14 comments

  • zetazzed 1 hour ago
    I'm a good target market for pro-coffee writing, but this is just an observational study of a drinks habit. No one in the general public should have any interest in studies of this kind.

    Maybe if you're deep in working in this research space it could help generate hypotheses for more meaningful research? But "we cross sectionally compared two groups with different behaviors and found they were different" is not really a result.

  • al_borland 50 minutes ago
    The endless articles about studies that are pro-coffee make me highly skeptical. They all feel like advertising by the coffee industry to help coffee addicts feel good about their habit instead of feeling like they should cut back.
    • designerarvid 45 minutes ago
      Either point out weaknesses in the study, or dubious funding behind it etc. Or just stick with saying that you prefer tea.
      • pazimzadeh 38 minutes ago
        it could be that coffee acts directly on the endocrine system as they suggest, or coffee allows you to work out longer (or work out at all since you don't want to sit still) which leads to the effects they observed

        I'm curious why they don't mention tea actually, are they suggesting it's not the caffeine that's doing it?

        granted recent studies showed decaf coffee has some benefits itself, so it could be some of the other compounds present in coffee, but a discussion of this would be useful

        • askvictor 1 minute ago
          Decaf still has caffeine; about 30% of the original from the bean iirc.

          Tea, as well as caffeine, has other compounds that are calming.

          And yes, there are plenty of other compounds in coffee, as well as purely psychological effects.

      • ShinyLeftPad 36 minutes ago
        Or links between the study and coffee industry
      • mc32 42 minutes ago
        Or possibly one of those who stick to only water.
      • blinkbat 42 minutes ago
        AmishNews
    • embedding-shape 42 minutes ago
      > coffee addicts

      I don't know if it's the word "addicts" that maybe doesn't have to be a negative, or if it's not the right word at all for "functional addicts", but I feel like the "addiction" people have to coffee is much more behavioral than chemical (although there is physiological withdrawal symptoms too), compared to other "harder" drugs like cocaine or heroin. The clear negative effects from long-term use is also a lot much evidence with one side of these, coffee not so much.

      Not sure you have to cut back on something that you really enjoy, so much that you wanna do it every day, even if you get cranky when someone (sometimes you) ruin this ceremony for you. Why would you cut back when the biggest negative is spending 10-20EUR a month on some nice coffee you can consume every single morning?

      • co_ent 18 minutes ago
        I've known people with disabling headaches until they hit 200mg+ of caffeine in the AM. They are caffeine addicts.

        >you wanna do it every day, even if you get cranky when someone (sometimes you) ruin this ceremony for you

        This is addicted behavior; the bar is far lower than most people use the word for.

        • dasyud 0 minutes ago
          My father's one of those people who get a headache unless they get their morning cup of tea. That is what deters me from caffeine.
    • brokencode 43 minutes ago
      Why should they feel like cutting back? Where’s the evidence that it’s bad for you?
      • ifh-hn 28 minutes ago
        I cut back because I found that I couldn't go a day without it without a massive headache.

        Took me 2 weeks to stop craving coffee. And about a month until I started to feel right.

        I still have the occasional coffee but don't drink it every day. I like it this way.

        I miss it like I missed cigarettes after I quit those.

        • nomel 25 minutes ago
          Is there a net benefit that you see, ignoring the fact that you're no longer dependent?

          I've stopped a half dozen times, for around a month each time, but I found that I like the way my brain functions with coffee. The risk of a headache seems like a net win for me, in the grand scheme, especially since I try to do what I can to reduce the risk of dementia and Alzheimers.

          • ifh-hn 17 minutes ago
            I suppose for me the net benefit is I can do without it. I don't like the feeling of being dependent on something.

            I like that I can just get up and go do something without having to get a coffee to stave off a headache and be fully functional.

            Like I say I'm not t-total I just have a different relationship with coffee now, one where I'm in control and I can use it rather than needing it.

      • bossyTeacher 9 minutes ago
        It causes:

        - High heart rate and blood pressure

        - Increased risk of arrhtymia

        - Less deep sleep

        - Disruption to your cortisol level dynamics

        Whether you consider all of them not "bad" or worth the benefits is up to you. People also consider moderate consumption of alcohol worth its benefits.

