recent research on coffee

Is coffee good or bad for your health?

Although early studies of coffee suggested that it could lead to health problems, recent research provides strong evidence that drinking coffee actually has a variety of health benefits.

“The overall evidence has been pretty convincing that coffee has been more healthful than harmful in terms of health outcomes,” said Frank Hu , chair of the Department of Nutrition at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, in an April 5, 2021, article in Discover. “For most people, moderate coffee consumption can be incorporated into a healthy diet.”

Hu said that moderate coffee intake—about 2–5 cups a day—is linked to a lower likelihood of type 2 diabetes , heart disease , liver and endometrial cancers, Parkinson’s disease, and depression . It’s even possible that people who drink coffee can reduce their risk of early death.

Early research linked coffee to diseases ranging from heart disease and asthma . But Hu noted that many participants in those studies also smoked, which may have led researchers to think that coffee was responsible for the adverse effects that are now linked with cigarettes . He added that anything people consume a lot of tends to come under scrutiny. “In the past, I think a lot of people thought, ‘Oh, coffee’s so delicious, there must be something bad about coffee,’” he said. “So I think the good news is that [for] most people, coffee actually confers some health benefits.”

Certain groups should be careful about drinking coffee, according to the article. Not much is known about the effects of coffee on children , and caffeine could be harmful to pregnancies . Too much caffeine can also cause anxiety in people with panic or anxiety disorders.

For those who drink coffee, experts suggest brewing it with a paper filter, because unfiltered coffee is associated with higher rates of early death, and can contain compounds that raise levels of LDL, or “bad,” cholesterol. They also advise not going overboard with added cream or sugar.

Read the Discover article: Is Coffee Good for You or Not?

Moderate coffee, tea consumption can be part of healthy lifestyle for most (Harvard Chan School news)

Coffee can be beneficial part of a healthy diet (Harvard Chan School news)

Coffee (The Nutrition Source)

Advertisement

Coffee consumption and cardiometabolic health: a comprehensive review of the evidence

• Open access
• Published: 04 July 2024

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Zoltan Ungvari 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 &
• Setor K. Kunutsor   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-2625-0273 6 , 7  

2694 Accesses

79 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

This review provides a comprehensive synthesis of longitudinal observational and interventional studies on the cardiometabolic effects of coffee consumption. It explores biological mechanisms, and clinical and policy implications, and highlights gaps in the evidence while suggesting future research directions. It also reviews evidence on the causal relationships between coffee consumption and cardiometabolic outcomes from Mendelian randomization (MR) studies. Findings indicate that while coffee may cause short-term increases in blood pressure, it does not contribute to long-term hypertension risk. There is limited evidence indicating that coffee intake might reduce the risk of metabolic syndrome and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. Furthermore, coffee consumption is consistently linked with reduced risks of type 2 diabetes (T2D) and chronic kidney disease (CKD), showing dose-response relationships. The relationship between coffee and cardiovascular disease is complex, showing potential stroke prevention benefits but ambiguous effects on coronary heart disease. Moderate coffee consumption, typically ranging from 1 to 5 cups per day, is linked to a reduced risk of heart failure, while its impact on atrial fibrillation remains inconclusive. Furthermore, coffee consumption is associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality, following a U-shaped pattern, with the largest risk reduction observed at moderate consumption levels. Except for T2D and CKD, MR studies do not robustly support a causal link between coffee consumption and adverse cardiometabolic outcomes. The potential beneficial effects of coffee on cardiometabolic health are consistent across age, sex, geographical regions, and coffee subtypes and are multi-dimensional, involving antioxidative, anti-inflammatory, lipid-modulating, insulin-sensitizing, and thermogenic effects. Based on its beneficial effects on cardiometabolic health and fundamental biological processes involved in aging, moderate coffee consumption has the potential to contribute to extending the healthspan and increasing longevity. The findings underscore the need for future research to understand the underlying mechanisms and refine health recommendations regarding coffee consumption.

Similar content being viewed by others

Coffee consumption and all-cause and cause-specific mortality: a meta-analysis by potential modifiers

Causal relationship from coffee consumption to diseases and mortality: a review of observational and Mendelian randomization studies including cardiometabolic diseases, cancer, gallstones and other diseases

Coffee consumption and risk of hypertension: a systematic review and dose–response meta-analysis of cohort studies

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Introduction

Adverse cardiometabolic outcomes, encompassing hypertension, metabolic syndrome (MetS), nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), type 2 diabetes (T2D), chronic kidney disease (CKD), and cardiovascular diseases (CVDs), represent a significant public health burden globally. These diseases significantly impact morbidity, life expectancy, quality of life, and mortality. Hypertension, a leading risk factor for CVD and stroke, affects an estimated 1.28 billion adults globally, with a higher prevalence in low- and middle-income countries [ 1 , 2 ]. Metabolic syndrome, a complex of interconnected metabolic risk factors that include abdominal obesity, insulin resistance, high blood pressure, and atherogenic dyslipidemia (consists of an aggregation of lipoprotein abnormalities including elevated serum triglyceride and apolipoprotein B (apoB), increased small low-density lipoprotein (LDL) particles, and a reduced level of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C)) [ 3 , 4 ], is an important contributor to T2D, CVD, and premature death [ 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 ]. Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease is a cardiometabolic condition which is characterized by hepatic steatosis with varying degrees of necroinflammation and fibrosis [ 9 ]. It is a major cause of cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma [ 9 ]. Type 2 diabetes, characterized by elevated blood sugar levels, is a common condition contributing to various health complications, including kidney failure, heart disease, and stroke [ 10 ]. Chronic kidney disease reveals a troubling burden, in terms of both morbidity and mortality, as well as substantial economic costs associated with its diagnosis and management [ 11 , 12 ]. Cardiovascular disease, with its major manifestations being coronary heart disease (CHD) and stroke, is the leading cause of death globally [ 13 ]. Together, these diseases pose a substantial burden on healthcare systems and global economies. The rising prevalence of these conditions is linked to aging populations[ 14 ] and increased exposure to modifiable lifestyle risk factors such as tobacco use, physical inactivity, unhealthy diet, and harmful alcohol consumption [ 15 , 16 , 17 ]. These lifestyle choices play a pivotal role in the development and progression of these diseases, highlighting the importance of preventive strategies in public health [ 18 ].

