this post was submitted on 23 Mar 2024
209 points (98.2% liked)

science

14786 readers
39 users here now

A community to post scientific articles, news, and civil discussion.

rule #1: be kind

<--- rules currently under construction, see current pinned post.

2024-11-11

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Exclusive: Scientists say people with disease who drink two to four cups a day are less likely to see it return

People with bowel cancer who drink two to four cups of coffee a day are much less likely to see their disease come back, research has found.

People with the illness who consume that amount are also much less likely to die from any cause, the study shows, which suggests coffee helps those diagnosed with the UK’s second biggest cancer killer.

Experts said the findings were “promising” and speculated that, if other studies show the same effect, the 43,000 Britons a year diagnosed with bowel cancer may be encouraged to drink coffee. The disease claims about 16,500 lives a year – 45 a day.

A study of 1,719 bowel cancer patients in the Netherlands by Dutch and British researchers found that those who drank at least two cups of coffee had a lower risk of the disease recurring. The effect was dose dependent – those who drank the most saw their risk fall the most.

Patients who had at least five cups a day were 32% less likely than those who drank fewer than two cups to see their bowel cancer return, according to the paper, which was funded by the World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF) and has been published in the International Journal of Cancer.

all 47 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] grasshopper_mouse@lemmy.world 92 points 7 months ago (1 children)

It's because the coffee makes you shit the cancer right out

[–] QuarterSwede@lemmy.world 19 points 7 months ago

Not far from the possible truth. Coffee drinkers are more likely to have regular bowel movements so that would help. 20% of all people have a bowel response thanks to coffee.

[–] SteefLem@lemmy.world 43 points 7 months ago (3 children)

Ok now im waiting for the “other” study that says coffee causes cancer….

[–] cholesterol@lemmy.world 15 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Despite its reputation, coffee is continually correlated with health benefits in statistical studies. This is not something made up by news agencies. But honestly, I don't get it either. I drink lots of coffee, but it can upset my stomach and give me the jitters. It just doesn't intuitively seem like something that should be healthy.

[–] John_McMurray@lemmy.world -3 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Switch to dark roast. It's borderline decaf.

[–] sordidone@c.im 1 points 7 months ago

@John_McMurray @cholesterol L-theanine is very inexpensive, it's just an amino acid found in tea which eases jitters. Caffeine itself is good for exercise it's straight-up healthy if you can get to sleep haha

[–] iopq@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

It's a similar amount of caffeine

[–] John_McMurray@lemmy.world -3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

No, it is not, believe me, I can tell.

[–] iopq@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)
[–] John_McMurray@lemmy.world -3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I'm sorry you either don't drink coffee or are caffeine immune. Anecdotal isn't a euphemism for worthless.

[–] iopq@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

You can literally measure the amount of caffeine, why should I listen to your opinion?

[–] John_McMurray@lemmy.world -2 points 7 months ago (3 children)

Look you clown, everyone (except you, apparently) knows the longer you roast, the more you remove caffeine.

[–] Mobile@leminal.space 2 points 7 months ago (2 children)

You're misinformed. You need to use more grams of dark roast to catch up, in terms of caffine, to light roast caffeine levels. You can still get the caffeine buzz from dark roast.

[–] iopq@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago

Fewer grams because dark roasts have less moisture, so when you use 18g of the coffee you get more beans

[–] John_McMurray@lemmy.world -1 points 7 months ago

Not too likely, you'll pass the "tastes like crap now" threshold.

[–] LowtierComputer@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Why are you being so rude?

[–] John_McMurray@lemmy.world -1 points 7 months ago

Why is he bothering me with this horseshit, is a better question.

[–] mojo_raisin@lemmy.world 9 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Ya, I think the key lesson is: Don't get your health information from the news, your health is not their goal.

[–] Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz 4 points 7 months ago

Making money, by attracting attention is the primary goal. Spreading falsehood is just “business as usual”. Informing the public is a byproduct of the core business.

[–] Shard@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago

I believe those earlier studies did not factor the cancer risk from consuming very hot beverages. Apparently the damage to the cells of your mouth and throat from getting cooked causes mutations that could develop into cancer.

[–] Blackout@kbin.run 30 points 7 months ago

It's widely known people who drink coffee also spend time each day meticulously cleaning their bowels. Simply a correlation.

[–] Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz 16 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Here’s the interesting bit.

“The association between coffee consumption and all-cause mortality was U-shaped; coffee intake seemed optimal at 3–5 cups/d with the lowest risk at 4 cups/d (HR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.53, 0.88). Our results suggest that coffee consumption may be associated with a lower risk of CRC recurrence and all-cause mortality.”

Well, what exactly counts as a cup then?

“Coffee consumption in cups/d was then calculated by multiplying the frequency of consumption per day by the number of cups that were consumed. We further accounted for the differences in the sizes of cups by multiplying coffee in cups/d by 1 (for cup) or 1.5 (for mug).“

I guess the traditional 100 ml cups and the common 200 ml cups are all just cups, whereas 300 ml mug is clearly a mug. Who knows really, when the data is all self reported. I guess my 400 ml/d consumption should be roughly optimal.

[–] silliewous@feddit.nl 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Maybe the absolute volume is not what’s important to get the benefit?

[–] Hamartiogonic@sopuli.xyz 4 points 7 months ago (1 children)

So, if I use espresso cups or even dollhouse cups, I can easily hit that optimal cup number with a very small amount of coffee. 😁

[–] Blaat1234@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago

A double espresso from 16g of beans is less than 40ml and stronger than a bigger lungo from a nespresso pod (~7g coffee).

Smaller cups tend to be stronger. That same double espresso with 130g ice and 100ml milk and blend until ice is crushed makes a pretty strong frappuccino.

From espresso to lungo / americano to Starbucks recreations, they all basically use the same dose but wildly varying cup size.

Cup to mug of the same strength filter coffee makes a difference though.

[–] watson387@sopuli.xyz 6 points 7 months ago (1 children)

So while something is definitely going to kill me, it almost certainly won't be recurring bowel cancer.

[–] PapaStevesy@midwest.social 6 points 7 months ago

Yeah, you just have to survive it the first time.

[–] mp3@lemmy.ca 3 points 7 months ago
[–] JoMomma@lemm.ee 2 points 7 months ago

Time for my coffee enema

[–] phoneymouse@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago

Does it help you not get the cancer in the first place?

[–] dlpkl@lemmy.world 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Here's the problem, right. One of the signs of colon cancer is thin shits. Coffee causes thin shits. How tf do I know if my thin shits are from ass cancer or caffeine.

[–] cholesterol@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Stop consuming caffeine for a week?

[–] dlpkl@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)
[–] cholesterol@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago

For science