        Everyone has a different risk profile. Know the risks and choose as you please.

      • al_borland 22 minutes ago
        I constantly hear coffee drinkers say how much they drink with shame and that they should cut back. It's one of the most common things I hear when someone is talking about their coffee consumption.

        Personally, I stopped drinking caffeine when I was around 19 after I figured out it was the source of my chronic headaches (from withdrawal). I had to talk my dad out of taking me to a neurologist at one point in high school. My quality of life went up significantly after cutting caffeine and going through the week-long headache.

        • brokencode 14 minutes ago
          Shame due to what? Because they are suffering somehow or because they feel like it must be bad for them because they enjoy it?
    • KPGv2 41 minutes ago
      I feel that way about the endless studies showing fiber is important for health, too. Because there's no way studies re-confirm findings because they're revealing truth. It's definitely Big Leaf at work.
    • throwaway27448 23 minutes ago
      Addiction implies harm. What is the harm in coffee consumption?
      • bossyTeacher 15 minutes ago
        Addiction implies dependence. If you feel unable to be a productive member of society without a psychoactive substance that you must ingest daily, then I have bad news for you.
    • scythe 22 minutes ago
      The meat, tobacco, alcohol, etc industries would like very much to be able to do this but haven't with much larger budgets.

      Caffeine causes increased locomotor activity. It's possible that the apparent benefits of coffee may occur because it causes drinkers to move around more (exercise). Other drugs also do this, but usually with more side-effects. Reductions in all-cause mortality associated with coffee consumption are broadly distributed across cardiovascular disease, cancer, which qualitatively resemble the benefits of exercise. Increased testosterone is also an effect of regular exercise:

      https://journals.bioscientifica.com/ec/article/6/5/306/35211...

  • eiriklv 1 hour ago
    High SHBG and lower free hormones isn't a good thing usually. Starving and anorexia (as an example) can make your SHBG levels skyrocket, resulting in low free hormone levels.
  • throwaway2037 48 minutes ago
    Here is the original study: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00394-026-04038-z

    Weirdly, I cannot copy text from that page. What am I doing wrong?

    Regardless, here is the result summary:

        > Higher coffee intake groups showed lower total and visceral fat and higher skeletal muscle mass, while BMI was comparable across groups. Inverse correlations were observed between coffee intake and circulating branched-chain amino acids (BCAAs) in both sexes. In men, higher coffee intake correlated with a more favourable glucose-insulin profile. Multivariable-adjusted models revealed a distinct hormonal pattern: positive associations with total testosterone (β = +0.29 nmol/L per cup/day), bioavailable testosterone, and sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG), alongside inverse associations with free testosterone and the free androgen index (FAI). In women, hormonal associations were more limited, with positive associations for SHBG and inverse associations for free testosterone and FAI.
    
    This part: "positive associations with total testosterone (β = +0.29 nmol/L per cup/day)". For testosterone, 1 nmol/L ≈ 28.8 ng/dL. So: +0.29 nmol/L ≈ +8.4 ng/dL per additional cup/day.

    Really, this will have no meaningful impact on your health. It is widely discussed by TRT (testosterone replacement therapy) doctors that supplements that can increase your total test by 100ng/dL will have no meaningful impact. Literally, you need to drink 12 cups of coffee per day to get a ~100ng/dL improvement. You are going to have a lot of second order effects from drinking 12 cups of coffee per day! I would never recommend it.

    • doubled112 27 minutes ago
      I often drink a 12 cup pot in a day. No noticeable effects.

      Why are coffee cups smaller than cups?

      Maybe I’m just slow, but it makes doing the mental math a lot more difficult than it needs to be. Maybe I just need more coffee.

  • asdfasgasdgasdg 23 minutes ago
    Love coffee, drink it every day. This study is just as useful as other studies that correlate coffee with negative outcomes. Which is to say, it’s a study that just shows some correlations. Causation is not particularly likely. Drink coffee if you like it but don’t expect health benefits or harms.
  • derektank 41 minutes ago
    I wonder if the mechanism of action here is increased caffeine consumption resulting in more/longer duration/higher intensity exercise.
  • delduca 45 minutes ago
    Only if it’s coffee from Brazil :-)
  • BrandoElFollito 11 minutes ago
    I like coffee and drink about 5 to 7 Nespresso capsules a day. Except when I forget, or have no access to coffee.

