Posted on 09/02/2005 2:21:15 PM PDT by neverdem
Coffee's vindicators tout a message no one wants to hear
This week brought news that coffee, long accused of causing cancer, actually
helps prevent it. Reports that America's favorite beverage is chock-full of antioxidants came across exactly as one would expect—in the form of a gentle scolding. That a cup of joe carries ten times more antioxidants than a banana "does not mean coffee is a substitute for fruit and vegetables," warns Associated Press. "Americans are not eating enough fruits and vegetables, the sources of antioxidants...doctors recommend," Reuters cautions us 50 words in.
Following a study by Joe A. Vinson at the University of Scranton, it's not unreasonable to conclude that the 1.64 cups of coffee the average American sucks down every day will help keep his cells from dividing uncontrollably. But even Vinson managed to find the bad news in this announcement, noting, "Unfortunately, consumers are still not eating enough fruits and vegetables." Maybe he's just worried that using the words "coffee" and "healthy" in the same sentence would be like ordering a double espresso or flavored cappuccino—a faux pas sufficiently gauche to offend health nannies and coffee connoisseurs alike. That black sludge could be good for us is not only counterintuitive, but counter to everything the FDA, caffeine alarmists, Juan Valdez, and Starbucks have taught us about the good life.
Over the past four centuries, coffee has been accused of causing birth defects, ulcers, throat, stomach, pancreatic and breast cancer, coronary thrombosis, calcium loss, and "caffeinism." It has repeatedly been blamed for bouts of impotence in men and infertility in women, as Nina Luttinger and Gregory Dicum explain in their history of the coffee trade, Coffee Book: Anatomy of an Industry. In 1674 a group of women in England penned The Women's Petition against Coffee, charging that "coffee makes a man as barren as the desert out of which this unlucky berry is imported." (In their defense, men responded with a petition insisting that coffee "adds a spiritualescency to the Sperme, and renders it more firm and suitable to the Gusto of the womb.")
Blurring the lines between food and drug, sustenance and stimulant, coffee awakens a society's killjoys and encourages its regulators. Sixteenth-century Turkey was a pioneer of coffee prohibitionism. The Mufti of Constantinople outlawed the drink; second-time offenders were tied up in leather sacks and thrown into the Bosporus. Prussia's Frederick the Great banned the stuff in 1777 and issued the Coffee and Beer Manifesto. "Everybody is using coffee. If possible, this must be prevented," he explained, "My people must drink beer."
Hundreds of years of safe consumption have done little to improve coffee's reputation. In Uncommon Grounds, Mark Pendergrast points out that scientists have tried time and again to prove society's long-held intuitions about its toxicity—most notably in a series of tests during the late 1970s and early '80s. This involved FDA scientists force-feeding massive amounts of caffeine to rats and recording the results. As it turns out, feeding rats the equivalent of 35 cups of coffee a day is not good for them. That's not enough to prove a link between caffeine consumption and health problems in human beings; it is more than enough, however, to perk up the professional scolds at the Center for Science in the Public Interest.
Citing studies that linked caffeine intake to birth defects in lab animals, Michael Jacobson of the CSPI spent years trying to get caffeine knocked off the FDA's list of drugs "generally recognized as safe" and to add warning labels to coffee products. Caught between industry interests and bogus rat studies, the FDA did what it does best—nothing. "We're not saying caffeine is unsafe," the FDA's Sanford Miller explained, "We're just not saying it's safe."
That's pretty much been the happy consensus ever since. Where coffee is promoted, it is promoted as a stimulant and a guilty pleasure. Where it is denounced, it is denounced as a drug and a vice. In the late 1980s and early 1990s, coffee was the upper that kept recovering cocaine addicts showing up at the office. More recently, Starbucks has helped turn java into a faux Italianate fantasy of leisure and excess. Periods of coffee alarmism bubble and dissipate. They only add to the spirit of the high and the depth of the indulgence.
Professor Vinson's antioxidant study has no place in this equilibrium. The liquid equivalent of brussel sprouts and organic spinach is neither a worthy indulgence nor a satisfying target for CSPI fanaticism. As a socially acceptable addiction in a world of health taboos, coffee is a necessary vice. Which may be why Vinson went to such lengths to downplay his findings and attack the American diet. Among the coffee alarmists and the many millions of coffee drinkers who ignore them, he knows he's the real killjoy.
Kerry Howley is an assistant editor of Reason.
If this is true then I will NEVER die.
Bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Yes, but I should be dead yesterday. Does coffee used in high calorie desserts count?
Does this count for de-caf, too?
And wouldn't you know it. I read that there were tons of coffee in warehouses in New Orleans that are now lost.
Study reveals huge U.S. oil-shale field P.S. The Seattle Times doesn't have to be excerpted.
F.B.I. Abandons Disputed Test for Bullets From Crime Scenes
Doctors Blame Taser Stun Gun for Fibrillation
FReepmail me if you want on or off my health and science ping list. Anyone can post the unposted link as they see fit.
INFIDEL! Do not speak of such things!
Side note: there is a local coffee shop that has a specialty drink on the board. It is billed as decaf, sugar-free, fat-free and carb-free. The drink is called "Why Bother?"
Side note: there is a local coffee shop that has a specialty drink on the board. It is billed as decaf, sugar-free, fat-free and carb-free. The drink is called "Why Bother?"
I call that water.
Produces the world's most productive rats. They really clean up their "To Do" lists. And are still looking for chores. With a song in their hearts, and tails twitching until they bleed.
Yeah, but you can't sell 8 ounces of water for 3 buc--...nevermind.
Oh. Heh heh...switching to decaf...
Coffee should be rich, strong, black, hot and plentiful. The stronger the better and NEVER adulterated with cream or sugar, IMHO
...all the while making pithy commentary on the liberal media...
Coffee should be...
black as Hell,
sweet as Love,
and swift as Death.
Dear Prime Choice,
LOL.
Actually, I drink a little of the regular stuff first thing in the morning, but frankly, it really isn't good for me to drink a pot or two of caffeinated coffee.
So I switch to de-caf after a cup or so of the real thing.
Hey, it's better than nothing. ;-)
sitetest
the way I read an article about this, coffee was the single greatest source of anti-oxidants for Americans. Proabably only because we average over one cup a day, but don't eat blueberries every day, or carrots.
You know what? I'm sick of these "experts" scolding me about what I do and don't like to consume. They just can't seem to be able to get their stories straight.
And as someone with experience as a parent of teens (and anyone in law enforcement will concur), I can say that when they can't get their stories straight, SOMEBODY'S LYING.
So you know what I'm going to do? I'm going to ENJOY my coffee, liquor, wine, smokes, salt, sugar, and red meat.
These scientists pimping out their research for publicity and funding can kiss my a$$$ - 'CAUSE I AIN'T GONNA LISTEN TO THEM NOOOO MORE!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.