Slashdot Mirror
Caffeine May Counter Age-Related Inflammation, Says Study (stanford.edu)
According to a new Stanford study published in the journal Nature Medicine, caffeine may help to counter the inflammatory process that occurs in some older people. The researchers have found a connection between advancing age, systemic inflammation, cardiovascular disease and coffee consumption by analyzing blood samples, survey data and medical and family histories obtained from more than 100 human participants in a multiyear study. Stanford Medical Center Report adds: The study implicates this inflammatory process as a driver of cardiovascular disease and increased rates of mortality overall. Metabolites, or breakdown products, of nucleic acids -- the molecules that serve as building blocks for our genes -- circulating in the blood can trigger this inflammatory process, the study found. The study also provides evidence that caffeine and its own metabolites may counter the action of these circulating nucleic-acid metabolites, possibly explaining why coffee drinkers tend to live longer than abstainers. Notably, this inflammatory mechanism was found to be activated only in some, but not all, of the older study participants. Those in whom it was relatively quiescent tended to drink more caffeinated beverages. Laboratory experiments revealed that the mechanism was directly countered by caffeine and associated compounds. For the new study, the researchers compared blood drawn from older versus younger study participants to see which genes tended to be more highly activated in older people. They zeroed in on two clusters of genes whose activity was associated with the production of a potent circulating inflammatory protein called IL-1-beta. The genes within each cluster appeared to work in coordination with one another. The researchers found that incubating a type of immune cell with two of those nucleic-acid metabolites boosted activity in one of the gene clusters, resulting in increased IL-1-beta production. When injected into mice, the substances triggered massive systemic inflammation, along with high blood pressure. In addition, immune cells infiltrated and clogged the animals' kidneys, increasing renal pressure substantially. Intrigued by the correlation between older participants' health, gene-cluster activation and self-reported rates of caffeine consumption, the researchers followed up and verified that blood from the group with low cluster activity was enriched for caffeine and a number of its metabolites, compared with blood from the group with high cluster activity. (Examples of these metabolites are theophylline, also found in tea, and theobromine, which abounds in chocolate.) Incubating immune cells with caffeine and its breakdown products along with the inflammation-triggering nucleic acid metabolites substantially prevented the latter from exerting their powerful inflammatory effect on the cells.
How frequently we hear studies how certain lucrative industries, like one where there is a margin of 700%-2000% in the product, "it is amazing for your health".
What a coincidence this was broadcast in the news earlier on today too.
Someone must be paying $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.
That means I AM IMMORTAL!
All hail the dew.
Why are you shaking like that?
Low dose aspitin is commonly recommended for those at risk of heart problems. It is an anti-inflamitory, anti-coagulant and arguably even cheaper than caffiene.
"I bless every day that I continue to live, for every day is pure profit."
Caffiene, Nicotine, Preservatives, and Raw White Sugar. . . . powering Hackers since 1967. . .
Caffeine is drunk almost everywhere in the world, and is part of a lot of (often conflicting) studies. But what about studying the effects of chicory for instance, or fresh lemon juice, or almond milk...? Maybe we could find something else that has the benefits of the coffee without the downside?
Slashdot, fix the reply notifications... You won't get away with it...
You know, this kind of shallow cynicism actually makes you easier to dupe, because it's not evidence-based; it's what-sounds-truthy-based.
This article was published in Nature, which requires a complete disclosure of institutional affiliations and financial conflicts. That doesn't mean the system is perfect, but it's about as good as it gets, especially given that Nature is one of the most prestigious scientific journals in the world. Nature Medicine has an eye-popping 30.357 impact factor, making it the fourth most highly cited medical journal in the world after the New England Journal of Medicine, The Lancet, and Journal of the American Medical Association.
Does it mean you should immediately believe anything that's published in Nature Medicine? No. You should wait until it is cited in a literature review article in one of those top journals before making any health decisions based on it. However as individual papers go, this is as credible as they get.
Researchers have been trying to take caffeine down for decades. Nobody can quite believe that something so enjoyable as coffee isn't bad for you. In fact doctors used to routinely warn their patients off coffee because of all the bad things it would do to them, but in fact when researchers tried to confirm all the things doctors knew about why coffee was bad for you, none of them turned out to be true, with narrow exceptions for certain populations (e.g., coffee doesn't cause ulcers as we used to be told, but if you have an ulcer coffee will make the symptoms worse).
What researchers found were surprising benefits, including what appears to be evidence of reduction in risks for multiple forms of cancer and even a reduction in suicide risk.