    I did not notice any change between these two extremes.

    • amelius 2 minutes ago
      I also drink a lot of coffee and I really hate it when I'm visiting a client and they offer me only 1 or 2 cups of coffee during the day!
  • unselect5917 50 minutes ago
    Something I learned years ago: caffeine doesn't directly "wake you up" it merely causes a trickle of adrenaline release.

    So I'm guessing you could get the same boost from exercise, probably moreso.

    Anything that elevates the heart rate for a bit is generally good for humans.

    • n8henrie 47 minutes ago
      This is not the mechanism by which caffeine promotes wakefulness.
    • RobLach 41 minutes ago
      That's totally wrong.

      For one, caffeine is a known adenosine antagonist. The effects of adenosine is described as "drowsiness" or "relaxed".

    • u1hcw9nx 45 minutes ago
      This was not a caffeine consumption study.
  • moojacob 1 hour ago
    Maybe because the other way to get Caffine is in drinks full of corn syrup.
    • nemomarx 1 hour ago
      You can get corn syrup free monsters everywhere. Or those 5 hour ones, or Celsius or whatever.

      The reason to prefer coffee is that it tastes less aggressive than those I think

      • BeetleB 49 minutes ago
        Coffee tastes more aggressive than all of those.
        • KPGv2 35 minutes ago
          For people who are already addicted to sugar, yes, coffee tastes more aggressive than the drinks full of insane amounts of sugar or artificial sweeteners.

          Meanwhile in Asia beans are considered sweet bc their food isn't overloaded with sugar.

          • BeetleB 16 minutes ago
            It sounds like you're equating "aggressive" with "sweet".

            Coffee has a very strong taste (even without sugar). Stronger than anything on the list. I'd wager that the reason some people add a lot of sugar is to make up for that strong taste.

            5 hour energy drinks have almost no sugar. Much milder taste than coffee.

            > Meanwhile in Asia beans are considered sweet bc their food isn't overloaded with sugar.

            Red bean paste?

    • llm_nerd 1 hour ago
      The study links it to better metabolic health. Did you assume it meant worse?
      • bjt 1 hour ago
        I think they're saying that coffee is a healthier habit than soda.
        • KPGv2 33 minutes ago
          Yes, my inference was "people consume caffeine, and if one group is getting it from coffee, the other group is getting it from non-coffee, mostly (highly-caloric) soda water, which explains why the coffee side looks healthier."
  • plastic-enjoyer 1 hour ago
    So, that's why I am horns all the time
    • rzzzt 1 hour ago
      "Higher coffee consumption was linked to a more favourable glucose–insulin profile, higher concentrations of total and bioavailable testosterone, and increased levels of sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG). At the same time, free testosterone and the free androgen index were modestly lower. In women, hormonal associations were more limited and were primarily characterised by higher SHBG and lower measures of free androgens."

      - Total testosterone = free + bound to albumin + bound to SHBG

      - Bioavailable testosterone = free + bound to albumin

      - Free testosterone = free (not bound to any protein)

      ...aaaand now I got a mild headache. Is this good or bad? Is this why the title says "links" and not "promotes" or "inhibits" or any other word with a concrete negative or positive connotation?

  • andai 1 hour ago
    Title sounds terrible, but the effects are positive from what I understood?
    • thih9 1 hour ago
      Not effects, just observations, as the article also states.
  • winningChild 56 minutes ago
    [dead]
  • thih9 1 hour ago
    Obligatory reminder about correlation != causation, as indicated in the article itself:

    > However, as this was an observational study, the findings demonstrate associations rather than cause-and-effect relationships.

    More: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_cau...

    • KPGv2 32 minutes ago
      People don't need this reminder on Hacker News. Maybe on Reddit, but even there it's dogma repeated by damn near everyone.
    • throwyonion 51 minutes ago
      [dead]