Slashdot Mirror


Why It's So Hard To Predict How Caffeine Will Affect Your Body

carmendrahl writes "Emergency-room visits linked to caffeine-laden energy drinks are on the rise. This gives scientists who'd like to see caffeine regulated the jitters. But the U.S. Food and Drug Administration seems to be dragging its feet on regulating caffeine content in food and drink, because people have different sensitivities to it (abstract). Currently, caffeine-rich products like Monster Energy get around the rules because they're marketed as dietary supplements. 'Caffeine gets cleared from the body at different rates because of genetic variations, gender, and even whether a person is a smoker. For this reason, it’s difficult to set a safe limit of daily consumption on the compound. Physiological differences, as well as differences in the way people consume caffeine, have tied FDA in knots as it has debated how to regulate the substance. ... The toxic level in humans, about 10 g, is roughly the equivalent of imbibing 75 cups of brewed coffee (in 8-oz mugs) or 120 cans of Red Bull over a few hours. But that lethal limit can vary widely from person to person, experts say."

212 comments

  1. Just tax it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The same way all vice product consumption is curbed.

    1. Re:Just tax it. by oodaloop · · Score: 1

      Wow, it's almost as if you didn't even read TFS.

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    2. Re:Just tax it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I gave it a skim

    3. Re:Just tax it. by smittyoneeach · · Score: 1, Troll

      In the modern nanny state, isn't taxation the preferred method for shaping societal behavior by our Ruling Class Overlords?

      --
      Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
    4. Re:Just tax it. by oodaloop · · Score: 1

      Maybe. I'm not arguing against it, or for it. But how much? The whole point of the TFS is that effects vary so much that we can't tell people how safe it is, how much is too much, etc.

      --
      Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    5. Re:Just tax it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The nice thing about caffiene, in every way we normally consume it that I'm aware of, is that your body will let you know you've had too much WAY before it gets dangerous. Obviously and quicly. That is, unless there's something very wrong with you to begin with. Otherwise drinking enough Monster or coffee to put yourself in the hospital is almost always a willful act of stupidity.

      As such, I'm not too concerned about the FDA "dragging its feet" on the matter.

    6. Re:Just tax it. by Insanity+Defense · · Score: 3, Informative

      Not for everyone. For some people (like myself) the problems caffeine cause are subtle and work in combination with other things. With caffeine in my system I'm allergic to perfume, cigar and pipe smoke and sunburn in 15 to 20 minutes. Caffeine alone does nothing obvious but add any of the other things and my health goes to hell with the appearance that it is the 2nd thing causing it alone. Only by accident did I learn of the caffeine connection and solve my lifelong health problems.

    7. Re:Just tax it. by Eskarel · · Score: 0

      Actually taxation is a way of using the free market to create societal changes.

      You might disagree with the change their trying to create, and you're more than welcome under a taxed environment to continue your chosen behavior, albeit at a higher cost, but having to pay more doesn't actually affect your freedom in any way shape or form.

      Next thing you'll be saying that Coca Cola encourages a Nanny State because it has the gall to charge you for its products instead of giving you caffeine for free.

    8. Re:Just tax it. by dixonpete · · Score: 4, Interesting

      For me caffeine gave me a 25 year mood disorder that mimicked Bipolar II. Docs were clueless. My symptoms disappeared after going cold turkey 4.5 years ago. Caffeine is seriously underrated as to how dangerous it is.

    9. Re:Just tax it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its danger is not underrated by snails, insects and many other creatures...

    10. Re:Just tax it. by Talderas · · Score: 1

      Next thing you'll be saying that Coca Cola encourages a Nanny State because it has the gall to charge you for its products instead of giving you caffeine for free.

      Are most of our laws brought to us by Coca Cola?

      --
      "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
    11. Re:Just tax it. by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      Not exactly. Replace "caffeine" in what you wrote there with "alcohol" and see what I mean.

      Case in point, I've got a very high tolerance to alcohol. This is a natural tolerance; I'm only 155lb at 6' tall, but if drinking beer, I am physically full long before I even feel the effects and it can take hours of maintaining that 'full' before feeling remotely drunk.

      My ex, on the other hand, weighed about 10-15lb less than I do, and she couldn't handle a full beer before getting tipsy. She'd get sick with a full beer consumed over the course of 30-40 minutes or so.

      Similarly, I know people who can drink coffee all day and not have a problem sleeping. Others get the jitters and can't sleep after having a small piece of chocolate. If you've got that low a tolerance, a single energy drink can do some very bad things to you, particularly if you've got heart problems or something like diabetes.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    12. Re:Just tax it. by smittyoneeach · · Score: 1

      Actually taxation is a way of using the free market to create societal changes.

      This is not a sentence.

      --
      Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
    13. Re:Just tax it. by fifedrum · · Score: 1

      paying more in taxation directly affects your freedom. period. it restricts access to goods and services.

    14. Re:Just tax it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On the flip-side, a daily dose of caffeine moderates my Tourette's like tics, in addition to giving me a mild euphoria during the initial half hour dosing. The occasional withdrawal due to not getting as much as I should or being sick and not able to keep fluids down is worth it.

      If I go off it, the physical addiction is not that hard to overcome (use aspirin as a detox med). Then a few weeks later the tics get bad again.

      Doctors? They tried a number of other things combined with psychotherapy. Haldol was the worst. I couldn't properly hold a pen on Haldol. None of that really worked. Exercise and coffee combined with (not necessarily professional) frank discussions seems to work sometimes, although I've been depressed the past few years.

    15. Re:Just tax it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      except for normal people for which it is of no danger. news at 11, peanuts dangerous! to those with peanut allergy!

    16. Re:Just tax it. by Insanity+Defense · · Score: 1

      The difference is that if you have a peanut allergy your doctor will readily diagnose it. People who have caffeine problems mostly end up finding out that they do by accident after years (or decades in my case) of misdiagnosis by doctors.

  2. From reading the article... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...caffeine will someday become a controlled substance after the prohibitionists finish up outlawing tobacco.

    1. Re:From reading the article... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The way it's going (if "the prohibitionists" get their way at all), what psychoactive (or called such whether it really is or not) substance won't be?

  3. Drag them Feet, Feds by retroworks · · Score: 4, Funny

    Drag away. What they should be measuring is the amount of caffeine that is going into the water table from urine. At that point, it's actually affecting someone else, second hand, and may actually be appropriate to regulate.

    --
    Gently reply
    1. Re:Drag them Feet, Feds by DickBreath · · Score: 1

      Look, maybe the FDA just hasn't had enough caffeine yet to feel like trying to regulate caffeine.

      Then they would need even more to look into caffeine ending up in the water table. But why regulate that. Just imagine, caffeine on tap from every faucet. Caffeinated showers! It sounds like this should be legislated to be required.

      --

      I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
    2. Re:Drag them Feet, Feds by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

      So, you're saying is the Feds could use a nice, piping hot cup of Java to get moving?

      --
      I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
    3. Re:Drag them Feet, Feds by dbet · · Score: 1

      That amount would be (effectively) zero.

    4. Re:Drag them Feet, Feds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's just a load of shit.

    5. Re:Drag them Feet, Feds by sjames · · Score: 5, Funny

      It must be a lot. I've never seen a fish blink even once!

    6. Re:Drag them Feet, Feds by TheLink · · Score: 1

      You're just lucky not to have been chomped by a shark yet...

      That's why we pick sharks for lasers - they can close their eyes to protect them :).

      --
    7. Re:Drag them Feet, Feds by Talderas · · Score: 1

      I would prefer baconated showers.

      --
      "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
  4. Caffeine is a drug.. by mrbluze · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The part about caffeine that is dangerous is that, like other stimulants, it gives the impression of improved brain performance without really delivering it. A fatigued person propped up with caffeine still makes mistakes related to fatigue. The other effects like jitters and palpitations is probably harmful to the heart in the long term also but it's less of a hazard to others.

    --
    Do it yourself, because no one else will do it yourself. [beta blockade 10-17 Feb]
    1. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by jittles · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It is, yes. But the FDA is definitely right that it affects people differently. I can drink a red bull, a monster, a coke, tea, or anything but coffee and easily take a long nap afterwards. Something about the caffeine I get through coffee is different. It actually makes me feel alert and awake. So is there some other chemical in coffee that increases the effectiveness of caffeine for me, or is the caffeine delivered differently? Does it have a slightly different composition? I don't know. But its a difference I can definitely feel.

    2. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same for me, its kinda weird. I think its a lack of the other things that you get in energy drinks that does it. Or maybe its that there is more water content per caffeine in sodas and some energy drinks (many say they have as much caffeine as a small cup of premium coffee).

    3. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by vlm · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Gut clogging quantities of HFCS most likely. Unless you drip a quarter cup of corn syrup into your coffee as a control.
      The no-cal versions have vast quantities of strange sweeteners.

      If you want a real control, assuming you can still legally buy caffeine pills OTC (or maybe over the net) like Vivaran (sp?) you can simply pop pills equal to however many milligrams you'd like. Drink some water to wash it down and maintain hydration and its almost guaranteed to be healthier for your innards than the additives in either drink.

      Its rather telling WRT lethal dosages that they used to sell vivarin caffeine pills in 50 packs (implying you can chug them all and live) but sleep aid pills in 5 packs (implying more than a couple and you're dead). Then again they sell tylenol in 500 capsule buckets at sams club so maybe my theory doesn't apply.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    4. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by vlm · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Whoops I forgot to mention that if a cup of raw corn syrup literally knocks you out despite the caffeine you might want to stop doing that until you mention it to your doctor who will probably order a glucose tolerance test to see if you have some insulin issues. That involves chugging a bottle of corn syrup with blood sugar level testing before and periodically after. Note that only an idiot would get official medical advice from /., but this was an accurate and true anecdotal summary of what my wife had to do (result in her case was nothing wrong with her).

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    5. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by LordLimecat · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Gut clogging quantities of HFCS most likely.

      Put this stupid myth to rest. There is no known reason for-- nor observed effect-- HFCS to be processed significantly differently in your body than straight up sucrose. In 1 of the 2 most common mixtures, it has 1% more glucose (better for you); in another it has 6% more fructose (a bit worse for you). Either way, its a wash, and chemically it has the exact same stuff that sucrose has, just already partly broken down into its constituent sugars (sucrose = glucose + fructose).

      Its seriously irritating that of all things for people to worry about, they quibble about WHAT KIND of sugar is being imbibed (which has negligible effect) rather than the amount. Its like wondering whether the lake you are drowning in is fresh or brackish, and what health effects that might have on you.