The role of dietary factors in mitigating the risk of these cardiometabolic diseases is increasingly recognized. A balanced diet, rich in fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and lean proteins, has been shown to have protective effects against these conditions [ 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 ]. Amidst various dietary components, coffee consumption emerges as a topic of growing interest due to its widespread use and potential health implications. Coffee, a beverage with a rich history and cultural significance and the most popular and widely consumed beverage in the world [ 23 ], has been a subject of numerous studies examining its impact on health [ 24 ].

The history of coffee is as rich and robust as the beverage itself, spanning centuries and cultures, with its roots deeply embedded in both social and medicinal contexts [ 25 , 26 ]. Coffee is believed to have originated in Ethiopia around the ninth century, where its beans were initially chewed for energy by local tribes. The use of coffee as a drink spread to the Arabian Peninsula, and by the sixteenth century, it was known in Persia, Egypt, Syria, and Turkey. Historically, coffee was not only consumed for pleasure but also valued for its medicinal properties [ 26 ]. In Arabian culture, coffee was prescribed as a medicine for a variety of ailments from simple headaches to more complex conditions like depression [ 26 ]. By the seventeeth century, coffee had made its way to Europe and was sold by apothecaries as a remedy for digestive disorders, a practice that was particularly common in Germany and France. In the 1600s, detailed medicinal reports began appearing on coffee’s beneficial effects, such as its ability to cure certain diseases, aid in digestion, excite mental prowess, and act as a stimulant [ 26 ].

The journey of coffee through medical scrutiny has a colorful past [ 26 ], highlighted by what might be considered one of the earliest instances of a controlled clinical trial. This experimental approach to understanding coffee’s health effects dates back to the eighteeth century under the rule of Gustav III of Sweden (1746–1792 AD), who had a complex view on the beverage’s safety [ 27 ]. The King’s skepticism towards coffee was inherited from a backdrop of stringent regulations instigated by his father, Adolph Frederick, who enacted the “Misuse and Excesses Tea and Coffee Drinking Edict” [ 28 ]. This law not only imposed heavy taxes on coffee but also penalized its consumption. In a bold move to investigate health implications of coffee consumption, Gustav III initiated an experiment involving two identical twins convicted of a crime. Their death sentences were commuted to life imprisonment on the condition that they participate in his study, with one twin consuming three pots of coffee daily and the other the same amount of tea. The results were clear when the coffee-drinking twin outlived his tea-consuming counterpart, dying at a later age [ 27 ]. This outcome eventually contributed to the lifting of the coffee ban in Sweden during the 1820s.

In modern times, the majority of health practitioners have recommended avoiding coffee in patients with CVD [ 29 ], due to side effects such as increased blood pressure (BP) and cardiac arrhythmias [ 30 , 31 ], that may adversely impact cardiovascular outcomes. In fact, in the 1960s, coffee consumption was proposed as a cardiovascular risk factor [ 32 ]. However, recent evidence suggests that coffee consumption may exert beneficial effects on several cardiometabolic outcomes [ 33 , 34 ]. Studies have shown associations between coffee intake and reduced risk of outcomes such as T2D, CVD, and mortality.[ 33 , 35 , 36 ] However, the evidence has not always been consistent, with some studies suggesting neutral or even adverse effects [ 33 , 37 , 38 ].

Given the extensive literature and several inconsistencies in findings, there is a pressing need to summarize and appraise the evidence surrounding coffee consumption and cardiometabolic health in one single investigation. This will enable patients, clinicians, researchers, and policy makers to make the appropriate interpretations, which can optimally impact on public health and clinical practice. This review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the current state of evidence, delve into the biological mechanisms through which coffee may exert its cardiometabolic health effects, and discuss the health, clinical, and policy implications. The following adverse cardiometabolic outcomes are evaluated: hypertension, MetS, NAFLD, T2D, CKD, composite CVD, and specific endpoints such as CHD, stroke, heart failure (HF), and atrial fibrillation (AF), and all-cause mortality. This review also discusses the potential of coffee consumption to contribute to the extension of healthspan and improve longevity, based on its benefits to cardiometabolic health. The review also highlights gaps in the existing evidence and suggests future research directions in this area. Additionally, this study reviews evidence on the causal relationships between coffee consumption and these cardiometabolic outcomes using Mendelian randomization (MR) studies. Such a synthesis is very relevant, considering the substantial public health burden attributed to adverse cardiometabolic outcomes and the widespread consumption of coffee globally.

A search of MEDLINE and Embase was conducted up to May 2024 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), non-RCTs, and observational studies, including prospective cohort, nested case-control, case-cohort, or retrospective cohort studies, with a particular focus on systematic reviews and meta-analyses of these study designs, based on the hierarchy of evidence [ 39 ]. Search terms or keywords related to coffee consumption (“coffee,” “coffee consumption”) and cardiometabolic outcomes (“hypertension,” “metabolic syndrome,” “NAFLD,” type 2 diabetes,” “chronic kidney disease,” “cardiovascular disease,” “coronary heart disease,” “stroke,” “heart failure,” “atrial fibrillation,” “mortality”) were combined. The review was restricted to studies conducted in human population, reported in English, and in adults. For observational studies, the focus was particularly on longitudinal cohort studies given that they address the issue of temporality. Studies that studied the effect of the combination of coffee and tea/cocoa-based beverages were not evaluated. In a separate search, MR studies on coffee consumption and cardiometabolic outcomes were identified.

Types of coffee

Coffee is a complex beverage composed of over 100 biological and chemical components, including carbohydrates, lipids, nitrogenous compounds, vitamins, minerals, and a variety of bioactive compounds such as diterpenes, magnesium, trigonelline, quinides, lignans, alkaloids, and phenolic compounds [ 40 ]. The principal active ingredient in coffee, caffeine, is the most widely consumed psychostimulant in the world [ 41 ]. The composition of these components can vary significantly depending on the coffee bean variety, roasting degree, and brewing method.

There are two primary types of coffee beans: Arabica and Robusta. Arabica beans, which constitute about 70% of the world’s coffee production, are prized for their smooth flavor and aromatic qualities. Robusta beans, making up the remaining 30%, are more robust and bitter, often used in blends for added body and crema. They contain higher levels of caffeine compared to Arabica beans [ 42 ].

