Drinking Tea and Coffee Linked To Lower Risk of Head and Neck Cancer in Study (theguardian.com) 22
Research finds people who have more than four coffees a day have 17% lower chance of head and neck cancers. From a report: If the only thing getting you through a mountain of present-wrapping is a mug of tea or coffee, be of good cheer. Researchers have found people who consume those drinks have a slightly lower risk of head and neck cancers. There are about 12,800 new head and neck cancer cases and about 4,100 related deaths in the UK every year, according to Cancer Research UK.
The new study does not prove that tea and coffee are themselves protective against such cancers, but experts say the findings help to shed light on what has been a much debated area with inconsistent results. "While there has been prior research on coffee and tea consumption and reduced risk of cancer, this study highlighted their varying effects with different sub-sites of head and neck cancer including the observation that even decaffeinated coffee had some positive impact," said Dr Yuan-Chin Amy Lee of Huntsman Cancer Institute and the University of Utah School of Medicine, the senior author of the study.
Writing in the journal Cancer, the team report how they analysed data from 14 studies that covered Europe, North America and Latin America. [...] After taking into account factors such as age, sex, daily number of cigarettes smoked, alcohol consumption and fruit and vegetable consumption, the researchers found that people who drink more than four cups of caffeinated coffee a day have a 17% lower chance of developing head and neck cancers overall compared with those who do not drink the beverage. Specifically they found such consumption was associated with reduced odds of cancers of the oral cavity and the oropharynx -- part of the throat just behind the mouth.
The new study does not prove that tea and coffee are themselves protective against such cancers, but experts say the findings help to shed light on what has been a much debated area with inconsistent results. "While there has been prior research on coffee and tea consumption and reduced risk of cancer, this study highlighted their varying effects with different sub-sites of head and neck cancer including the observation that even decaffeinated coffee had some positive impact," said Dr Yuan-Chin Amy Lee of Huntsman Cancer Institute and the University of Utah School of Medicine, the senior author of the study.
Writing in the journal Cancer, the team report how they analysed data from 14 studies that covered Europe, North America and Latin America. [...] After taking into account factors such as age, sex, daily number of cigarettes smoked, alcohol consumption and fruit and vegetable consumption, the researchers found that people who drink more than four cups of caffeinated coffee a day have a 17% lower chance of developing head and neck cancers overall compared with those who do not drink the beverage. Specifically they found such consumption was associated with reduced odds of cancers of the oral cavity and the oropharynx -- part of the throat just behind the mouth.
Which to do? (Score:2)
Re:Which to do? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: Which to do? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The graphics on that page are funny. They all show tea being put outside the strainer instead of inside.
But tea strainers work. I suggest getting one with visible holes instead of micro-perforations because the micro-perforations (or something stupid like 400 mesh) quickly clog with tea polymers like polyphenols. If the holes in the strainer are about needle-sized (visually: 0.5-0.75 mm), they will even strain the majority of what a tea bag contains, but won't clog and will drain quickly so as to not make a
Re: (Score:2)
Also possibly data trawling [xkcd.com]
XKCD blames journalists for data trawling, with scientists as unwitting enablers.
In TFA, scientists are doing the trawling / p-hacking.
Self Selection (Score:5, Insightful)
The major problem with these studies is no that ignores self selection issues.
For example multiple newer studies have suggested that the reason why people that drink red wine live longer is because those with health issues are told not to drink alcohol. Which means the older studies put every person with chronic liver failure from drinking red wine into the group of people that no longer drink red wine and say they die younger from not drinking, rather than drinking.
Re: (Score:3)
Also causality.
People who habitually fly around on their family's private jet live longer than people who can't afford to fly on even Ryanair. The implication is that commercial flights damage your health, but the more likely reason is that rich people are much more likely to have a healthier lifestyle.
Re: (Score:2)
Rich people are more likely to have healthy lifestyles, but healthy people are also more likely to become rich.
How about some advancement? (Score:5, Informative)
This research doesn't seem to further much. Almost pointless. You almost have to wonder if someone's proving 1+1=2 just for research grants and a pay check.
Re: How about some advancement? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Biologists are too invested in blindly, stupidly continuing their animal torture
TFA describes an observational study of humans.
The comment you are replying to is about test tube studies on human cells.
None of that has anything to do with torturing animals.
Re: (Score:1)
Correct. But these vague studies are only necessary because biologists don't really know what is going on, because they have not spent enough time to understand what is going on, because, again, biologists are too invested in blindly, stupidly continuing their animal torture, and avoid doing the hard thinking about cancer paths.
Spurious correlation or confounders. (Score:4, Interesting)
Didn't RTFA. But stuff like this is more likely to be noise than anything else.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/a... [nih.gov]
Scott Adams reported on this yesterday (Score:1)
I've been listening to the Coffee with Scott Adams podcast pretty regularly lately and he's been doing a good job on reporting technology news. If the trend of Slashdot being a day late continues then I expect Slashdot to report on sugar apple tree leaves discovered providing pain relief, a new solar powered hydrogen production "nano-reactor", and some kind of laser that can transfer power over planetary distances. Scott Adams discussed other news, those are just a sample of the technology related stories
What about the cancer risks of hot drinks? (Score:3)
Or conversely (Score:2)
while(true){toggle = !toggle;} (Score:3, Funny)
For 3 decades I've seen a cycle of studies showing "coffee good", "coffee bad", "coffee good", "coffee bad", "coffee good", "coffee bad", "coffee good", "coffee bad", Etc.
Split the difference: it's neutral! If you like coffee have some, if not skip. Done! Now go study some other food, how about ciabatta bread.
Wish they'd stop with correlation studies... (Score:2)
And just hold on to the information until the version where they force a change on people and see if it alters their lives.
Like stop them from drinking tea/coffee and see what happens. Then take a different set and force them to start.
Re: (Score:2)
Scientists don't look for causation until correlation is established.
Correlation doesn't imply causation, but a lack of correlation implies a lack of causation.
If you don't want to read about speculative research, why are you on a news site for nerds?