    6. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Placebo effect maybe?
      Asking this because I used to play a prank to a friend of mine whenever he came for dinner: He always complained about being unable to fall asleep after drinking coffee, so since we all drank coffee after dinner I started giving him decaf without him knowing.
      Guess what, when asked the day after or a couple of days later he would say that he had difficulty falling asleep with decaf as well... Well, he didn't knew it was decaf.
      After a couple of repeats I finally told him that we were giving him decaf.... and I switch, started giving him coffee again. You got it, when asked he would say that he didn't had any problem falling asleep.

      But then again, it may not be the case with you.

    7. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Possibly Niacin.

    8. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by murphtall · · Score: 1

      You can easily buy 100g of caffeine from amazon for under 20 usd. I know cuz I did. I like it in my breakfast smoothies. Just google anhydrous caffeine

    9. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by Beardo+the+Bearded · · Score: 5, Funny

      The part about caffeine that is dangerous is that, like other stimulants, it gives the impression of improved brain performance without really delivering it.

      That's not true for all drugs. For example, ethanol intake makes me funnier, smarter, stronger, and sexier.

      --

      ---
      ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
    10. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not trying to be a d here but do you have evidence to back up the claim that it doesn't improve cognitive performance?

      I don't have one to prove it does but anecdotal support abounds. Especially once you are tolerant/dependent on it.

      I drink tea, it's had a lot more human trials than this Red Bull type chemical slurry people love these days.

    11. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by garyebickford · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well, technically each of these sugars is metabolized somewhat differently, and uses up different amounts of B vitamins in the enzyme conversion chain. IANA biochemist but it takes, IIRC, two molecules of B-something to assist in the splitting of a sucrose molecule to its constituent frucose and glucose molecules, and so forth. I forget which vitamins are used where. So again, different people will be affected differently depending on your vitamin levels as well as your phenotype.

      Funny how these things go, it wasn't that long ago that you could buy fructose at the health food store, as a 'healthy alternative' to sucrose - coming from fruit and all.

      --
      It's easier to be a result of the past, but more fun to be a cause of the future! http://www.spacefinancegroup.com/
    12. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by Lumpy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "The no-cal versions have vast quantities of strange sweeteners."

      Really? My sugar free coffee every morning has none of those. What twisted person would defile the holy coffee by adding anything to it?

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    13. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seems like the obvious solution would be to call the lower bound of when people suffer negative health limits the upper limit on safe consumption.

    14. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      Once again, the commonly touted sucrose is broken down in your body into what is basically an odd-ratio HFCS mix (Sucrose would become 50-50 glucose-fructose, while HFCS is usually 42-55 or 53-42 plus 3-5% "other sugars")

    15. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      See below for correction, ratio was slightly off, but not by much.

    16. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by NatasRevol · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Not a myth. Actual observed effects.

      http://science.slashdot.org/story/10/03/24/2122231/high-fructose-corn-syrup-causes-bigger-weight-gain-in-rats

      In case you don't want to go click it, here's TFS:
      "In an experiment conducted by a Princeton University team, 'Rats with access to high-fructose corn syrup gained significantly more weight than those with access to table sugar, even when their overall caloric intake was the same.' Long-term consumption also 'led to abnormal increases in body fat, especially in the abdomen, and a rise in circulating blood fats called triglycerides.' Psychology professor Bart Hoebel commented that 'When rats are drinking high-fructose corn syrup at levels well below those in soda pop, they're becoming obese — every single one, across the board. Even when rats are fed a high-fat diet, you don't see this; they don't all gain extra weight.'"

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    17. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by hierophanta · · Score: 4, Informative

      This is actually scientifically not true. Caffeine affects us by blocking the chemicals that make us tired. As a result we are not only feeling more awake, but actually are more awake. The crash that occurs is because the chemicals that have been blocked thus far, are in a waiting pattern until their blockage disappears after which they flood the receptors. I do agree though, there is a good amount for false positive when it comes to perceived performance though.

    18. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by AvitarX · · Score: 1

      Yes, but the post you are responding to is comparing soda levels of HFCS (and artificial sweeteners) to coffee.

      I don't buy that HFCS is particularly bad, but I am willing to be the sugar calories in a self-sugared (or non-sugared even, there was no implication of over-sweet coffee) are far lower than red-bull or soda.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    19. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by dissy · · Score: 2

      ... assuming you can still legally buy caffeine pills OTC (or maybe over the net) like Vivaran (sp?) ...

      One of my favorite health food stores sells pure powdered caffeine in bulk.
      $13 for a half ounce (smallest increment) up to $300 for a kilogram (Largest increment as far as price breaks go)

      That same health food store also sells empty gellotin capsules with which pure caffeine pills can be made, without all the stomach churning effects from the rest of the commercial "energy blends"

      There is a huge market for caffeine, and anything the FDA could end up doing is only going to make matters worse, just like every other time they've put their fingers into things in the past decade and ended up costing lives :/ I really hope they find enough sense to leave this one alone.

    20. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

      Completely agree. I'd love to see a citation.

      I'm also aware that an anecdote does not a trend make, but I can think of cases where I was simply non-functional due to tiredness, yet was able to accomplish a good amount of solid work once caffeine had some time to kick in. I'll admit that some of my work was not my best (e.g. the grad school term paper I started at 2am on the due date and finished 14 hours later after writing 99 pages), but if I have a large lunch, caffeine keeps me from simply entering a dazed coma, allowing me to actually be productive during that hour or two where I would otherwise be rather useless.

    21. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by sepiroth · · Score: 1

      But it does improve brain performance in a certain way [wikipedia]. It does not last though and the after effect can have an opposite effect.

    22. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by nabsltd · · Score: 3, Informative

      I can drink a red bull, a monster, a coke, tea, or anything but coffee and easily take a long nap afterwards. Something about the caffeine I get through coffee is different.

      Depending on how it is prepared, coffee can have more caffeine than Red Bull, and definitely has more than Coca-Cola and the vast majority of teas. See this table for details.

      You can also do some searching and see that the "caffeine" in various substances isn't always the real thing, but instead is closely related compounds.

    23. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by anagama · · Score: 1

      I can drink a red bull, a monster, a coke, tea, or anything but coffee and easily take a long nap afterwards. Something about the caffeine I get through coffee is different. It actually makes me feel alert and awake.

      I used to drink tons of coffee and lattes -- it's a nice to thing to drink here in the Pacific NW because our weather and hot drinks go perfectly together. I drank it because I like the way it tastes, but it never woke me up in the morning or kept me awake at night. I'd make myself a latte just before bed sometimes. Hot milk is really soothing (don't go there, you know what I mean).

      Then about four or five years ago I started to shake. It was embarrassing -- like I was jonesing for cocaine or meth or something. So now I drink decaff. It too neither wakes me up nor keeps me up.

      --
      What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
    24. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Leptin, buddy. Leptin.

      That 6% more fructose does have an effect, and it throws off your leptin, which means it takes more sugars to signal the brain that you can stop eating, now.

      All on it's own this means nothing, and does nothing, as you say. But when you zoom out from looking at just the chemical metabolism, you'll find that HFCS tends to encourage you to eat more. This seems to be linked to obesity.

    25. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by Obfuscant · · Score: 5, Informative

      Put this stupid myth to rest.

      You mean the myth that using fructose in place of sucrose makes no difference?

      The simple fact that a simple sugar has already been broken down to a simple sugar means that it will flood the system much more quickly than a more complex sugar that needs to be converted before transport. If we don't need to pay attention to what the sugars are, then explain why cellulose (long chains of glucose) are indigestible, while simple glucose floods the system almost as soon as it is ingested.

      Yes, sir, the metabolic paths for glucose and fructose are different, and flooding the liver with massive amounts of fructose rapidly does result in a different effect than a slower appearance of glucose. The liver and endocrine systems need time to react to the influx of the sugars no matter what they are, so a rapidly appearing slug of one kind of sugar can easily overwhelm the regulatory mechanisms of the body and cause harm where a slower appearance of a different sugar does not. That harm may only be an unnecessary conversion of sugars to glycogen and fat, but in the long term that results in obesity and that can be harmful.

      You're talking to a diabetic who has monitored his blood sugar for years through all kinds of experiments with different sugars, who can tell you that the "glycemic index" and "sugar alcohols" information is a truly dangerous myth, along with the sugar industry shills telling us that there is no danger from HFCS. Yes, you're right that cutting sugar overall is a good thing, but trying to claim that if you are going to down a sugar laden drink that it makes no difference is just parroting the sugar industry media flacks. You'd point to data denying global warming or the link between smoking and cancer as being from an industry source, why are you so quick to accept data from the sugar industry?

    26. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by Ellis+D.+Tripp · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Why pay that much? They sell it by the kilo for $30.

      http://www.amazon.com/Caffeine-Powder-Pharma-freshness-Powder/dp/B006IFGRLW/ref=pd_sbs_misc_8

      10X as much for only 50% more...

      --
      Remember "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"? Help make it a reality again! http://soylentnews.org
    27. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by jones_supa · · Score: 1

      Just remember that even decaf can have as much as 1/3 of the caffeine content remaining. Filtering the caffeine out is a bit tricky process.

      Still, it is very well possible that your friend indeed experienced a placebo effect, as you said.

    28. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by jones_supa · · Score: 3, Informative

      More specifically, the chemical is adenosine.

    29. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by Obfuscant · · Score: 2

      That's not true for all drugs. For example, ethanol intake makes me funnier, smarter, stronger, and sexier.

      And I've noticed exactly the opposite. When I intake ethanol you are dumber and uglier. The effect is, of course, gender specific and not all effects occur, since most women get prettier the more I drink. Not smarter.

    30. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

      I was staying at someone's house, and after a few cups of instant coffee I remember realising that I wasn't anywhere near as uptight as I'd normally feel having drunk that many.

      It was only *after* this that I noticed it was a jar of decaffeinated coffee (and the possibility hadn't occurred to me beforehand, as I never normally drink the stuff).

      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    31. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But the FDA is definitely right that it affects people differently.

      Which is funny, because it's never stopped the government from regulating other drugs.

    32. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by VortexCortex · · Score: 1

      The part about caffeine that is dangerous is that, like other stimulants, it gives the impression of improved brain performance without really delivering it. A fatigued person propped up with caffeine still makes mistakes related to fatigue.

      Like caffeine, Your whole "Caffeine is a Drug" point has various different effects on me. For instance, if it's not a big deal to give children, drugs in caffeinated beverages, then why the big deal about other recreational or performance enhancing drugs for adults? Seems like the laws are all sorts of fucked up, and we should just toss them out. Don't rely on blood alcohol level, some folks pass field sobriety tests at higher levels of intoxication than others. This "widely varied effects" phenomenon is typical of nearly all drugs. Our bodies and minds are very complex electrochemical machines, to properly regulate the intake of drugs we should note their effects on the individual itself -- If we can't come up with at least a fairly accurate mapping of intake to caused behavioral changes, then we should let the individuals decide for themselves, and test their abilities in order to determine if they're too drunk, too wired on caffeine, or too stoned to operate a vehicle or be presentable in public.