Coffee can be classified into two subtypes: instant coffee and ground coffee, which differ in preparation, taste, and caffeine content [ 42 ]. Instant coffee is created from brewed coffee that has been freeze-dried or spray-dried into soluble powder or granules. To prepare, you simply dissolve it in hot water, making it a quick and convenient option. Instant coffee typically contains between 60 and 80 mg of caffeine per 8-oz cup. It is often made from lower-grade coffee beans. Ground coffee is made from coffee beans that have been roasted and then ground. It is used in various brewing methods, such as drip brewing, French press, or espresso machines. The caffeine content in ground coffee can vary widely, depending on the bean type, roast level, and brewing method. Generally, an 8-oz cup of ground coffee can contain anywhere between 70 and 140mg of caffeine.

Globally, coffee is enjoyed in numerous forms, ranging from traditional brews like espresso, Americano, and French press to more contemporary styles such as latte, cappuccino, macchiato, mocha, flat white, iced coffee, and cold brew [ 43 ]. Each preparation method influences the composition as well as the flavor and texture of the final product. Espresso coffee traces its origins back to Turin in 1884, with the invention of the machine known as “La Brasiliana,” patented by Angelo Moriondo (patent No. 33/256 dated May 16, 1884, and later patent No. 34/381 dated November 20, 1884). This innovation was internationally patented in Paris on October 23, 1885 [ 44 ]. The term “espresso coffee” first emerged at the 1906 Milan Fair, coined by Desiderio Pavoni to describe this new coffee preparation method [ 45 ]. In 1936, Antonio Cremonese officially included “espresso coffee” in a patent (patent No. 343230). This patent was subsequently purchased and enhanced by Achille Gaggia, who marketed the machine as a “crema coffee” machine. The name “crema coffee” referred to the distinctive layer of crema that differentiated it from instant coffees. Thus, crema coffee evolved into the espresso coffee we recognize today [ 46 ]. In 1938, Gaggia filed patent No. 365726, which marked a significant advancement in coffee extraction technology. His machine employed a piston system to push high-temperature water through the coffee powder, creating the first pressurized espresso extraction method. This innovation resulted in espresso coffee that was free from traditional bitterness and burnt aftertaste, characterized instead by a thick, creamy texture [ 45 ]. In 1947, Gaggia registered a second patent, introducing a lever system that replaced the press mechanism. This lever pushed water at a pressure of 9/10 atmospheres into the ground coffee, allowing for the extraction of aromatic compounds and the formation of crema. The result was a coffee that retained its full olfactory and taste characteristics. The intense aroma and rich flavor profile contributed to the rapid popularity of “crema espresso,” solidifying it as a celebrated symbol of Italian coffee culture [ 44 ].

Coffee can also be categorized based on its caffeine content into caffeinated and decaffeinated varieties. The caffeine extraction involves various methods that reduce caffeine levels while attempting to maintain the original flavor profile.

Coffee can broadly be classified into three preparation styles based on how it is brewed. Boiled coffee is one of the oldest methods, where ground coffee is boiled in water, typically in a pot or kettle. This method does not use a filter, allowing the grounds to naturally settle at the bottom.

Unfiltered coffee is a brewing method in which coffee grounds are steeped in hot water and then separated from the liquid using a method that allows some fine particles to remain in the final brew. This method encompasses styles such as Turkish coffee and French press. In Turkish coffee, the finely ground coffee is simmered in a pot with water and often sugar, then served into cups where the grounds are allowed to settle. In the French press, coarser grounds are steeped in hot water, and then a plunger is used to press the grounds to the bottom of the pot, allowing the brewed coffee to remain above the mesh filter.

The filtered coffee method involves brewing by pouring hot water over coffee grounds contained within a filter. As the water percolates through the grounds, it extracts flavors and compounds, but leaves behind most of the coffee particles and oils, thanks to the filter. This process produces a coffee that is lighter in body and cleaner in taste compared to unfiltered coffee methods. One significant characteristic of filtered coffee is that it lacks the rich diterpene compounds found in unfiltered coffee, such as cafestol and kahweol, which are known to contribute to the oiliness and robust flavor of coffees like those made from a French press or Turkish brewing method. The absence of these diterpenes makes filtered coffee a healthier choice for those concerned about cholesterol, as diterpenes have been shown to elevate LDL cholesterol levels [ 47 ].

Coffee consumption and impact on adverse cardiometabolic outcomes

Blood pressure and hypertension.

The relationship between coffee consumption and blood pressure (BP)/hypertension is complex. Coffee consumption has been linked to increases in BP or risk of hypertension, whereas some studies suggest a protective effect of coffee intake. A large number of RCTs and observational cohort studies of the effect of coffee or caffeine consumption on BP or hypertension have been conducted, and there have been several efforts to aggregate the evidence using systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Jee and colleagues [ 48 ] in their 1999 meta-analysis of 11 RCTs showed that coffee consumption (median dose of 5 cups/day) was associated with increases in systolic and diastolic blood pressure (SBP and DBP, respectively) (2.4 and 1.2 mmHg, respectively) following a median duration of 56 days. The effect of coffee consumption on SBP and DBP was greater in trials with younger participants [ 48 ]. In a meta-analysis of 16 caffeine and coffee consumption RCTs of 42 days median duration published by Noordzij and colleagues [ 49 ] in 2005, SBP and DBP were shown to increase by 2.04 and 0.73 mmHg, respectively. When coffee and caffeine trials were analyzed separately, BP elevations appeared to be larger for caffeine (SBP 4.16 mmHg (2.13–6.20) and DBP 2.41 mmHg (0.98–3.84)) than for coffee consumption (SBP 1.22 mmHg (0.52–1.92) and DBP 0.49 mmHg (−0.06–1.04)) [ 49 ]. In a 2021 meta-analysis of RCTs to evaluate the effects of coffee consumption on MeTS parameters, Ramli and colleagues [ 50 ] showed that green coffee extract supplementation reduced SBP and DBP. Mesas and colleagues [ 51 ] in 2011 conducted a meta-analysis of five RCTs to summarize the evidence on the acute and longer-term effects of caffeine and coffee intake on BP in hypertensive individuals. Results showed that the administration of 200–300 mg caffeine produced a mean increase of 8.1 mmHg in SBP and of 5.7 mmHg in DBP. The increase in BP was observed in the first hour after caffeine intake and lasted ≥3 h [ 51 ]. In three studies of the longer-term effect (2 weeks) of coffee, no increase in BP was observed after coffee was compared with a caffeine-free diet or was compared with decaffeinated coffee [ 51 ].

