Life Extension Forums




coffee, conflicting studies, and the influences from genetics

Author Message
 Posted 2/21/2012 6:53:07 PM
Spectator

SpectatorSpectatorSpectatorSpectatorSpectatorSpectatorSpectatorSpectatorSpectator

Status: Member
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 8/25/2014 11:08:53 AM
Posts: 8, Visits: 134
I took a genetic test from 23andme.com recently, out of curiosity.  One of the traits they identified is slow coffee metabolism, which could increase my risks of a heart attack from caffeine consumption.  More detailed information here on the particular gene:

http://snpedia.com/index.php/Rs762551



I regularly consume a moderate amount of coffee, so this makes me a bit concerned. (I recently switched to Rich Rewards  -- excellent product by the way!!!).

Checking the LEF site references related to cardio vascular effects of coffee, I found one study on Japanese (Koizumi) and another large one which indicated it did not increase mortality but benefits were not conclusive (Lopez Garcia).   It'd probably difficult to interpret without more detailed studies, but it makes me realize how much genetics could be affecting nutritional research studies...

We often hear about different/conflicting results (be it coffee or nutrition or supplements) -- I wonder how often the mixed results can be due to genetics, such as how the body metabolizes compounds.  Consider, when a study shows minimal positive or negative benefit, is it because it decreased risk for 70% but increased risk even more for the other 30%?  Seems likely we'd be underestimating positive benefits or overestimating negative benefits due to the mixed populations.   

Tags:
Post #5290
Add to Twitter Add to Facebook
 Posted 2/22/2012 5:05:37 AM
Forum Coordinator

Forum Coordinator

Status: LE Employee
Group: Managers
Last Login: 11/24/2014 10:22:33 AM
Posts: 1,980, Visits: 7,332
This abstract http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20562351 reports a slight benefit on cardiovascular mortality.

This abstract http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21298466 reports a benefit for coffee on all cause mortality but doesn't report cardiovascular mortality.  These http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20335629 
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19266179shows a benefit for women in both cardiovascular and all cause mortality.

Others of interest:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21175902
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19531728
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19781429
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19249420
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19228865
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19026304


On the other hand, this http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18328848 study found an increase in CAD risk associated with coffee only in smokers.

 


Tags:
Post #5294
Add to Twitter Add to Facebook
 Posted 2/22/2012 5:12:49 AM
Influential Poster

Influential PosterInfluential PosterInfluential PosterInfluential PosterInfluential PosterInfluential PosterInfluential PosterInfluential PosterInfluential Poster

Status: Member
Group: Forum Members
Last Login: 2 hours ago
Posts: 555, Visits: 3,496
From memory of what I've read, two to four cups of regular coffee per day help most people.  Interestingly enough, decaffeinated is not as good, due to the chemicals used to take out the caffein.
Post #5295
Add to Twitter Add to Facebook


Similar Topics

Expand / Collapse

Reading This Topic

Expand / Collapse