      Seems fairly stupid to arrest people for having a few beers and driving when we don't even record statistics for comparison of the other drug users amped up on Starbucks and Adderall, taking corners and weaving through traffic like madmen. I'd rather be in the lane next to the stoner driving like a grandma chewing a candybar than the morning rush hour stimulant users who me off without warning and cross four lanes of freeway traffic to make their exit.

      Don't get me wrong, I love a good cup of Java, however I evaluate my emotional and physical states, along with the drugs I've taken before doing anything dangerous, be caffeine, alcohol, Pseudoephedrine, Acetaminophen, or Dextromethorphan. NyQuil keeps me up all night, like having a few cups of coffee, yet if I get pulled over and tell a cop I've taken the cough syrup I could be charged with a DUI -- Yet, the a 20oz open container of coffee goes unpunished.

    33. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by zebadee · · Score: 3, Informative

      The other effects like jitters and palpitations is probably harmful to the heart in the long term

      Caffeine (at high) doses can cause heart problems much more acutely. We have shown that 0.3mM caffeine (equivalent to ~2.3g*) can modify the activity of a protein in the heart sufficiently to mimic the effect of herditary mutations capable of causing fatal arrhythmias and that effect is quick (within mins). http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18518861

      *Based on an average water volume of a 70kg man = 40L, caffeine = 194g/mole and all caffeine being absorbed.

    34. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The part about caffeine that is dangerous is that, like other stimulants, it gives the impression of improved brain performance without really delivering it. A fatigued person propped up with caffeine still makes mistakes related to fatigue. The other effects like jitters and palpitations is probably harmful to the heart in the long term also but it's less of a hazard to others.

      I'm pretty sure that someone that falls asleep at the wheel is going to do worse than the schmuck hopped up on caffeine. I know which of the two I'd rather be on the road with. Your comment is a sweeping overgeneralisation.

    35. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is because rats and mice (unlike humans) rely much more on their taste buds to regulate caloric intake. HCFS is more sweet because the freed-up fructose is sweeter than glucose, and this messes with them.

      This is also why there are studies out there saying calorie-free sweteners cause obesity in rodents, while having zero effect on people.

    36. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're mixing apples and oranges here. We can't digest cellulose because we dont have enzymes capable of breaking the beta1-4 bonds that make up this polymer, and it has no business or relation to the Sugar-HCFS conversation.

      The other fact that you are mis-informed about is the speed of digestion and method of absorption of Sucrose (Glucose+Fructose), Glucose alone, and Fructose alone. The first concept that half the people in this thread fail to grasp is that the hydrolysis of Sucrose happens so quickly, as to be irrelevant in this discussion. As far as your liver is concerned, it will have to clear similar carbohydrate loads whether you eat 100g of table sugar, or Corn suryp. The rate-limiting factor for this process is your gastric emptying: how quickly your stomach dumps chyme into the ileum. After that, the first 20 centimeters is all it takes to process the vast majority of the carbs you eat. Even plain white bread is digested and absorbed similarly fast.

      Yes, fructose is different from glucose, but there is (roughly) the same amount of it in both table sugar, and HCFS. Any biochemist or registered dietitian worth their salt will tell you that Both sugar and HCFS are equally bad for you. One is not worse than the other.

      What you SHOULD be thinking about is how much of the stuff we consume. I remember reading a study about a year ago that said the average American consumes approximately 300g of sugar PER DAY, if you factor in non-diet soda, and baked goods that have sugar added.

      Here's a fun experiment you should try next time you go shopping: try to find any kind of bread that doesnt list Cane Sugar (the "heathy" brands stick to this), Corn syrup, Honey, or any other kind of sweet filler, like molassess. It is highly unlikely that you will find anything that isn't Rye or Pumpernickel.

    37. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by LurkerXXX · · Score: 2

      Good coffee I don't add anything to. Mediocre to worse coffee I add cream and sugar to.

      Just like steaks and steak sauce.

    38. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by kwyjibo87 · · Score: 2

      More specifically, the chemical is a modified version of adenosine called cyclic AMP (cAMP). cAMP is generated by enzymes from ATP, the energy molecule of cells. It acts as a signal amplifier in cellular signaling cascades, and for the purposes of how caffeine affects the body, increased cAMP concentrations = more cellular metabolism. Think the adrenaline response at the cellular level.

      Caffeine inhibits enzymes which break down cAMP and turn off the signal. No off switch = artificial build-up of cAMP in the cell = artificial high metabolism state.

      Cocaine acts in a somewhat analogous manner, in that it doesn't increase the amount of neurotransmitters being released directly or directly stimulate neurons, but prevents released dopamine from being broken down and thus prolongs the signals artificially, leading to the psychological effects of cocaine use.

    39. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      Dropping half a cup of sugar in your coffee would probably have some effect too, don't you think?

      Were you just saving that HFCS rant up and this was the best opening you got?

    40. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by ceoyoyo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      French press Kona coffee... Nothing. The swill that comes out of the machine at work? Whiskey.

    41. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by Foolhardy · · Score: 1

      The no-cal versions have vast quantities of strange sweeteners.

      Actually, most artificial sweeteners are much sweeter than glucose, so only a tiny quantity is needed. Sucralose for example is 600 times sweeter than sugar. Wikipedia has a nice table on the subject.

      I'm not sure what "strange" is supposed to mean. There are many thousands of different chemicals present in organic foods. Many sugar substitutes are chemicals that were discovered in food plants in the first place.

    42. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 1

      There have been studies which show that caffeine is absorbed into the system more rapidly from coffee than from tea. However, the caffeine from coffee is also processed back out of the body faster when it comes from coffee than from tea (however, I do not know if the latter effect is anything more than the fact that the body cannot start filtering the caffeine out until after it is absorbed). I started drinking a cup of coffee first thing after I get up and a cup of tea when I get to work and have observed that I no longer get sleepy about an hour before lunch (although I still get sleepy about two hours after lunch).

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    43. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by KingAlanI · · Score: 1

      I get 8g of caffeine for $4 (40 pack of 200mg store brand caffeine pills).
      I also see the 500-count bottles of acetaminophen tablets.

      --
      I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
    44. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by maztuhblastah · · Score: 1

      You'd point to data denying global warming or the link between smoking and cancer as being from an industry source, why are you so quick to accept data from the sugar industry?

      You know why this is different?

      Because in those cases, there's good data from neutral parties that smoking increases the risk of lung cancer and that the earth is getting warmer.

      But that HFCS is worse, measure-for-measure, than sucrose when in food consumed by healthy adults?

      The data just ain't there. Sorry. It's just not. And no, that Princeton study that you're trying to find the link for right now doesn't count. ;)

    45. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where there is life there is coffee... where there is coffee there is life.

    46. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by ook_boo · · Score: 1

      "gives the impression of improved brain performance without really delivering it" Not too sure about that. I went off caffeine for six months once, then took a trip overseas (8 hours time difference) and had to drive 6 hours on arrival. At dusk, I noticed I was literally falling asleep at the wheel and drifting across lanes. So I pulled over to a coffee place, had my first coffee in six months, and it was like magic. No more drifting into opposing traffic.

    47. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Considering that HFCS has almost _identical_ amounts of the constituent sugars compared to sucrose, the obvious conclusion is that the the supposed observed effect has to do with something other than the few percentage difference in fructose. LIke maybe the fact that HFCS tasted better to rats than sucrose.

      Fructose does cause fat build up more than glucose. But sucrose and HFCS are nearly identical. It's patently retarded to think that HFCS is significantly any worse, per se. There's no basic chemical model which would allow for it. Likewise, there's no reason to believe there's any difference in intestinal uptake such that it would cause any significant difference in weight gain. It's pseudo-science.

      And if fructose is worse than glucose (it's certainly metabolized differently), you're better off drinking pepsi than a bottle of fruit juice, all things being equal. But HFCS v. sucrose... pah-lease.

    48. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by gTsiros · · Score: 1

      decaf tastes very different to normal coffee. At least the jacobs brand that i frequent.

      --
      Looking for people to chat about multicopters, coding, music. skype: gtsiros
    49. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The threshold doctors use to say that you are normal or not is way too high. The human body was never meant to deal with the massive intake of sugar like almost everybody have nowadays. I am still considered as "normal" despite being just below the threshold of diabetes. Whenever I have (or had actually) a typical dose of sugar like a glass of fruit juice, a soda pop, a piece of cake and such, I am hit by drowsiness. Over the years, I compensated this effect with more and more caffeine to offset the sugar-induced drowsiness.

      I bet this is the general rule. People need to have coffee or other caffeine-containing drinks mainly because of their huge sugar intake throughout the day.

      Ask for a copy of her results and see by yourself how well she deals with high blood sugar. Optimal health is when you keep your blood sugar at your fasting level all the time. Any variation is detrimental to your health.

    50. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by vlm · · Score: 1

      ceoyoyo has the answer. We aren't hummingbirds or honeybees evolved for millions of years to eat mass quantities of sweeteners as our primary damn near sole calorie source, so trying it is probably pretty dumb idea. Some fruits and berries occasionally yeah great but not as the primary source of calories for an entire lifetime. On top of that, Fing around with the exact "natural" ratio of fructose is probably unwise. Bulk dissolved fructose is almost certainly the worst sweetener you can consume from a biochemical standpoint looking at how internal organs react to it (talking about rational choices here, so we'll forget about lead acetate or antifreeze-type glycol). Very much like ethanol, complete avoidance is probably unnecessary, but having it take over your life is equally unwise. Regardless if your coffee is either pure untainted black or maybe a teaspoon of "normal" table sugar its incredibly unrealistic to compare it to a big can of energy drink which has a giant dollop of HFCS not a dainty little teaspoon at most.

      I mean, health issues or not, you wouldn't just crack open a small bottle of corn syrup, chug it, and assume it would have no short term effect on your tummy at all?

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    51. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mod parent up!

      right now!

    52. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      I've never noticed the "prettier" part when imbibing. I may be more likely or interested in taking advantage of said prettiness, but I have absolutely no idea how someone would be able to drink enough to go home with an 'ugly' simply on the basis of alcohol.

      For me, my tolerance for stupidity doesn't necessarily go down, but my general giveafuck gets depleted and fewer things in general agitate me. That's a win for everyone, as I'm more social and lively.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    53. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by AntEater · · Score: 1

      Be careful, you're going to upset someone's simplified understanding of reality.

      --
      Alex, I'll take keybindings not used by Emacs for $400....
    54. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its genetic.
      https://www.23andme.com/health/Caffeine-Metabolism/

    55. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      I love your citations.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    56. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      I love your citations.