Coffee is well on its way to becoming the first evidence-backed superfood.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Strange, you seem so laid back
Giver: prostate is flushed
Receiver: prostate is massaged
End effect: toxins are removed from prostate
Not kidding. Not a troll.
These studies weren't that wrong. For people obsessed with meat, gout is a very real danger.
"It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
Actually evidence from the 1950s was mixed -- as it still is -- but in fact most of it stands up pretty well. What's a problem is the interpretation of that evidence and its limited nature (e.g. not knowing about different types of cholesterol).
For example it was established in the 50s that high blood cholesterol was a risk factor for cardiovascular disease. This is still believed as true, but what they didn't know at the time is what factors affected blood cholesterol. It was (plausibly although not conclusively) suspected by many that fat consumption would increase it; nobody suspected sugar... why should they?
In complex systems like the body there is usually conflicting evidence early on, which is resolved by further study.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Maybe it works also with decaffeinated coffee.
Disclaimer:
No Stanford University students were funded by any corporations or industry conglomerates that are tied in any way to the selling of caffeinated products, we may say, in connection to manipulation of data in any of studies for their own gain. Maybe.
... at a counter, so I'm low risk.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
Over the years, I've seen at least a dozen coffee research papers come out with a wide mix of good & bad news.
I average it all and conclude coffee is officially "meh" in terms of health.
Table-ized A.I.
These studies weren't that wrong. For people obsessed with meat, gout is a very real danger.
And there are a lot of things that are good for you but if you consume too much it will at least cause damage (for example vitamin C enhances iron absorption. If you have high-iron stores, consuming an excessive amounts of vitamin C will cause your body to absorb too much iron, which can damage organs.) But recent evidence proves that those pro-carb, anti-fat studies in the 50's are very misleading to say the least. Go to this site http://www.cerealkillersmovie.... to find out more.
This is my sig, there are many like it but this one is mine
that's probably how its clearing your body of breakdown products. mystery solved.
The bean of the coffee makes the thoughts quicken, the pulse increase;
The breath is a warning to others
For he is the Kwikii Mart Haderach!
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Obviously caffeine does not reduce an inflammatory response.
Well, at least not on the Internet...
Researchers have been trying to take caffeine down for decades. Nobody can quite believe that something so enjoyable as coffee isn't bad for you. In fact doctors used to routinely warn their patients off coffee because of all the bad things it would do to them, but in fact when researchers tried to confirm all the things doctors knew about why coffee was bad for you, none of them turned out to be true, with narrow exceptions for certain populations (e.g., coffee doesn't cause ulcers as we used to be told, but if you have an ulcer coffee will make the symptoms worse).
What researchers found were surprising benefits, including what appears to be evidence of reduction in risks for multiple forms of cancer and even a reduction in suicide risk.
Coffee is well on its way to becoming the first evidence-backed superfood.
FWIW, I'm in one such population: Even relatively low levels of caffeine (or other stimulants) can trigger anxiety attacks. 6oz of Coke will keep me up 18 hours later. Which sucks in our high-stress world. I have to use a small number of squares of (good) dark chocolate to keep the dosage manageable.
You will not drink with us, but you would taste our steel? - Walter Matthau, The Pirates
Well, the answer might be to try a morning cup of decaf coffee. Why? Because caffeine isn't the only active ingredient in coffee; the anti-cancer properties of coffee appear to be in the phenols which are still present in decaf. And you'd still get the stimulant benefits of caffeine because you're more sensitive, although I'd avoid even decaf after noon.
A cup of decaf coffee has between 2-10 mg of caffeine depending on the process; an ounce of dark chocolate has about 20 mg of caffeine; a twelve once coke has 34 mg of caffeine; a cup of regular coffee has 90-200 mg of caffeine.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Well, the answer might be to try a morning cup of decaf coffee. Why? Because caffeine isn't the only active ingredient in coffee; the anti-cancer properties of coffee appear to be in the phenols which are still present in decaf. And you'd still get the stimulant benefits of caffeine because you're more sensitive, although I'd avoid even decaf after noon.
A cup of decaf coffee has between 2-10 mg of caffeine depending on the process; an ounce of dark chocolate has about 20 mg of caffeine; a twelve once coke has 34 mg of caffeine; a cup of regular coffee has 90-200 mg of caffeine.
Thanks - I was wondering about the non-caffeine ingredients. My dark chocolate intake is about .75oz/day (and I can definitely feel it) Maybe I'll try a cup of decaf on a weekend morning some time.
I'm also concerned about who defines "decaf" - especially here in Seattle, the capital of caffeine abuse ;-)
You will not drink with us, but you would taste our steel? - Walter Matthau, The Pirates