In a 2017 dose-response meta-analysis of seven observational cohort studies by Grosso and colleagues [ 52 ], the nonlinear analysis showed a 9% significant decreased risk of hypertension per 7 cups of coffee a day, while, in the linear dose–response analysis, there was a 1% decreased risk of hypertension for each additional cup of coffee per day. In stratified analysis, significant inverse associations were observed in females, but not in males; however, these analyses need to be interpreted with caution given the limited number of studies for the stratified analysis [ 52 ]. In a 2018 dose-response meta-analysis of ten observational cohort studies, Xie and colleagues [ 53 ] showed that coffee consumption was weakly and inversely associated with the risk of hypertension in a linear dose-response manner. For the dose-response curve, the relative risks (RRs) of hypertension risk were 0.97 (95% CI, 0.95–0.99), 0.95 (95% CI, 0.91–0.99), 0.92 (95% CI, 0.87–0.98), and 0.90 (95% CI, 0.83–0.97) for 2, 4, 6, and 8 cups/day, respectively, compared with individuals with no coffee intakes [ 53 ]. The associations did not vary significantly by age and sex in stratified analyses [ 53 ]. In a 2019 meta-analysis by D’Elia and colleagues [ 54 ] involving four prospective cohort studies, a nonlinear inverse dose-response relationship was demonstrated between coffee consumption and the risk of hypertension. Compared with no coffee consumption, the RRs of hypertension were 1.00 (95% CI, 0.99–1.01) for 1 cup/day, 0.99 (95% CI, 0.97–1.02) for 2 cups/day, 0.97 (95% CI, 0.94–0.99) for 3–4 cups/day, 0.94 (95% CI, 0.91–0.97) for >4–5 cups/day, 0.90 (95% CI, 0.86–0.93) for >5–6 cups/day, and 0.86 (95% CI, 0.82–0.91) for >6–7 cups/day compared with no coffee consumption [ 54 ]. The associations did not vary by age categories [ 54 ]. In a 2023 meta-analysis of 12 observational cohort studies by Haghighatdoost and colleagues [ 55 ], comparing the highest category of coffee consumption with the lowest intake was associated with a 7% reduction in the risk of hypertension (RR=0.93, 95% CI, 0.88–0.97). The associations did not differ significantly by age and sex [ 55 ].

Although the precise nature of the relation between coffee and BP is still unclear, most of evidence suggests that coffee consumption may cause short-term increases in BP, with no effect on long-term BP levels. Furthermore, coffee consumption does not increase the risk of hypertension; a weak association between moderate to high (range 2–8 cups/day) coffee consumption and decreased risk of hypertension cannot be ruled out (Fig. 1 ), and this does not appear to be modified significantly by age or sex.

Coffee consumption and adverse cardiometabolic outcomes: summary of effects. AF, atrial fibrillation; BP, blood pressure; CHD, coronary heart disease; CKD, chronic kidney disease; CVD, cardiovascular disease; HF, heart failure; HYPT, hypertension; MetS, metabolic syndrome; NAFLD, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease; T2D, type 2 diabetes

Metabolic syndrome

The relationship between coffee consumption and MetS has mostly been investigated using cross-sectional study designs, with relatively few based on observational prospective cohort studies. Among 93,179 individuals from two large general population cohorts in a MR study, Nordestgaard and colleagues [ 56 ] in 2015 showed that coffee intake was associated with a lower risk of MetS observationally. Compared with individuals with no coffee intake, odds ratios (ORs) for MetS were 0.91 (95% CI, 0.86–0.97) for 0.1–1 cup/day, 0.89 (95% CI, 0.84–0.94) for 1.1–2 cups/day, 0.88 (95% CI, 0.83–0.93) for 2.1–3 cups/day, 0.83 (95% CI, 0.78–0.89) for 3.1–4 cups/ day, 0.84 (95% CI, 0.79–0.90) for 4.1–5 cups/day, and 0.89 (95% CI, 0.83–0.95) for >5 cups/day [ 56 ]. The inverse associations did not vary significantly by age or sex [ 56 ]. Among 2554 older Australian adults followed over a 10-year period, Wong and colleagues [ 57 ] in 2022 showed that coffee consumption was not associated with the incidence of MetS. In a cohort of 10,253 participants without MetS at baseline, Corbi-Cobo-Losey and colleagues [ 58 ] in 2023 investigated the association between coffee consumption and incident MetS and showed that coffee consumption of ≥1 to <4 cups/day (moderate consumption) was associated with a significantly lower odds of developing MetS compared to consumption of <1 cup/month [ 58 ]. Compared with <1 cup/month, ORs were 0.79 (95% CI, 0.53–1.16) for ≥1 cup/month to <1 cup/day, 0.71 (95% CI, 0.50–0.99) for ≥1 cup/day to <4 cups/day, and 0.73 (95% CI, 0.42–1.29) for ≥4 cups/day [ 58 ]. There was no significant evidence of interactions by age or sex [ 58 ]. In a 2021 meta-analysis that pooled data separately on 13 cross-sectional studies and 2 observational cohort studies, none of the summary estimates showed evidence of an association between coffee consumption and the MetS [ 59 ]. In a 2021 systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs to evaluate the effects of coffee consumption on MetS parameters, Ramli and colleagues [ 50 ] showed that green coffee extract supplementation reduced waist circumference, triglyceride levels, HDL-C levels, SBP, and DBP, whereas decaffeinated coffee reduced fasting blood glucose levels.

Limited prospective evidence suggests that moderate to high coffee consumption might be associated with a reduced risk of MetS (Fig. 1 ).

Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease

Only few prospective studies have evaluated the association between coffee consumption and the risk of NAFLD; most of the evidence is based on cross-sectional study designs, which lack temporality.