      And your 'obvious' conclusions. That totally ignore the same caloric input.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    57. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by rocket+rancher · · Score: 1

      The part about caffeine that is dangerous is that, like other stimulants, it gives the impression of improved brain performance without really delivering it. A fatigued person propped up with caffeine still makes mistakes related to fatigue. The other effects like jitters and palpitations is probably harmful to the heart in the long term also but it's less of a hazard to others.

      The assertion that caffeine is dangerous because it gives only the impression of improved brain performance without really delivering it is categorically false. Caffeine use happens to be great for activities that require heightened awareness of your immediate circumstances, like driving, flying, combat, and certain sports. It's why caffeine (ab)use is considered to be doping, and is screened for by athletic commissions. 84% of the caffeine in your body metabolizes into a pCyclic adenosine monophosphate (cAMP) booster called paraxanthine, which directly affects your prefrontal cortex. The prefrontal cortex is associated with long term goal-directed planning and behavior modeling, which can be (and often are) in conflict with the short term needs of the moment. Paraxanthine interferes with the ability of neurons in the prefrontal cortex to maintain communication with other parts of the brain, freeing up your cognitive resources for use on what's happening right now. Seriously -- thinking about what you are going to have for dinner tonight is kinda pointless when some competitor has decided that you are going to be his lunch right now. Caffeine really delivers improved brain performance in a measurable way, by adjusting the brain's chemistry in a manner that helps you to focus on what you are doing right now.

    58. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      Its not clear (because theres no clear link to the actual study), but from what Im reading it has gotten a lot of criticism because it did not actually do a proper comparision between sucrose and HFCS, but rather extrapolated from an earlier study ( ) Maybe Im not reading that properly, however.

      More problematic for this comparison, they werent actually comparing HFCS to sucrose:

      Hoebel: The goal of this paper was not exclusively to compare HFCS to sucrose. Rather, we were interested in assessing 1) limited vs. continuous access to HFCS, as our previous research has focused on binge eating of sugars, 2) differences in body weight gain as a results of access to HFCS that might result in males vs. females, and 3) the effects of long term access to HFCS on parameters such as triglyceride levels and fat accrual.

      Theres also no mention of whether it was a blind study on the part of the experimenters or not, which tends to be pretty important ( I dont know if the term "double blind" would be appropriate here, as Im sure the rats neither know nor care what they are eating).

      My issue is that the only studies I have seen on HFCS have tended to be "inadequate" for comparing sucrose and HFCS; when the research head says thats not their goal, thats kind of a problem.

    59. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      Oops, links should have been
      1) http://soursaltybittersweet.com/content/hfcs-follow-what-rats-princeton-can-and-can%E2%80%99t-tell-us , among others.... it looks like maybe I did misread and that what was not controlled for was how much rat chow they ate. Still a fairly big problem; perhaps the HFCS group ate more chow for whatever reason, either related or unrelated to HFCS.
      2) http://grist.org/article/interview-with-princeton-hfcs-researcher-dr-bart-hoebel/

    60. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      Still completely ignoring this:
      "Rats with access to high-fructose corn syrup gained significantly more weight than those with access to table sugar, even when their overall caloric intake was the same"

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    61. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A true coffee lover (addict) will tell you that there is such a thing as caffine withdrawal. I call them "coffee headaches".

      When I was a teenager, my mother became concerned that I was drinking too much coffee. Without telling me, she switched the coffee to decafinated. I was so miserable (and made everyone around me miserable also) for a week that she gave up her experiment. When she stopped the switch, VOILA! I was myself again.

      Another little tidbit. A friend of mine cannot drink coffee after 5:00 pm because drinking it will keep him up all night. I can drink coffee right before going to bed and sleep soundly. It might be the placebo effect, but the effects are very real.

    62. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      As I said, the other major HFCS blend has LESS fructose than glucose. This is the major problem with every single comparison between "HFCS" and "sugar" ive ever seen: they completely ignore that there are two different blends, and no matter how you look at it one SHOULD be slightly better than sugar, and one slightly worse, if there is any difference whatsoever.

    63. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      Be careful, youve apparently come to accept that anything you see that agrees with your preconceptions, regardless of whether it agrees with chemistry or chemists.

    64. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by unitron · · Score: 1

      HFCS is processed by my taste buds differently from sugar cane sugar (which is why Mountain Dew no longer tastes the same or as good), and that's reason enough for me to want it banned.*

      On the anecdotal side, I wonder if there isn't a correlation (regardless of whether there's any causation going on) between the rise in obesity and the rise in HFCS replacement of "real" sugar.

      *Actually what I want is for the government to quit doing stuff that monkeys with the price of both.

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

    65. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by unitron · · Score: 1

      I have found that I like coffee best with nothing added.

      No water, no heat, no force applied to the beans to reduce them to smaller pieces, no transporting of them from where they grew to anywhere near where I am...

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

    66. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      Youre ignoring the whole "the controls werent equal, and the researchers didnt bother to control for experimental bias" thing. Thats not exactly minor, and criticism (even from "neutral" observers) for the princeton study isnt exactly rare.

      If I read the criticisms correctly they also didnt bother measuring how much chow was eaten, which makes it pretty hard to link the weight gain to HFCS.

      Criticisms of the princeton study

      The claim that the metabolic consequences of HFCS and sucrose differ radically should raise eyebrows among physiologists. While I’d be skeptical of any results that find a difference, I would find good evidence for differences fascinating...... So if I were a metabolic physiologist, I might be tempted to look into how HFCS makes rats less active.

      Except that I wouldn’t because after reading the paper, I would note that the experimental design, statistical analysis, and interpretation of the results in Bocarsly et al 2010 are deeply flawed. ......
      [Issues]

      • Experimental Design. The experiment lacks a 24-h Sucrose treatment and thus any interpretation of the 24-h HFCS treatment confounds two potential factors, time (12-h v. 24-h) and sugar (HFCS v. sucrose).
      • Second, and most importantly, because this is relevant to all of their results, the authors either fail or make no mention of controlling for type I error using something like a Tukey-HSD test

      And so on, if you wish to read.

      Another article which brings up a different issue...
      Complicating things further, the researchers cite a related study of female rats that found no difference in weight gain between animals that consumed HFCS or sugar over an eight-week period.

      And at the end of the day, the real issue is that one study does not prove a point, particularly when it doesnt even begin to offer a mechanism whereby 5% more fructose would cause a significant difference in weight. Studies showing negative effects from EM radiation come to mind.

    67. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Well said.

      Just like steaks and steak sauce.

    68. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      There is no known reason for-- nor observed effect-- HFCS to be processed significantly differently in your body than straight up sucrose. In 1 of the 2 most common mixtures, it has 1% more glucose (better for you); in another it has 6% more fructose (a bit worse for you). Either way, its a wash, and chemically it has the exact same stuff that sucrose has, just already partly broken down into its constituent sugars (sucrose = glucose + fructose).

      Sure, if you completely ignore the effects of metabolism, the sucrase cycle, rate-limiting effects of enzymes, and ignore the liver and pancreas, it's exactly the same.

      Look into this more, all the research is available.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    69. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      Why does the study need to offer a mechanism?

      Why can't they just present facts?

      We fed the same amount of calories of both HFCS and sucrose to two groups of rats.
      The HCFS rats were much fatter, with worse health problems.

      That's enough of a point to produce a paper.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    70. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      Its enough for a paper, but not for the statements youre making-- not when your controls arent equal, not without eliminating experimental bias, and not without corroborating studies.

    71. Re:Caffeine is a drug.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Funny how these things go, it wasn't that long ago that you could buy fructose at the health food store, as a 'healthy alternative' to sucrose - coming from fruit and all.

      You still can. Nowadays it's marketed as "agave nectar".

  5. 2008 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    A journal article from 2008. Thanks, Slashdot. Cutting edge stuff, really.

    1. Re:2008 by HaZardman27 · · Score: 1

      That wasn't the primary article linked to in the summary, genius.

      --
      Apparently wizard is not a legitimate career path, so I chose programmer instead.
  6. Mmm Coffee And Cigarettes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mmm Coffee And Cigarettes.

    1. Re:Mmm Coffee And Cigarettes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Makes the morning go so much better.

      And by go, I mean go.

  7. Um... by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Caffeine gets cleared from the body at different rates because of genetic variations, gender, and even whether a person is a smoker.

    ...Isn't that true for most substances?

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    1. Re:Um... by kevkingofthesea · · Score: 2

      Yes, to varying degrees, but a lot of substances have fairly predictable half-lives in the body.

    2. Re:Um... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      All water soluble non-digested chemicals, yes. If something is digested, it is broken up into different compounds that you need to pay attention to, and fat soluble chemicals never actually leave (like LSD), they just get stored away in the alrd region.

      The nearly avoided meaning of this article is that caffeine (like alcohol) is a dangerous drug, but also has such a massive culture of (mild) use that it is very hard to come up with regulations that won't get the authors lynched. Much like alcohol and other water soluble drugs, you can cart out examples of overdoses and garner sympathy, but whenever you try to draw a line it is either 1) effectively random as many people consume more with no ill effects or 2) accurate but sufficiently complicated that you need a blood test to see where you stand. Unlike alcohol, there isn't a group of MADD mothers trying to guilt-trip everyone into outlawing it completely (just a group of Mormons, but they're not as loud). As I am sufficiently disinterested in most drugs, I do not know which examples of banned chemical are water soluble, but I'm sure a devout libertarian can come in and fill in the blanks.

    3. Re:Um... by Brian+Feldman · · Score: 3, Informative

      fat soluble chemicals never actually leave (like LSD), they just get stored away in the alrd region

      This is wrong. Lysergic acid diethylamide is broken down by monoamineoxidase. This is just like the myth of LSD being stored in your spinal fluid and causing flashbacks or the one of THC being stored in your fat and getting you high when you exercise -- completely baseless.

      --
      Brian Fundakowski Feldman
    4. Re:Um... by Shoten · · Score: 2

      What's most true about most substances and also caffeine is "that lethal limit can vary widely from person to person." Yeah, that's true of most things; hence the standard measure of toxicity for anything is called "LD50," which stands for "lethal dose, 50%". It's the dosage in mass of substance/kg of body weight that will kill 50% of people who ingest/breathe/snort/whatever it. So why this is some kind of huge challenge is beyond me. For some substances the deviation from LD50 is smaller (botulinus toxin) and for others it's larger, but you still have a good means of measuring it, and the LD50 for caffeine is 192mg/kg for rats, 224 mg/kg for rabbits, 127 mg/kg for mice, and so on. (I'll know the LD50 for Bob as soon as he stops twitching... *turns to look behind me* "Settle down Bob, this will all be over soon. There's no sense trying to chew through the duct tape; I used too much of it for you to be able to get away.")

