is wonderful. Rarely in life is cheaper better. But in this case it is true (Except for the energy involved in roasting of course.) The fact is that coffee, like bread, is just better when it is fresh. A lot better.

    With care coffee can be roasted on the stove top in a black cast iron pan. It smokes a lot so you should have a venting hood. There are tons of on-line instructions. To get my beans I go to Sweet Maria's or to Burman Coffee traders. But there are many places to get green beans. Equipment is available from these places I mentioned as well.

    --
    "No fear. No envy. No meanness." Liam Clancy
  36. Caffeine Exposure/Allergy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The other name for this is "Caffeine Allergy". For a very, very small amount of people (that 1% your talking about), caffeine has quite a psychotic effect on the brain. Some details can be found here: http://doctoryourself.com/caffeine_allergy.html . In my case, it makes me talk at inappropriate times, makes me overly critical of people and (at times) makes me very very angry at people for no valid good reason. I also have been very fearful of things in general, generally anti-social and had some OCD characteristics thrown in to boot. Borderline hoarder.

    This allergy appears to be genetic, since my father and grandfather both exhibited the same traits.

    Since discovering what was ailing me, I have slowly decreased my caffeine intake. I drink Diet Coke and am now down to 12 oz per day. I want to decrease that even further, but at least at 12 oz my brain has a chance of functioning normally. The allergy hit (as far as I can tell) around age 16-17. I'm 47 now and am just now coming to terms with it and how it's affected my life over the last 30 years.

    Oh well, at least I discovered it. Most of my family did not.

    Thank you for putting up with my post, Gordon (post AC because I haven't signed up yet)

  37. JOLT !! by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 1

    If it is caffeine, then I guess you could conceivably get the same benefit from chocolate

    Chocolate ?

    Hell, no, I want my JOLT COLA NOW !!

    It is the only thing that keeps hundreds of thousands of software devs alive through the endless 24-hour non-stop keyboard banging sessions
     

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
  38. They forgot to drink it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So half of all people age 80 have Alzheimer's, and it's all because they didn't drink enough coffee. LOL

  39. Pike's Place by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think perhaps Pike's Place is so terrible, that even beta proteins and prions won't go near it. I bet people who drink espresso are still in trouble. And mind you, the article mentions nothing of tea.

  40. The bananas are far more dangerous. by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 1

    YES! I knew it!

    And they laugh at me when I do my daily training. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4bCyIAsSid8

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

  41. What about just taking caffeine pills? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For those of us who cannot abide the taste of coffee? Would it have the same effect?

    Or can the essence of coffee be reduced to a pill form that can be ingested, saving taste bud torture, nasty coffee breath and brown teeth?

  42. Really? by HArchH · · Score: 1

    Didn't prevent it in my dad.

  43. They say.. by Puppet+Master · · Score: 1

    the first thing to go is the memory. I forget what the 2nd thing is.

    --
    The day Microsoft creates a product that doesn't suck, it will be known as the Microsoft Vaccuum Cleaner!