Zelber-Sagi and colleagues [ 60 ] prospectively evaluated the association between coffee consumption and onset of NAFLD in the general population and demonstrated no evidence of an association. In a 2017 prospective analysis of a multiethnic cohort, Setiawan and colleagues [ 61 ] showed evidence of an inverse association between coffee consumption and the risk of NAFLD, consistent with a dose-response relationship. Compared with individuals with never drinkers, ORs were 1.00 (95% CI, 0.89–1.12) for <1 cup/day, 0.93 (95% CI, 0.84–1.03) for 1 cup/day, 0.85 (95% CI, 0.75–0.96) for 2–3 cups/day, and 0.66 (95% CI, 0.53–0.83) for ≥4 cups/day. Chung and colleagues [ 62 ] in 2020 evaluated the association between coffee consumption and fatty liver disease in a large Korean cohort and demonstrated that the incidence of fatty liver was not associated with the amount of coffee consumption at baseline, but was lowered with an increment in the amount of coffee consumption at the follow-up period overall and in males but not in females [ 62 ]. Multiple meta-analyses have demonstrated a protective association of coffee intake with the development of NAFLD, but they mostly combined observational cross-sectional, case-control and cohort studies [ 63 , 64 , 65 ].

In summary, coffee consumption might be associated with a reduced risk of NAFLD in a dose-response manner, but this is based on limited prospective evidence (Fig. 1 ).

• Type 2 diabetes

Numerous individual studies have shown that long-term coffee consumption is consistently associated with a significantly lower risk of developing T2D. Using the Nurses’ Health Study (NHS) and Health Professionals’ Follow-up Study (HPFS), Salazar-Martinez and colleagues [ 66 ] in 2004 evaluated the long-term relationship between coffee consumption and other caffeinated beverages and the incidence of T2D. Coffee consumption was assessed every 2 to 4 years. Compared to no coffee consumption, the RRs of T2D risk in men were 0.98 (95% CI, 0.84–1.15) for <1 cup/day, 0.93 (95% CI, 0.80–1.08) for 1–3 cups/day, 0.71 (95% CI, 0.53–0.94) for 4–5 cups/day, and 0.46 (95% CI, 0.26–0.82) for ≥6 cups/day. The results were similar for women and were not modified by smoking or body mass index [ 66 ]. The associations between decaffeinated coffee and T2D risk were inverse and modest [ 66 ]. In a 2006 prospective analysis of the Iowa Women’s Health Study, which included 28,812 postmenopausal women who were free of diabetes and CVD, compared with women who reported 0 cups of coffee/day, women who consumed ≥6 cups/day had a 22% lower risk (RR=0.78; 95% CI, 0.61–1.01) of T2D [ 67 ]. This association appeared to be largely driven by decaffeinated coffee (RR=0.67; 95% CI, 0.42–1.08) rather than regular coffee (RR=0.79; 95% CI, 0.59–1.05) [ 67 ]. In another analysis of the NHS and HPFS cohorts, Bhupathiraju and colleagues [ 68 ] in 2014 examined the associations between 4-year changes in coffee consumption and the risk of T2D in the subsequent 4 years. The results showed that participants who increased their coffee consumption by more than 1 cup/day over a 4-year period had an 11% (95% CI 3%, 18%) lower risk of T2D in the subsequent 4 years compared with those who made no changes in consumption. Furthermore, participants who decreased their coffee intake by more than 1 cup/day had a 17% (95% CI 8%, 26%) higher risk for T2D. In the MR study by Nordestgaard and colleagues [ 56 ] in 2015, coffee intake was shown to be associated with a lower risk of T2D observationally. Compared with individuals with no coffee intake, hazard ratios (HRs) for T2D were 0.70 (95% CI, 0.54–0.91) for 0.1–1 cup/day, 0.66 (95% CI, 0.51–0.86) for 1.1–2 cups/day, 0.72 (95% CI, 0.56–0.93) for 2.1–3 cups/day, 0.52 (95% CI, 0.38–0.71) for 3.1–4 cups/day, 0.48 (95% CI, 0.35–0.67) for 4.1–5 cups/day, and 0.57 (95% CI, 0.42–0.78) for >5 cups/day [ 56 ]. The inverse associations did not vary significantly by age or sex [ 56 ].

Systematic reviews and meta-analysis of these individual studies also support the hypothesis that habitual coffee consumption is linked with a substantially lower risk of T2D. In pooled analysis of nine cohort studies to evaluate the association between habitual coffee consumption and risk of T2D, van Dam and Hu [ 69 ] in 2005 reported RRs for T2D to be 0.65 (95% CI, 0.54–0.78) for the highest (≥6 or ≥7 cups/day) and 0.72 (95% CI, 0.62–0.83) for the second highest (4–6 cups/day) category of coffee consumption compared with the lowest consumption category (0 or ≤2 cups/day). The associations did not vary substantially by sex, obesity, or region (USA and Europe) [ 69 ]. In a 2014 systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of 28 prospective studies by Ding and colleagues [ 70 ], compared with no or rare coffee consumption, the RR for T2D was 0.92 (95% CI, 0.90–0.94), 0.85 (95% CI, 0.82–0.88), 0.79 (95% CI, 0.75–0.83), 0.75 (95% CI, 0.71–0.80), 0.71 (95% CI, 0.65–0.76), and 0.67 (95% CI, 0.61–0.74) for 1–6 cups/day, respectively. The RR of T2D for a 1 cup/day increase was 0.91 (95% CI, 0.89–0.94) for caffeinated coffee consumption and 0.94 (95% CI, 0.91–0.98) for decaffeinated coffee consumption ( p -value for interaction = 0.17) [ 70 ]. In stratified analyses, the inverse associations between coffee consumption and risk of T2D were similar by geographical region (USA, Europe, and Asia) and sex [ 70 ]. In a 2018 meta-analysis involving pooled analysis of 30 prospective studies, the pooled RR was 0.71 (95% CI, 0.67–0.76) for the highest category of coffee consumption (median consumption, 5 cups/day) vs the lowest category (median consumption, 0 cups/day) [ 36 ]. The risk of T2D decreased by 6% (RR = 0.94; 95% CI, 0.93–0.95) for each cup/day increase in coffee consumption. Results were similar for caffeinated coffee consumption (per additional cup of coffee per day: RR=0.93; 95% CI, 0.90–0.96) and decaffeinated coffee consumption (RR=0.94; 95% CI, 0.90–0.98) [ 36 ]. The data showed no clear differences in the association between coffee consumption and risk of T2D by age, sex, or geographic region [ 36 ].

In summary, a significant body of robust research suggests that coffee consumption is inversely associated with the risk of developing T2D in a dose-response manner; with the largest risk reduction observed for high consumption (≥6 cups/day) (Fig. 1 ).