      It also seems that what matters isn't the half-life of caffeine. Caffeine is absorbed almost instantly within the gut; it will actually travel through your skin, if you rub it on your body, it's so easily absorbed. So the peak concentration in the blood is pretty easy to predict, coming at just after the time of peak dosage consumption. Anything after that is lower, unless you consume mor....ahhh, I get it now.

      --

      For your security, this post has been encrypted with ROT-13, twice.
    5. Re:Um... by crazycheetah · · Score: 1

      It is.

      According to my Physiology/Pharmacology textbook, the half-life of caffeine is 3-7 hours, though. Most drugs are cleared from the body at different rates depending on the person, but you can figure out a typical half-life range fairly easily. I don't know why the writer of this article ignored that (unless they just didn't bother to research it any more or thought that it complicated the article more than necessary).

    6. Re:Um... by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      Unlike alcohol, there isn't a group of MADD mothers trying to guilt-trip everyone into outlawing it completely (just a group of Mormons, but they're not as loud).

      Well, MADD is against drunk driving, which is an activity that one can participate in, but the consequences of which are normally borne by someone completely innocent. That's a fairly big injustice. Same goes for cellphones and driving - the user most likely will survive whatever happens, but the third party often will not. It's really a form of privatizing profit (I can drink and drive myself home, or I'm bored, let's see what's on twitter right now), and socializing risk (I won't die, most likely. Who cares about the other car or pedestrian or cyclist? They knew the risks). Of course, I'm not advocating prohibition, just prohibiition should you wish to drive.

      And yes, sleepiness while driving is also a bad habit, which is also borne from our work ethic and culture, something we also need to change so the roads aren't filled with half-awake zombies. (Caffeine can help to a limited extent).

      OD'ing on caffeine results in the OD'er making a (possibly one-way) trip to the ER, so the risk is borne completely by the person participating in the activity. In this case, it's perfectly acceptable - I don't care what you do to your body, as long as it doesn't affect me. Drunk driving, texting, sleepiness, they affect me as I could be the victim of your bad judgement. But OD'ing on caffeine? Not so much (except in a contrived case where you OD'd and fell dead behind the wheel and I happened to not notice you careening around the road).

    7. Re:Um... by Obfuscant · · Score: 1

      "Settle down Bob, this will all be over soon. There's no sense trying to chew through the duct tape; I used too much of it for you to be able to get away."

      Sorry, your data has been contaminated by the lethal effects of the adhesive on the back of duct tape. The LD50 is pretty small, I know, since it takes very little duct tape when applied to cover the nose and mouth of a person to make them a statistic. At least in my experience.

    8. Re:Um... by dryeo · · Score: 2

      While MADD started out by being against drunk driving, they've pretty well been taken over by complete abolitionists.
      Caffeine is like most forms of speed, take too much and you get jittery and start hallucinating. Having hallucinating drivers on the road can also be dangerous.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    9. Re:Um... by pev · · Score: 1

      But also most significantly activity level! If you're sat at your desk and never exercise your body takes a lot longer. If you're active and doing lots of exercise, gone much faster!

  8. Re:Tremors and explosive diarrhea by vlm · · Score: 4, Funny

    No no no AC we're talking about caffeine here not taco bell. Get with the program!

    --
    "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
  9. The smell alone by futhermocker · · Score: 2

    Makes me want to puke.

    Although being a coffee addict myself I never tried a single can of "power" or "energy" drinks, just because the smell is so distinct, yuck!

    Cougar Boost anybody? /American Dad

    --
    KERNEL PANIC -SIGFAULT AT ADDRESS #51A54D07
  10. Mr Anecdotal here by EmperorOfCanada · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Some caffeine from Green Tea keeps me programming, driving, studying, etc. Red Bull makes me wound up and literally makes my heart skip a beat every now and then. Straight caffeine pills just knock me out and a few hours later make me angry. So needless to say I limit myself to occasional green teas. (Matcha!)

    If my wife has a coffee after 6pm she will have trouble sleeping that night.

    My brothers can't operate with much less than 5+ cups of strong coffee per day.

    So needless to say within my reach are a pretty wide set of reactions to caffeine. The drug I would love to see studied even more is Chocolate.

    1. Re:Mr Anecdotal here by magic+maverick+ · · Score: 2

      Some caffeine from Green Tea keeps me programming, driving, studying, etc. Red Bull makes me wound up and literally makes my heart skip a beat every now and then. Straight caffeine pills just knock me out and a few hours later make me angry. So needless to say I limit myself to occasional green teas. (Matcha!)

      Red Bull has other stuff (like taurine) besides caffeine that might be the cause. The green tea making (do you have rituals?) might be part of what helps you keep going as well.

      If my wife has a coffee after 6pm she will have trouble sleeping that night.

      Do a controlled test. Give her a decafe, but don't tell her it's decafe. As normal, see if it affects her. Proper double blind tests have shown that students (it's always students because they are cheap) act as if decafe has caffeine, but that warm milk laced with caffeine is just warm milk (and thus helps them sleep).

      My brothers can't operate with much less than 5+ cups of strong coffee per day.

      Suggest that they wean themselves off the stuff. It's not healthy at those levels. Swap in a decafe instead of ordinary coffee, and then continue with the other 4+ cups for a bit. Then swap out another coffee for decafe, and repeat until only drinking decafe. It might be the taste and the associated feelings of relaxation they are really after (rather than the caffeine).

      So needless to say within my reach are a pretty wide set of reactions to caffeine. The drug I would love to see studied even more is Chocolate.

      I'd rather they studied THC and LCD more. Chocolate is legal, the other two should be.
      ---
      Point of this post is that it might not just be the particular drug, it might also be the associations that the person has with the drug. Some people only smoke when drinking for example. Or smoke after sex (so /.ers wouldn't smoke in that case... haha).
      And some people just feel like a cup of good tea or a glass of beer after a hard days work. It's the association of, well, work's over I can relax.

      --
      HELP MY ACCOUNT HAS BEEN HACKED BY AN ILLIBERAL ART STUDENT SET TO DESTROY THE INTERWEBZ!
    2. Re:Mr Anecdotal here by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

      The tannins in the tea slow down and stretch in time the caffeine absorption so instead of a rush you get a very mild, but prolonged high. Well, then again, Gyokuro is still pretty strong stuff.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    3. Re:Mr Anecdotal here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have one of those diverse reactions. When I drink coffee or tea, I feel ok aside from heart rate rising and blood pressure, but about six hours later I get stomach pains and chest pains that respond somewhat to Tums (I have been tested for reflux and told it is only partially that). On days with no coffee, I get nothing in terms of problems. I suspect that there is some kind of chemical depletion that goes on in the liver or stomach that causes this.

      The only real way to avoid it is to avoid coffee.

    4. Re:Mr Anecdotal here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd rather they studied THC and LCD more. Chocolate is legal, the other two should be.

      Shit! When did that happen? They aren't gonna take my laptop when I get busted with weed now are they?

    5. Re:Mr Anecdotal here by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Give her a decafe, but don't tell her it's decafe.

      Should I not pronounce it as decaffAY, or decAYf?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  11. The best legal stimulant, but should be respected. by urbanriot · · Score: 1

    Since I've become an adult with habitual patterns, I've been able to tangibly gauge the effects of caffeine on my mind and I'm not entirely sure that young people, what with all the other natural chemicals raging through their body, are able to do the same.

    I'm a person that's tangibly sensitive to the effects of caffeine. For me, a single morning cup of coffee can immediately waken me to the point where I'd be if I naturally allowed myself that one hour transition from waking to working. However, a second cup of coffee within a 5 hour period will cause my mind to race faster than I can effectively communicate and I have 'the jitters'. Also, a large cup of Starbucks will literally make it impossible for me to work as I can't focus on my screen or conversations. And if I have a coffee after 3:00 PM? I can forget about sleeping before 2:00 AM.

    What works best for me, what allows me to reach an effective plateau, is one cup of coffee in the morning and a cup of green tea (or yerba) in the afternoon - I'm always sharp, on the ball and I'm less distracted by whatever causes ADHD.

  12. Toxic level by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    The toxic level in humans, about 10 g, is roughly the equivalent of imbibing 75 cups of brewed coffee (in 8-oz mugs) or 120 cans of Red Bull over a few hours.

    According to the eminent Wikipedia, that's the LD50 (150 to 200 mg/kg).
    If you gave an average group of humans 10g of caffeine, half of them would die.

    Now LD50 is a way to measure of toxicity, but I think it's fair to assume that a substance is toxic well below the lethal dose.

    1. Re:Toxic level by MiniMike · · Score: 4, Funny

      According to the eminent Wikipedia, that's the LD50 (150 to 200 mg/kg).
      If you gave an average group of humans 10g of caffeine, half of them would die.

      But you wouldn't know which ones for a few hours...

    2. Re:Toxic level by vlm · · Score: 1

      I think it's fair to assume that a substance is toxic well below the lethal dose.

      Careful, there's a lot of stuff like water, salt (at least WRT about 90% of the population), water soluble vitamins, minerals, and "food" in general where that doesn't even remotely apply.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    3. Re:Toxic level by Ol+Biscuitbarrel · · Score: 1

      Should people be smoking fancy cigars instead? Why don't you smoke it already? Puff, puff! Go, go, go, go, go!

    4. Re:Toxic level by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just replying to say I got your reference.

    5. Re:Toxic level by Ol+Biscuitbarrel · · Score: 1

      The key is to grab life by the hojos!

    6. Re:Toxic level by dissy · · Score: 1

      I think it's fair to assume that a substance is toxic well below the lethal dose.

      Careful, there's a lot of stuff like water *snip*

      Careful now, we shouldn't underestimate the lethal dangers of Dihydrogen Monoxide!

      After all, it's shown to "mutate DNA, denature proteins, disrupt cell membranes, and chemically alter critical neurotransmitters"

      We should all be very concerned about this dangerous substance!

      -- dhmo.org forever

    7. Re:Toxic level by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

      I think it's fair to assume that a substance is toxic well below the lethal dose.

      The substance is toxic, period, regardless of dose. In fact, virtually anything, when given in high enough quantities, can be dangerous to humans. As most of us know, it's perfectly possible to die from water poisoning.

      So, yes, caffeine is toxic to people even in lower dosages. It's also potentially dangerous to people in lower dosages, but as a measure of toxicity, we can take the LD50 as an indication that, in this case, most people would need to consume far more than they could ever reasonably be expected to consume in order to be in danger. And if you check the MSDS for caffeine, you'll see that it's labeled as being hazardous with a health hazard rating of 2, but that's pretty mild in general, and it's referring to it in an undiluted pure form too.

    8. Re:Toxic level by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice try. A level is usually quoted a (mg of substance / kg of body mass), and of course it's an average because different people are more sensitive to any substance than others. Additionally, there may be synergies between one substance and another. Then there's the subject of the rate at which you ingest the substance vs. the rate at which your body will clear it from your blood stream.

