Skip to main content

Coffee conundrum — good or bad?

Here we go again — yet another study on coffee consumption and health, this time claiming that moderate coffee consumption lessons the risk of clogged arteries and heart attacks.

I wonder if anyone really takes any notice of such studies.  Just five years ago another study found that people under 55 who drank more than 28 cups of coffee a week were at an increased risk of early death from all causes, with a more than 50 per cent increase in mortality.  So you can take your choice on cup you drink from.

Now, it is claimed  in research published in the online journal Heart people who drink a 'moderate' amount of coffee daily are less likely to develop clogged arteries that could lead to heart attacks.

Researchers from South Korea found that people consuming three to five cups a day had the least risk of coronary calcium in their arteries. Now I wouldn't consider five cups a day as being 'moderate', but I suppose there are some addicted coffee drinkers who take more.  I drink just one cup of coffee in a day,  but often go without.  I drink gallons of tea.  A really good cup of coffee is something to look forward to.

There has been much debate over the effect of coffee consumption on cardiovascular health.

Despite earlier concerns about a potential increase in heart disease risk associated with drinking coffee, a recent meta-analysis of 36 studies showed that moderate coffee consumption was associated with a decreased risk of heart disease. Coffee consumption has been associated with improved insulin sensitivity and reduced risk of type 2 diabetes, but it has also been linked to increased cholesterol concentrations and heightened blood pressure.

In the current study,  an international team of researchers led by the Kangbuk Samsung Hospital, Seoul, in the Republic of Korea, set out to examine the association between coffee consumption and the presence of coronary artery calcium (CAC) which is a early indicator of coronary atherosclerosis – a potentially serious condition where arteries become clogged up by fatty substances known as plaques or atheroma and which can cause the arteries to harden and narrow, leading to blood clots which can trigger a heart attack or a stroke.

They studied a group of 25,138 men and women – average age of 41 – who had no signs of heart disease, attending a health screening examination.

The participants’ screening examination included a validated food frequency questionnaire and a multidetector cardiac CT (computed tomography) for diagnostic imaging to determine levels of coronary artery calcium (CAC) scores.

Annual or biennial health screening examinations are common in Korea, because health examinations are mandatory for all workers under the Industrial Safety and Health Law there and CAC scoring has become a common heart disease screening test.

The researchers estimated the CAC score ratios associated with different levels of coffee consumption compared with no coffee consumption and took potential confounders into account such as education level, physical activity level, smoking status, BMI, alcohol consumption, family history of heart disease and consumption of fruits, vegetables, and red and processed meats.

They categorised coffee consumption as none, less than one cup a day, one to three cups a day, three to five per day and at least five or more per day.

The researchers found the prevalence of detectable CAC was 13.4% amongst the whole group of people and the average consumption of coffee was 1.8 cups per day.

The calcium ratios were 0.77 for people who had less than one cup per day, 0.66 for those having one to three cups every day, 0.59 for those consuming three to five cups per day, and 0.81 for people having at least five cups or more every day compared with non coffee drinkers.

The association was similar in subgroups defined by age, sex, smoking status, alcohol consumption, and status of obesity, diabetes, hypertension, and hypercholesterolaemia.

The association, therefore, was U-shaped, with participants drinking three to five cups per day having the lowest prevalence of arteries that had clogged up.

Possible explanations for the findings, say the researchers, are  that chronic coffee consumption has a possible link to reduced risk of type 2 diabetes, a strong risk factor for atherosclerosis, and that coffee drinking might improve insulin sensitivity and β-cell function.

The authors conclude: “Our study adds to a growing body of evidence suggesting that coffee consumption might be inversely associated with CVD [cardiovascular disease] risk. Further research is warranted to confirm our findings and establish the biological basis of coffee’s potential preventive effects on coronary artery disease.”

So there it is.  Make what you will of it.  I doubt it will have much impact on how much coffee you drink. It will certainly make coffee drinkers feel a bit better.  Indeed they probably do already as another study published in 2013 found that drinking two cups of coffee a day halved the risk of suicide.  On the other hand, although you might be happy you might also get fat because another study published in 2013 showed that regular coffee drinkers were at increased risk of weight gain.

In 2012 a study claimed coffee could protect against bowel cancer.  On balance there are currently more studies demonstrating some kind of benefit of drinking coffee than there are demonstrating adverse consequences.  Is the balance swinging in favour of coffee?

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Prioritising people in nursing care.

There has been in recent years concern that care in the NHS has not been sufficiently 'patient centred', or responsive to the needs of the patient on a case basis. It has been felt in care that it as been the patient who has had to adapt to the regime of care, rather than the other way around. Putting patients at the centre of care means being responsive to their needs and supporting them through the process of health care delivery.  Patients should not become identikit sausages in a production line. The nurses body, the Nursing and Midwifery Council has responded to this challenge with a revised code of practice reflection get changes in health and social care since the previous code was published in 2008. The Code describes the professional standards of practice and behaviour for nurses and midwives. Four themes describe what nurses and midwives are expected to do: prioritise people practise effectively preserve safety, and promote professionalism and trust. The

Half measures on heat pumps

Through the "Heat and Buildings Strategy", the UK government has set out its plan to incentivise people to install low-carbon heating systems in what it calls a simple, fair, and cheap way as they come to replace their old boilers over the coming decade.  New grants of £5,000 will be available from April next year to encourage homeowners to install more efficient, low carbon heating systems – like heat pumps that do not emit carbon when used – through a new £450 million 3-year Boiler Upgrade Scheme. However, it has been widely criticised as inadequate and a strategy without a strategy.  Essentially, it will benefit those who can afford more readily to replace their boiler.   Undoubtedly, the grants will be welcome to those who plan to replace their boilers in the next three years, and it might encourage others to do so, but for too many households, it leaves them between a rock and a hard place.  There are no plans to phase out gas boilers in existing homes.  Yet, that is wha

No real commitment on climate

Actions, they say, speak louder than words.  So, when we look at the UK government's actions, we can only conclude they don't mean what they say about the environment and climate change.  Despite their claims to be leading the charge on reducing emissions, the UK government is still looking to approve new oil fields.  The Prime Minister, Boris Johnson,  has announced his support for developing the Cambo oil field and 16 other climate-destroying oil projects. Cambo is an oil field in the North Sea, west of Shetland. A company called Siccar Point has applied for a permit to drill at least 170 million barrels of oil there. If it's allowed to go ahead, it will result in the emissions equivalent of 18 coal plants running for a year.  What? Yes, 18 coal plants a year!  Today, as I write, Greenpeace is demonstrating in Downing Street against this project.  I suppose it will get the usual government dismissal and complaints about inconveniencing others.  Well, we know it won't