• Chronic kidney disease

Lew and colleagues [ 71 ] in 2018 analyzed data from a prospective cohort of 63,257 Chinese men and women and demonstrated evidence of an association between coffee intake and end-stage renal disease (ESRD). Compared with individuals with no coffee intake or <1 cup/day, HRs were 0.91 (95% CI, 0.79–1.05) for 1 cup/day and 0.82 (95% CI, 0.71–0.96) for ≥2 cups/day. When stratified by sex, this association was observed in men but not in women [ 71 ]. Jhee and colleagues [ 72 ] in analysis of the Korean Genome and Epidemiology Study (KoGES) cohort in 2018 demonstrated that daily coffee intake was associated with a decreased risk of CKD. Compared with no coffee intake, HRs were 0.76 (95% CI, 0.63–0.92) for 1 cup/day and 0.80 (95% CI, 0.65–0.98) for ≥2 cups/day [ 72 ]. In a 2018 analysis of the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) Study, higher coffee consumption was shown to be associated with a lower risk of CKD [ 73 ]. Compared with individuals with no coffee intake, HRs were 0.90 (95% CI, 0.82–0.99) for <1 cup/day, 0.90 (95% CI, 0.82–0.99) for 1 to <2 cups/day, 0.87 (95% CI, 0.77–0.97) for 2 to <3 cups/day, and 0.84 (95% CI, 0.75–0.94) for ≥3 cups/day [ 73 ]. The associations were similar in males and females [ 73 ]. Srithongkul and Ungprasert [ 74 ] in 2020 conducted a meta-analysis of four observational cohort studies and reported a decreased risk of incident CKD among coffee-drinkers compared with non-drinkers: pooled RR of 0.87 (95% CI, 0.81–0.95). In a 2021 meta-analysis of seven prospective cohort studies, coffee consumption was associated with a significant decrease in the risk for incident CKD, consistent with a dose-response relationship. Compared with non-drinkers, the RR of CKD for coffee-drinkers was 0.86 (95% CI, 0.76–0.97); furthermore, compared with non-drinkers, the RR was 0.87 (95% CI, 0.77–0.98) for ≤1 cup/day and 0.82 (95% CI, 0.74–0.92) for ≥2 cups/day [ 75 ]. There was no significant evidence that sex modified the association (albeit based on limited number of studies) [ 75 ]. In analysis of over 350,000 participants from the UK Biobank, Tang and colleagues [ 76 ] in 2022 demonstrated coffee consumption to be associated with a reduced risk of CKD in a dose-dependent manner. Compared with individuals with no coffee intake, HRs were 0.94 (95% CI, 0.88–1.00) for ≤1 cup/day, 0.89 (95% CI, 0.83–0.95) for 2–3 cups/day, 0.86 (95% CI, 0.79–0.94) for 4–5 cups/day, and 0.85 (95% CI, 0.75–0.95) for ≥6 cups/day. Subgroup analysis showed that the inverse coffee-CKD relationship existed in females, but not males. The coffee–CKD association did not significantly differ by age and lifestyle factors such as smoking status and alcohol consumption. Furthermore, the associations did not differ by coffee types (instant, ground, and decaffeinated) [ 76 ].

A consistent body of evidence suggests a protective effect of coffee consumption on CKD risk, and this is consistent with a dose-response relationship; higher doses are associated with the largest risk reductions (Fig. 1 ).

Cardiovascular disease including coronary heart disease and stroke

The link between coffee consumption and CVD, including CHD and stroke, is an area of ongoing research, with studies yielding mixed results. In a prospective evaluation of 20,179 randomly selected eastern Finnish men and women, Kleemola and colleagues [ 77 ] in 2000 showed that coffee consumption was not associated with the risk of nonfatal MI. Lopez-Garcia and colleagues [ 78 ] in 2006 evaluated the association between long-term habitual coffee consumption and risk of CHD in the HPFS and NHS, with cumulative coffee consumption categorized as <1 cup/month, 1 cup/month to 4 cups/week, 5 to 7 cups/week, 2 to 3 cups/day, 4 to 5 cups/day, and ≥6 cups/day. The results showed no significant evidence of associations between coffee consumption and CHD in men and women. Grioni and colleagues [ 79 ] in 2015 investigated 12,800 men and 30,449 women without a history of CVD and showed that consumption of over 2 cups/day of Italian-style coffee was associated with an increased risk of CHD: HRs of 1.37 (95% CI, 1.03–1.82) for >2–4 cups/day and 1.52 (95% CI 1.11–2.07) for over 4 cups/day.

Sofi and colleagues [ 37 ] in their 2007 meta-analysis of 13 case-control and 10 cohort studies showed a significant association between high coffee consumption and increased risk of CHD in the case-control studies: ORs of 1.83 (95% CI, 1.49–2.24) for >4 cups/day and 1.33 (95% CI, 1.04 to 1.71) for 3 to 4 cups/day, with no significant evidence of associations in the long-term follow-up cohort studies. In a 2009 meta-analysis of 21 prospective cohort studies, coffee consumption was not associated with the risk of CHD. Compared to light coffee consumption (<1 cup/day in US or ≤2 cups/day in Europe), the pooled RRs for CHD were 0.96 (95% CI, 0.87–1.06) for moderate (1–3 or 3–4 cups/day), 1.04 (95% CI, 0.92–1.17) for heavy (4–5 or 5–6 cups/day), and 1.07 (95% CI, 0.87–1.32) for very heavy (≥6 or ≥7 cups/day) categories of coffee consumption [ 80 ]. However, in subgroup analysis, moderate coffee consumption was associated with reduced risk of CHD in women, but not in men: RRs of 0.82 (95% CI, 0.73–0.92) and 1.01 (95% CI, 0.89–1.14), respectively [ 80 ]. In a 2018 meta-analysis of 6 cohort studies and 11 case-control studies, Mo and colleagues [ 81 ] showed that compared with <1 cup, daily consumption of 3–4 cups and >4 cups of coffee were significantly associated with an increased risk of MI: pooled ORs were 1.40 (95% CI, 1.11–1.77) and 1.48 (95% CI, 1.22–1.79), respectively. The dose–response relationship was consistent with a “J–shaped” curve; the increased risk of MI was observed in men but not women [ 81 ]. However, the associations did not vary by geographical location (Europe and North America) and coffee subtype (caffeinated and decaffeinated) [ 81 ]. In a 2023 meta-analysis of 32 prospective cohort studies, comparing the highest category of coffee consumption in comparison with the lowest intake was not associated with the risk of CHD (RR=1.05, 95% CI, 0.97–1.14) [ 38 ]. In a subgroup analysis by gender, coffee consumption was associated with an increased risk of CHD in men (RR = 1.19, 95% CI 1.05–1.35), but not in women (RR = 0.91, 95% CI 0.77–1.08) [ 38 ].