      Red Bull, et al, may contain large quantities of niacin which can dialate your arteries and increase blood flow, especially surface capillaries, which is why your skin tingles and your feel flushed.

      These so-called energy drinks target people that like the high they provide, and they can exacerbate existing physical problems. The fact that they're agressively marketed to the party set is no accident, and it reveals the lack of concern all these companies hold for their customers.

      At this point FDA is captive to the mission of commerce. It's underfunded and understaffed, and it's up against a largely ignorant population that's kept in the dark by an inadequate, antiquated educational system that has been stymied in any meaningful way to provide the background necessary for most to fully comprehend basic personal health issues, biology, physiology or the consequences of responding to marketing/advertising campaigns which employ increasingly sophisticated techniques to condition young consumers without any responsibility to the humans they feed off of.

      In the U.S., if you exercise your brain, you know it, and you're continually bombarded with the message that you're powerless to effect responsible change. It's a sham at so many levels that it boggles the already niacin and caffeine adled mind.

    9. Re:Toxic level by Alomex · · Score: 1

      The substance is toxic, period, regardless of dose.

      Adding the word period doesn't make a statement true. Caffeine in low dosages has almost no side effects. In fact it is unique among the behavior altering drugs in that regard. There are even highly respected medical researchers at NIH trying to use it as a vehicle to deliver medicinal drugs to the body since it is one of the mildest substances known to reach deep into the CNS system.

      Need more proof about how mild is caffeine? It is given to preemie babies as a stimulant for chrissakes.

    10. Re:Toxic level by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      All those substances are likely to have some nasty effects short of killing you if you take a high enough (but sublethal) dose.

    11. Re:Toxic level by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

      Adding the word period doesn't make a statement true.

      Sure, but pointing that out in order to contradict something that's factual and then going on to try and argue with me over a topic we clearly agree on is just plain silly. If you had read my comment, you'd have seen that the entire second half of it is devoted to pointing out how harmless caffeine is (that's why I included the MSDS link). I'm glad you agree, but I'm unclear why you felt a need to argue with me.

      And my first sentence has nothing to do with the side effects or harm caused by caffeine, though I can see why you took it that way. I was trying to point out that the word "toxic" had been misapplied (most people incorrectly use it to mean "harmful", when it really has a very narrow definition referring to substances with a high toxicity value). How toxic a substance is has nothing to do with dosage, but how harmful a substance is has everything to do with toxicity and dosage (e.g. cyanide is a "toxic" substance regardless of quantity, even if it isn't harmful at low dosages). That was my point, though admittedly I was not very clear in making it.

  13. There should be a simple test by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    that would measure the effect on the subject, rather than physiological measures.

    Give the subject some simple tasks and ask him or her to solve the problem using Perl. Check back after two hours:

    - less than 50 Perl LOC: not enough caffeine
    - 50 - 500 Perl LOC: just enough caffeine
    - more than 500 Perl LOC: too much caffeine

    1. Re:There should be a simple test by PRMan · · Score: 3, Funny

      I would think it would be more like:

      - 500 lines of Perl: not enough caffeine
      - 50 lines of Perl: just enough caffeine
      - 1 line of Perl: too much caffeine

      --
      Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
    2. Re:There should be a simple test by chmod+a+x+mojo · · Score: 1

      PERL has lines? I always just sat on my keyboard.... it looks the same.

      --
      To err is human; effective mayhem requires the root password!
    3. Re:There should be a simple test by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I find that if you tried to graph the effects of caffeine on programming, it would look more like the graph for the ballmer's peak... The trick becomes mixing the two to reach that peak and maintain the peak of both at the same time for an extended amount of time...

  14. At least they already regulated the important part by medv4380 · · Score: 1

    I can see the problems they are having with regulation. They got the important part at least with getting rid of alcoholic energy drinks. The Idiots mixing Alcohol and Energy drinks now have to do it on their own. Selling it at a store already mixed gives people a false sense of safety. Whoever thought of mixing a Red Bull or Coffee with alcohol was a moron. Things like Red Bull and Coffee have too little caffeine unless you're sensitive. I think their real issue should be with things like 5 hour energy where it's a 4 shots of coffee in a small container. 4 cups of coffee over the day probably wont kill you even if you're sensitive. But one shot of 5 hour energy is a different story if you're sensitive to it.

  15. symptoms of a bigger problem by CaptainNerdCave · · Score: 1

    The FDA _should_ keep dragging its collective feet, because there are MANY more dangerous things that should be targeted first, alcohol being number one on that list. My guess is that the main reason there are so many people going to hospitals with caffeine-related symptoms is because this country is overloaded with obese people who have heart conditions. This is just another instance of natural selection.

    Caffeine's deadly effects are already well-known, it's called "LD50", like many other substances that can be detrimental in huge quantities. Any guesses about if consuming that much caffeine with that much fluid actually can cause one to die? That's another argument.

    Ephedra disappeared from the market because of negative press coverage of several stupid athletes who abused it. I doubt caffeine is in any real danger, it's even more prevalent than alcohol, because it doesn't stop a person from functioning as a person.

  16. Different rates? isn't this also true of alcohol? by fantomas · · Score: 2

    From the summary: "Caffeine gets cleared from the body at different rates because of genetic variations, gender, and even whether a person is a smoker."

    - isn't this also true of alcohol? Any slashdot readers with a bit of medical knowledge help me understand the difference between how the body processes the two different substances?

  17. More helmet & seat belt laws by rmdingler · · Score: 1

    Every drug affects every user individually, and to further confound things, the effects often vary in the individual user from one dose to the next. Alcohol, marijuana, Advil, and opiates are each subject to personal efficacy variables such as frequency of use, innate tolerance, mood, sleep patterns, amount of food ingested, and undoubtedly many more. This is the very thing that separates the thinking man from the drug abuser. I don't need to be told via a County burn ban not to burn trash when it hasn't rained in two months and everything in between the burn pile and my home is dry tinder. I don't need to be told what my optimal morning caffeine ingestion amount is.

    --
    Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

    Ernest Hemingway

    1. Re:More helmet & seat belt laws by jones_supa · · Score: 1

      Exactly. Ultimately everyone is responsible themselves regulating their drug intake.

  18. At that volume, pure water will kill you by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

    n/t

    --
    I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
  19. Re:Different rates? isn't this also true of alcoho by Talennor · · Score: 2

    Difference: Current US regulation: you must clearly state the amount of alcohol in any canned/bottled/whatever drink.

    --

    //TODO: signature
  20. How? by ak3ldama · · Score: 3, Interesting

    How can they regulate this? You can go to almost any grocery/goods store and buy a 33 ounch can of ground coffee. They would surely let you buy as many of these as you wish to. Since a bunch of stupid white kids drink monsters too fast they now need to pursue regulation of it? Really? I know, maybe they should pass a law stating that energy drinks cannot taste better than coffee so as to damper the enthusiam with which these drinks are imbibed. Dumb.

    Caveat of my own stupidity: While in the dorms one weekend night I drank two pots of coffee in a relatively short span of time. What would that be? Maybe 2x 6x cups of coffee? So somewhere around 1200mg or so? Anyways my stomach hurt, my head kinda spun, and my legs twitched a little as I laid in bed wondering when I would fall asleep. I learned from that to take it easy.

    --
    "but money is the God of Algiers & Mahomet their prophet." - Rich. O'Bryen June 8th 1786
  21. Simple Answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    JUst put a warning label. "Caution: May cause death in high volumes. Drink at your own risk." And let people figure out for themselves where their toxicity level is.

    And no, I'm not biased (drinking my fourth cup of coffee just for the afternoon).

    1. Re:Simple Answer by moderatorrater · · Score: 1

      They could put that on literally everything.

  22. Why is it so hard? by Dishwasha · · Score: 1

    Why doesn't the FDA do like any other governmental or lawmaking entity does and write the laws to the weakest denominator and make everybody else suffer?

  23. Re:At least they already regulated the important p by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    There's nothing wrong with some whiskey or scotch in coffee.
    There's everything wrong with stupid morons. Can we please just get rid of the warning labels and let them kill themselves off?

  24. Isn't it hilarious? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Such an unstable compound is allowed freely on the market, yet some completely harmless ones that are overdosed because they have been forced to street drug taking (and often mixing) are banned completely.

    I'm glad that MDMA is finally getting looked at, AGAIN, for use in treatment of severe depression and stress.
    The damn thing isn't bad in the slightest, what is bad is the doses given out by silly little chemistry dropouts or dealers mixed with fucking talcum powder or some other nonsense. I've seen so many descriptions of people taking E that are completely and factually incorrect to what MDMA actually does to you.
    So many of them have been mixed with speed or other crap like that.

    Note that I am not a person that even takes drugs like that for getting some high or whatever.
    The best part about an energy drink is the taste, mainly, and pretty much all of them have the same damn tastes too.
    And even then, I rarely have them as is, maybe twice every 1.5~months when I buy a couple bottles of Rockstar. (which actually does taste different in this case, and really damn good)

    But even I can see how moronic the drug bans are. And worse is passive drugs are on the verge of being increased. Passive drugs should be outright BANNED.
    Passive drugs do cause damage, and can even cause more damage to others in some cases. (simple example being smoking through a filter, then blowing anything away from you towards other people, they inhale a good chunk of that smoke that never went through a filter, bam, considerable more damage already, most will be breathed back out, but the damage was alreay done)
    I'd be completely fine with people getting shitfaced on heroin out the ass, or that drug that rots bodies, kill yourself all you want, but weed? Hell no. Get out. Inject that crap in to your eyeballs all you want, but burning anything organic is carcinogenic and seriously damaging. That includes even burning food. (but that is for another argument)
    Obviously nobody can regulate what happens in the walls of ones house very easily, but putting children at risk for one should be seriously punished. As much as a potentially psycho parent would be. Both will either hinder or kill the kid earlier than they should have been in the end. There is no stretching, just compression.
    In the end, they cause far more damage to everything else which makes everyone else suffer indirectly. It IS bad, period. Opinions don't even matter.

    In the case of Caffeine, it is a rare exception to the rule. Doses don't seem to have any easy relation to bodies to measure.
    But it isn't passive so shouldn't be banned, just warned against. (like fatty foods, heavy salt, etc.)
    Obviously deal with cases of HUGE doses in a single drink because that stuffs nasty even for those who are capable of taking it. (same deal with alcohol)

    Oh this world sucks sometimes. It reminds me of a whiny 13 year old. That is where society is right now. A whiny emo 13 year old who cuts. It is embarrassing.
    So inconsistent, wasteful, annoying and suicidal, don't forget over-entitled to everything.

    1. Re:Isn't it hilarious? by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      If they're completely harmless how can you overdose?

  25. Re:The best legal stimulant, but should be respect by cockroach2 · · Score: 1

    Well, I envy you. I haven't felt any effect from coffee in ages (I literally cannot remember if it ever affected me) and I can easily go to sleep after a strong cup of coffee. I may have to try significantly higher dosages but I don't really like the idea. Having a substance as easily available as coffee actually keep you awake must be awesome...

  26. Hacker habits by jones_supa · · Score: 1

    I hope the hacker community has grown out of the old culture of everyone robotically drinking coffee and caffeinated sodas. Sometimes at workplace it's sad to see someone churning code and a huge pile of empty energy drink cans aside him. Like, is this some kind of tough profession through which you have to be constantly mildly drugged to cope. Slightly disgusting.

    1. Re:Hacker habits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Slightly disgusting"
      Oh, sure, overlook the penicillin growing in last weeks pizza box, tissue all over from 2001 but focus on the Jolt Cola cans. You shouldn't be looking in my cubical, it's not FDA approved.

  27. "regulate"? by skelly33 · · Score: 1

    I'm not so sure regulate is even the right word. They might make a recommendation for maximum daily allowance, but unless they're going to make it a federally controlled substance (i.e. on par with cocaine), the FDA will in fact have no degree of control - or "regulation" if you will - over people's personal intake. Even alcoholic beverages are not "regulated" for quantity of consumption. They may charge a tax on it... they may make a test that measures how much is too much when operating a vehicle... but they can't regulate the amount that an individual consumes - over-consumption regularly lands people in the hospital or the morgue.

    Safe (relative) caffeine intake, like alcohol, comes down to one knowing their own limits and self-regulating. Awareness is important, and the FDA could certainly have an impact on that. Personally, I have discovered in recent years that I actually have zero tolerance for caffeine after that last cup of coffee landed me in an urgent care facility. I can't even enjoy my favorite, Dr. Pepper any more because there is no caffeine-free variant of it. It wasn't remotely a matter of over doing it, it was simply an unusually high sensitivity to caffeine that developed over time. Occasionally I will try a decaf coffee or a Coke to see if the reaction is still there and I am quickly greeted with difficulty breathing.

  28. 75 cups of plain WATER is toxic! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Forget the caffeine. 75 Cups of plain water is toxic. Wiki-Water Poisoning

  29. Re:The best legal stimulant, but should be respect by urbanriot · · Score: 1

    Yea, I've heard the same from friends, that they can sleep after a cup of coffee and I found that bizarre. I suppose these differing experiences lends credence to the linked article. My experience with caffeine has remained the same for as long as I can remember, at least since my mid 20's. Too much coffee has a visible effect on me.

  30. Re:Tremors and explosive diarrhea by Lumpy · · Score: 3, Funny

    In the future all restaurants are Taco Bell... oh dear god.....

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  31. Only used by poseurs and amateurs... by Lumpy · · Score: 2

    I see the fake programmers try and use coffee every day to code faster. What a bunch of noobs. Anyone that is a true pro already knows that Cocaine is the one true way to get that project done on time and with GENIUS level code.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    1. Re:Only used by poseurs and amateurs... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Winning!

  32. Re:The best legal stimulant, but should be respect by PRMan · · Score: 1

    The same for me. I have a strong iced tea in the morning and then a coke at lunch. That keeps me going. Without them, I really don't do well mentally. This is down from 4 cokes, so I have really tried to cut it back to the minimum, but I just can't do less than that and still function.

    --
    Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
  33. Idiot by Charliemopps · · Score: 1

    For Christs sakes just read the fucking studies. Almost everything about Caffeine is good... The ONLY long-term down side of caffeine is a suspected slight increase risk in ovarian and breast cancer. They of course have no proof of this, and it's only suspected because caffeine leads to the fluctuation of plasma sex hormones and SHBG in women. But there are no studies that have shown it actually leads to any sort of increase in cancer risk.

    If you look at the collective research on caffeine it actually reduces the risk of developing some pretty major diseases across the board.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_effects_of_caffeine

    You should drink caffeine, it's good for you. If you're neurotic, anxiety ridden and prone to running to the hospital every time you get a hang nail, you probably shouldn't drink 10 redbulls and then start surfing WebMD. Which, I suspect, is the real source of these increases in hospital visits.

    1. Re:Idiot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But are we seeing a fair, unbiased picture? Many people love caffeinated drinks, and thus maybe more or less subconsciously want to find good things about caffeine to publish. Then there is the huge coffee industry which probably has some selective power on what kind of things get published.

      For starters, I know that caffeine is a vasoconstrictor (blood vessel constrictor), which impacts negatively the blood flow to your brain. It also disturbs your adenosine collection, thus preventing a proper sleep pressure to build up, which means that you can't get as deep sleep the next night. And so on.

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

      1) Ulcers.
      2) Stomach issues.
      3) Hypertension.
      4) Studies linking caffeine to cancer (there are others on the other side too).

      No drug is universally good. None.

  34. Re:Different rates? isn't this also true of alcoho by PRMan · · Score: 1

    So, then, a GREAT first step would be to require companies to label how much caffeine is in their product, so we can have a relative scale.

    --
    Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
  35. Re:Tremors and explosive diarrhea by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

    That put caffeine in all of their 'food'.

    --
    There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
  36. as a long time abuser by DECula · · Score: 1

    I have never come close to the minimum lethal dose (injected) of 3.2 grams, but I have done as much as 1.2 grams in a 24 hour period. It's great for focusing on 1 project. A few jitters, but not horrible - compared to the time when I went cold turkey on sugar for 2 months and had a 44 ounce unnamed citrus soda. It was hell trying to play Duke Nukem.

    I'm a bit aware that my ordering a pound of white powder and having it sent through the mail may raise some eyebrows, but they'll just have to find their own. It's MINE, all mine, I tell ya!

    --
    dreaded scurrilous bit-twiddler from Oklahoma
  37. US coffee or real coffee? by madmarcel · · Score: 1

    "The toxic level in humans, about 10 g, is roughly the equivalent of imbibing 75 cups of brewed coffee (in 8-oz mugs) or 120 cans of Red Bull over a few hours."

    Is that 75 cups of US coffee or real coffee like we drink in the rest of the world?

    1. Re:US coffee or real coffee? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you saying U.S. coffee is extra strong or extra weak? We have a pretty large variety of coffee types and styles here in the states, so either could be true depending on which U.S. and "International" coffees you pick.

      The study said 10g per 600 (75 x 8) fluid oz (US). Works out to roughly 133mg per 237ml cup.

    2. Re:US coffee or real coffee? by Quince+alPillan · · Score: 1

      It completely depends upon location and brew. Cuban and Turkish coffee are closer to rocket fuel than traditional medium roast coffee, and have differing amounts of caffeine in them.

      ...and you can't say "the rest of the world" without giving a country. Almost every country has its own method of preparation. Even differing parts of the US have different preparation methods (New Orleans vs. Miami, for example).

    3. Re:US coffee or real coffee? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The "roughly" part of that sentence covers the discrepancy your ego can't help but pointlessly try to make a political point out of. In any case, I'd wager that the average american "cup" of coffee (home-brewed, diner, or even worse Starbucks) contains considerably more caffeine on average than the average coffee (of any variety, even a real espresso-based drink) I've had anywhere else in the world, actually, and I spend as much time abroad as I do at home. The others may taste better and stronger, but strong taste is not necessarily an indicator of caffeine strength.

      (Obviously, I'm discounting places where the local variety of coffee is a thick mud containing ground coffee, that's hardly even in the same category anymore)

  38. Re:Different rates? isn't this also true of alcoho by dbet · · Score: 1

    Hmm. I have a Yuengling lager in my hand, made and consumed in the U.S., and there is no stated alcohol percent anywhere on it. Maybe it's on the case? Don't know.

  39. Re:Different rates? isn't this also true of alcoho by medv4380 · · Score: 1

    They are both very different chemically. People who are sensitive to Caffeine might not be sensitive to alcohol. Caffeine was mostly a black box up until the last 5 years. It works by messing with a couple of hormones, Estrogen and something else that I can't remember along with who knows what else. It is a stimulant so it wires you up. Alcohol on the other hand works with different hormones, testosterone being one of them. It also impedes the brain as a depressant. Even though you see that they are similar, in that gender and genetic variations play a roll, the same variations may or may not play a roll. Ultimately the liver, and water levels in the body play a roll in expelling both of them, and you could have a mutation in the liver that helps or hinders ether process.

  40. You'd have to regulate coffee, then, too. by kheldan · · Score: 1

    There is coffee out there that has as much naturally-occurring caffeine in it as many energy drinks. If you're going to start regulating caffeine content in any sort of drinks, then you have to do it for coffee as well. That is why it won't be done, and that's why it hasn't already been done: nobody is going to screw with coffee.

    Leave energy drinks alone. The number of people having serious problems because of them aren't that many, and the ones who do are being excessively stupid about their consumption of them to start with.

    --
    Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
  41. Ephedra... by Ellis+D.+Tripp · · Score: 3, Informative

    Ephedra disappeared from the market because of negative press coverage of several stupid athletes who abused it.

    Personally, I think that the War on Drugs had a lot more to do with that. Ephedra (and the active alkaloid, ephedrine) can be used as precursors for methamphetamine manufacture. The FDA yanked ephedra and ephedrine products about the same time that the DEA rammed through the laws requiring you to put your name into a federal database to buy a package of cold/allergy pills.

    --
    Remember "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"? Help make it a reality again! http://soylentnews.org
  42. SVT by nblender · · Score: 1

    About 6 years ago I worked at a place that had a bitchin' espresso machine. I became a sort of self-taught Barista and my coffee intake went up significantly... Then I changed jobs and lost access to the Espresso machine. I was drinking black tea during the day then.. Suddenly one day my heart started racing at 240bpm... It did so for about 15 minutes and then stopped. Saw a doctor and it happened several times but the doctor said they needed to catch it in progress. We never did catch it so doctor took me off Alcohol, Coffee and a proper diet.. I went a year without incident. So I added back Alcohol... A few months later, I added back Coffee and then within a couple months, I was out camping and had a serious bout of it. My heart beat at 240bpm for about 45 minutes before we decided to get me to a hospital which was a 1.5hr drive away... I walked into the hospital and my heart was still beating at 240bpm... They hooked me up and knew immediately that it was a Supra-Ventricular Tachy-Cardia... It can be caused by low electrolytes and in my case, caffeine... I still drink coffee but I limit myself to 3tbsp of grounds in the morning (in a french press, with boiling water)... I can cause an incident by drinking somewhat more than my daily allotment of coffee for a couple days in a row but if I stay within my established limit, then I stay incident free...