In the 24-year follow-up of the NHS, Lopez-Garcia and colleagues [ 82 ] in 2009 showed that habitual coffee consumption may modestly reduce risk of stroke: RRs of 0.98 (95% CI, 0.84–1.15) for 1 cup/month to 4 cups/week, 0.88 (95% CI, 0.77–1.02) for 5 to 7 cups/week, 0.81 (95% CI, 0.70–0.95) for 2 to 3 cups/day, and 0.80 (95% CI, 0.64–0.98) for ≥4 cups/day compared to <1 cup/month. These results applied to both ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke and the association was stronger among never and past smokers than among current smokers [ 82 ]. The results were qualitatively similar for caffeinated and decaffeinated coffee [ 82 ]. In a 2021 analysis of the UK Biobank cohort, Zhang and colleagues [ 83 ] demonstrated nonlinear associations of coffee consumption with the risk of stroke; coffee consumption of 2–3 cups/day was associated with the highest risk reduction. Compared to no coffee consumption, the HRs for stroke were 0.90 (95% CI, 0.85–0.95) for 0.5–1 cup/day, 0.88 (95% CI, 0.84–0.94) for 2–3 cups/day, and 0.92 (0.86–0.98) for ≥4 cups/day. The results were qualitatively similar for ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke [ 83 ].

In a 2011 dose-response meta-analysis of 11 prospective cohort studies, there was some evidence of a nonlinear association between coffee consumption and risk of stroke [ 84 ]. Compared with no coffee consumption, the RRs of stroke were 0.86 (95% CI, 0.78–0.94) for 2 cups/day, 0.83 (95% CI, 0.74–0.92) for 3–4 cups/day, 0.87 (95% CI, 0.77–0.97) for 6 cups/day, and 0.93 (95% CI, 0.79–1.08) for 8 cups/day [ 84 ]. The associations were similar for males and females and across geographical regions [ 84 ]. In a 2021 meta-analysis of seven long-term cohort studies, comparing the highest versus lowest category of coffee consumption was associated with a reduced risk of overall, hemorrhagic, and ischemic stroke: HRs of 0.92 (95% CI, 0.86–0.99), 0.90 (95% CI, 0.82–0.97), and 0.83 (95% CI, 0.74–0.88), respectively [ 85 ]. The results were similar in females [ 85 ]. In another 2021 meta-analysis which involved 21 studies including 30 independent cohorts comprising more than 2.4 million participants, findings showed evidence of a significant inverse association between coffee consumption and risk of stroke [ 86 ]. The pooled RR for the highest versus the lowest categories of coffee consumption was 0.87 (95% CI, 0.80–0.94). A dose-response analysis was consistent with a nonlinear relationship (U-shape). The strongest association for stroke (21% lower risk) was found for coffee consumption of 3–4 cups/day, with no further reduction in stroke risk observed with increasing levels of coffee consumption beyond this amount [ 86 ]. Similar associations were observed for males and females [ 86 ].

In 2016, Nordestgaard and Nordestgaard [ 87 ] investigated observational and causal associations between coffee intake and CVD mortality among 95,000–223,000 individuals. In observational analyses, CVD mortality appeared to be lower with higher coffee intake [ 87 ]. Compared with individuals with no coffee intake, HRs were 0.99 (95% CI, 0.76–1.29) for 0–1 cup/day, 1.04 (95% CI, 0.80–1.36) for 1–2 cups/day, 0.92 (95% CI, 0.70–1.21) for 2–3 cups/day, 0.93 (95% CI, 0.68–1.27) for 3–4 cups/day, 0.71 (95% CI, 0.50–1.00) for 4–5 cups/day, and 0.81 (95% CI, 0.59–1.12) for >5 cups/day. The associations were less prominent in never smokers compared with former and current smokers [ 87 ]. In analysis of 347,077 individuals in the UK Biobank, including 8368 incident CVD cases, Zhou and Hyppönen [ 88 ] in 2019 showed the association between habitual coffee intake and CVD risk to be nonlinear, and, compared with participants drinking 1–2 cups/day, the risk of CVD was increased for non-drinkers, drinkers of decaffeinated coffee, and those who reported drinking >6 cups/day: ORs of 1.11 (95% CI, 1.04–1.18), 1.07 (95% CI, 1.00–1.15), and 1.22 (95% CI, 1.07–1.40), respectively. There was no evidence of associations for <1 cup/day, 3–4 cups/day, and 5–6 cups/day [ 88 ]. In a 2014 meta-analysis of 36 prospective cohort studies comprising 1.2 million participants and over 36,000 CVD cases, a nonlinear relationship between coffee consumption and CVD risk was demonstrated. Moderate coffee consumption was associated with a reduced CVD risk, with the lowest CVD risk at 3 to 5 cups/day, and heavy coffee consumption was not associated with an increased CVD risk [ 89 ]. Compared with the lowest category of coffee consumption (median 0 cups/day), the pooled RR for incident CVD was 0.89 (95% CI, 0.84–0.94) for the third highest category (median 1.5 cups/day), 0.85 (95% CI, 0.80–0.90) for the second highest category (median 3.5 cups/day), and 0.95 (95% CI, 0.87–1.03) for the highest category (median 5 cups/day) of coffee consumption. The results were qualitatively similar for CHD and stroke outcomes [ 89 ]. In stratified analyses, the results were similar across age, sex, smoking status, geographical location, and coffee subtype (caffeinated and decaffeinated) [ 89 ]. In a 2016 dose-response meta-analysis of 31 prospective cohort studies on the association between coffee consumption and CVD mortality risk, with stratified analyses by smoking status and other potential confounders, Grosso and colleagues [ 90 ] demonstrated decreased CVD mortality risk (RR=0.85, 95% CI, 0.77–0.93) for consumption of up to 4 cups/day of coffee, with no further decrease in risk for higher consumption. The dose-response relationship was J-shaped for smokers, but linear for non-smokers. The coffee–CVD mortality association did not significantly differ by gender, geographical area, year of publication, and type of coffee [ 90 ]. In an updated dose-response meta-analysis of 40 prospective cohort studies, Kim and colleagues [ 91 ] in 2019 showed a non-linear inverse association between coffee consumption and CVD mortality. The lowest RR was at 2.5 cups/day for CVD mortality (RR=0.83, 95% CI, 0.80–0.87), with no further increase in risk with additional consumption [ 91 ]. In a 2022 analysis of the UK Biobank cohort comprising approximately half a million participants, Chieng and colleagues [ 35 ] showed that habitual coffee intake of up to 5 cups/day was associated with significant reductions in the risk of incident CVD and CVD mortality, when compared with non-drinkers. The lowest risk for CHD and ischemic stroke was observed in those who consumed 2–3 cups/day: HRs of 0.89 (95% CI, 0.86–0.91) and 0.84 (95% CI, 0.78–0.90), respectively. All coffee subtypes were associated with a reduction in incident CVD, the lowest risk was 2–3 cups/day for decaffeinated, ground, and instant coffee vs. non-drinkers [ 35 ].