    1. Re:SVT by Greyfox · · Score: 2

      You know, that's a heartwarming story about how you decided to continue to use a substance that could potentially kill you :-P

      --

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

    2. Re:SVT by nblender · · Score: 1

      I was told it was unlikely to kill me but would inconvenience me. I was advised that it was ok for me to continue, and to just find the level that kept me ticking properly.

  43. Caffeine pollution is a known issue..... by Ellis+D.+Tripp · · Score: 4, Informative
    --
    Remember "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"? Help make it a reality again! http://soylentnews.org
    1. Re:Caffeine pollution is a known issue..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's a known microbe (Pseudomonas putida) that breaks down caffeine into ammonia and CO2. I'd expect a problem in just using it in waste treatment is the water there might not have enough to keep it going. But maybe some day the genes from it might be added to a microbe strain they already use and it could take out some caffeine as a side job

    2. Re:Caffeine pollution is a known issue..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://www.nature.com/news/2003/030120/full/news030113-10.html

      http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/11/111122112023.htm

      http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2012/07/120730-caffeinated-seas-pacific-northwest-caffeine-coffee-science/

      http://researchmatters.noaa.gov/news/Pages/caffeine.aspx

      Man, if you want to start getting down to the part-per-trillion and part-per-quadrillion levels, we'll be able to see variation in 'pollution' levels for any known substance. Example, the National Geographic article notes the 'polluted' seas had caffeine levels of 45 ng/L. Compare that to a 12 oz. drink with 100 mg of caffeine in it. The 'pollution' we're talking about is at 0.0000016% the concentration found in caffeinated drinks.
      I know a lot of scientists really want to ask and answer questions like "can increasing caffeine levels 0.000002% in the environment cause problems?", but the fact is until we actually understand how the environment works as a system and how living creatures' bodies work as a system, we will not have the tools at hand to answer them. The statistical tools we have developed instead of this systemic knowledge are constantly abused, either by failing to control for variables, or simply ignoring basic assumptions underlying the physical and/or statistical model.

      Top level scientists in the 21st century are dropping the ball.

  44. A Good Start by Greyfox · · Score: 1
    A lot of those big-can drinks are more than a single serving, presumably to let them load the caffeine beyond the maximum allowed by law. So even if the consumer is savvy enough to check the label for caffeine dosage they might not notice the serving size and forget to multiply the dose by serving if they're planning to drink the whole can. If you're doing multiple cans a day, it starts to get easy to see why we're having a problem with it now despite a couple of centuries of coffee abuse (Grandpa used to drink 3 or 4 pots a day IIRC.)

    So limit containers to one serving and maybe we stop seeing people dying from this silly-ass bullshit. We can talk about the drug abuse culture at a later date.

    --

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

  45. Tremors/Freakout by Dripdry · · Score: 1

    Just an anecdote:
    I once had (if I recall correctly) a Triple Dumbass (6 shots of espresso?), a chait tea, and an ENORMOUS (ten scoops of ice cream?) ice cream sundae at a place called Kaffeine in Evanston, IL. Life wasn't going so well, so a friend joined me and we chatted, somehow I thought it a good idea to ingest as much caffeine as possible.

    I felt messed up after that in a way I've not felt since then (and that's saying something). Like I was going to have a seizure. Literal tremors, paranoia, like my brain was on fire.

    I thought I might actually collapse.

    --
    -
  46. Re:The best legal stimulant, but should be respect by jbengt · · Score: 1

    I used to be able to sleep after drinking coffee, but now, maybe because I'm getting old, I have trouble falling asleep if I drink it after 5:00 pm.

  47. Don't even think about it, FDA by russotto · · Score: 2

    You thought the protests against SOPA and PIPA were bad? Move against caffeine and they'll look like a walk in the park. It's not just geeks: pretty much every white collar profession (and more than a few blue collar ones) runs on caffeine. That includes lawyers and lobbyists. Just put the Federal Register down and back away slowly.

  48. Oregon is working on scheduling tobacco.... by Ellis+D.+Tripp · · Score: 1

    But I can't understand why they are shooting for Schedule 3. The law would seem to dictate Schedule 1 if they are really stupid enough to go down this road....

    http://www.kptv.com/story/20662618/bill-proposed-in-oregon-would-make-cigarettes-prescription-only-drugs

    --
    Remember "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"? Help make it a reality again! http://soylentnews.org
  49. Re:The best legal stimulant, but should be respect by clifyt · · Score: 2

    Too much coffee makes me fall asleep too.

    I also have ADHD and stimulants have what they call a paradoxical effect with someone with true ADHD. Your brain can focus for once and you can put your brain to sleep. Your body might not be having much of it...its an horrible achy sleep, but I can sleep.

    However, at about 8 shots in an ice coffee, it starts to turn around...I've learned this the hard way...

  50. Re:At least they already regulated the important p by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

    Only if it's blended scotch. There is definitely something wrong with putting good scotch in coffee. Or anything else for that matter.

  51. Re:Tremors and explosive diarrhea by arkane1234 · · Score: 2

    it's what plants crave...

    --
    -- This space for lease, low setup fee, inquire within!
  52. regular grocery store for me by KingAlanI · · Score: 1

    I get 8g as 40 200mg tablets for $4.
    I buy them because they're cheaper and more portable than energy drinks, not necessarily to avoid the other stuff in energy drinks, but avoiding that doesn't hurt.
    Highly caffeinated soda is cheaper than energy drinks, but more expensive than tablets. I often drink diet soda for the taste and for when I want a smaller dose of caffeine.

    --
    I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
  53. Re:Different rates? isn't this also true of alcoho by KingAlanI · · Score: 1

    I often see beer containers without the alcohol content listed, although you can look up the alcohol content for that style. Soda and energy drink containers always list the caffeine content, even if it's fine print on the side.

    --
    I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
  54. Fuck Regulating Caffeine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fuck Regulating Caffeine,

    You want to see a change in the administration, try it?

    I guarantee that every fucker in congress who doesn't vote to override that will get voted out of office, if they aren't recalled by their constituents first.

  55. Re:At least they already regulated the important p by DMUTPeregrine · · Score: 2

    The problem with morons and alcohol is that they tend to add heavy machinery to the mix and get others around them killed.

    --
    Not a sentence!
  56. beginner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Take it to the next level. cocaine only provides focus and clarity. You want to shoot for those creative solutions, and for that you need to open your mind. I recommend a bycicle-day level dose of LSD combined with mainlined meth. Note, that this virtually guarantees a trip that makes a "bad" trip seem like a weekend at playboy mansion. Actually it might be like a weekend at playboy mansion, but instead of a bunch of women wearing nothing, and an old man in a wheelchair, it will be the other way round, with spider goats ridden by undead carebears.

    And if that won't let you meet schedule, i'm afraid you'll have to give up on chemicals and try vim.

  57. fire the fda by chilvence · · Score: 1

    Here's a great idea. Stop drinking it when your body tells you when you have had enough. Don't know how to listen to your body? Well congratulations, you are now wired. I guess you'll be needing a branch of government to tell you how much fucking coffee you should drink.

    FUCK.

  58. The future. by Forty+Two+Tenfold · · Score: 1

    Caffeinated bacon? Baconated grapefruit? ADMIRAL Crunch?

    --
    Upward mobility is a slippery slope - the higher you climb the more you show your ass.
    1. Re:The future. by Talderas · · Score: 1

      Mmmm caffeinated baconated caffeine.

      --
      "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
    2. Re:The future. by craigminah · · Score: 2

      Mmmm, tomacco...

  59. Perhaps US more lax about labelling? by fantomas · · Score: 1

    Perhaps the USA is more lax than other countries about labelling alcohol content / other ingredients? Depends from country to country. In the UK they are very strict: I think maybe something to do with the legal aspect of the public not being able to contest drunk driving charges "I didn't know how strong the beer was, if I had known I would have only drunk 2 not 12 of them, honest m'lud! I blame the beer company!".

    Strict labelling has other positive aspects, I have friends who have to be gluten free, others who are peanut allergic and they are very grateful for required labelling of food products indicating whether or not the food products contain ingredients that might put them into hospital or not. Good to know that kind of thing before you take a taste of something.

  60. Nanny government by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For the love of god, do we really need a governmnet that is required to monitor how much Monster people are consuming and put a stop to it? Is this really a priority when you are twice as likely to die of murder in Chicago as you are in Afghanistan? How about we get the government to focus on adequately protecting people from murder before worrying about how much soda they drink.

  61. Latest Media Panic by sudon't · · Score: 1
    How is it possible that presumably educated people fall for such complete nonsense?

    Now, if you will excuse me, I have some bath salts to ingest so I can get back to my ritual satanic child abuse.

    --
    -- sudon't

    Air-ride Equipped

  62. sugar is digested by yeast by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sugar is digested by live yeast cultures to make the dough rise. Yeast multiplies very fast as long as it has food so it's unlikely that any of that sugar remains in the final product.

    try to find any kind of bread that doesnt list Cane Sugar

  63. Different effects for different people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Regulation is required on the part of the consumer not the supplier. I personally drink 2 18oz Monster Imports(184mgx2) & a full bottle of redline Xtreme(316mg) everyday. I dont get jitters, It doesn't particularly wake me up, it's just my routine. I've read numerous stories about how people who drink a bottle of redline, which does warn only to drink half a bottle in several places,& end up in the hospital. I'm a perfectly healthy, functioning adult who knows how much my body can handle & just happens to be very resistant to caffeine. Why should I be told I cannot continue with my every day routine because others cannot consume in moderation? Any adult should be able to decide for themselves what they should & should not intake.

  64. Re:Tremors and explosive diarrhea by GonzoPhysicist · · Score: 1

    I can see it now: Doritos 4 Loko Tacos

    --
    horror vacui
  65. Coffee and the gout by warpuck · · Score: 0

    I'm one of those people that have the gout. Simply it's due to high a concentration of purines in the blood, along with a pH level that causes those purines to form crystals. Caffeine is a purine. The AMA & American trained dietitians say coffee is a no no for gout. The Canadian medical expert say it makes no difference and in some cases it helps. So I guess you stay away from Starbucks and go with Tim Horton's coffee.... So if they can't make up my mind I'll keep drinking it. That reminds me, I have to go to the drug store and get more bad drugs for HBP & gout.

  66. Re:Tremors and explosive diarrhea by definate · · Score: 2

    No, that's electrolytes.

    --
    This is my footer. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
  67. And then there are people like me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    whose bodies have rebelled against the onslaught of caffeinated everything that they've become allergic to caffeine and theobromine and can't consume anything with those molecules in them lest we risk horrific allergic reactions.

  68. Indeed! by bolanskidrow · · Score: 1

    Cientists has been confirmed that caffeine is benefic to health but always depends on the montant of caffeine that someone drinks. However drink to much Monster or coffee is a first step to put yourself in the hospital.