Given that coffee consumption may produce short-term increases in blood pressure [ 51 ], the impact of coffee consumption on CVD in individuals with hypertension is of interest. Teramoto and colleagues [ 92 ] evaluated the impact of coffee consumption on CVD mortality among people with and without hypertension. Coffee consumption was associated with an increased risk of CVD mortality among people with grade 2–3 hypertension; HRs of 0.98 (95% CI, 0.67–1.43) for <1 cup/day, 0.74 (95% CI, 0.37–1.46) for 1 cup/day, and 2.05 (95% CI, 1.17–3.59) for ≥2 cups/day, compared with non–coffee drinkers [ 92 ]. There were no significant evidence of associations among people with optimal and normal, high-normal BP, and grade 1 hypertension [ 92 ]. In pooled analysis of seven observational cohort studies, there was no evidence of an association between habitual coffee consumption and a higher risk of CVD in individuals with hypertension [ 51 ].

In summary, the impact of coffee consumption on heart health remains a subject of debate. Evidence on the association between coffee consumption and CVD is mixed, but a U-shape relationship cannot be ruled out. The overall evidence suggests that coffee consumption is not associated or may be associated with an increased risk of CHD, whereas coffee consumption may be associated with a reduced risk of stroke, with the largest risk reductions observed for moderate consumption (Fig. 1 ).

Other cardiovascular outcomes

Heart failure.

In a 2012 dose-response meta-analysis of five prospective cohort studies of coffee consumption and HF risk, a J-shaped relationship was observed between coffee consumption and HF [ 93 ]. Compared with no consumption, the pooled RR for HF was 0.96 (95% CI, 0.90–0.99) for 1–2 servings/day, 0.93 (95% CI, 0.86 to 0.99) for 2–3 servings/day, 0.90 (95% CI, 0.82–0.99) for 3–4 servings/day, 0.89 (95% CI, 0.81–0.99) for 4–5 servings/day, 0.91 (95% CI, 0.83–1.01) for 5–6 servings/day, 0.93 (95% CI, 0.85–1.02) for 6–7 servings/day, 0.95 (95% CI, 0.87–1.05) for 7–8 servings/day, 0.97 (95% CI, 0.89–1.07) for 8–9 servings per day, 0.99 (95% CI, 0.90–1.10) for 9–10 servings/day, 1.01 (95% CI, 0.90–1.14) for 10–11 servings/day, and 1.03 (95% CI, 0.89–1.19) for 11 servings/day. There was no evidence that the relationship between coffee consumption and HF risk varied by sex [ 93 ]. In a machine learning analysis of the Framingham Heart Study (FHS), Cardiovascular Heart Study (CHS), and the ARIC study, Stevens and colleagues [ 94 ] in 2021 showed that higher coffee intake was associated with reduced risk of HF in all three studies. Compared with no coffee consumption, the HR for HF was 0.69 (95% CI, 0.55–0.87) for 2 cups/day and 0.71 (95% CI, 0.58-0.89) for ≥3 cups/day [ 94 ]. In a 2022 analysis of the UK Biobank cohort comprising approximately half a million participants, Chieng and colleagues [ 35 ] showed that coffee consumption at all levels was associated with significant reduction in the risk of congestive cardiac failure (CCF). The lowest risk was observed in those who consumed 2–3 cups/day, with HR of 0.83 (95% CI, 0.79–0.87) [ 35 ]. All coffee subtypes (decaffeinated, instant, and ground) were associated with a reduction in the risk of CCF [ 35 ]. In a 2023 evaluation of the UK Biobank cohort comprising approximately half a million adult men and women, Han and colleagues [ 95 ] demonstrated a nonlinear J-shaped association between coffee consumption and HF risk. Compared with drinking coffee <1 cup/day, the HRs for HF were 0.88 (95% CI, 0.84–0.92) for 1–2 cups/day, 0.92 (95% CI, 0.87–0.97) for 3–4 cups/day, and 1.21 (95% CI, 1.06–1.39) for >6 cups/day [ 95 ]. Stratified analyses by gender and smoking status yielded similar results, except that >6 cups/day did not significantly increase the risk of HF [ 95 ]. The associations were similar for coffee subtypes (decaffeinated, instant and ground) [ 95 ].

The overall evidence suggests that coffee consumption is associated with a reduced risk of HF, consistent with a J-shaped relationship. Moderate consumption (range 2–5 cups/day) is associated with the largest risk reduction. Higher consumption may be associated with an increased risk of HF (Fig. 1 ).

Atrial fibrillation and arrhythmias

The link between coffee consumption and AF has been investigated in numerous individual studies as well as pooled analyses of these studies. In a 2014 meta-analysis of six observational cohort studies, coffee/caffeine intake was weakly associated with a reduced risk of AF (RR=0.90; 95% CI, 0.81–1.01) [ 96 ]. In subgroup analyses, there was an 11% reduction for low doses (RR=0.89; 95% CI, 0.80–0.99) and 16% for high doses (RR=0.84; 95% CI, 0.75–0.94). Dose-response analysis showed the incidence of AF decreased by 6% (RR=0.94; 95% CI, 0.90–0.99) for every 300 mg/day increment in habitual caffeine intake [ 96 ]. In a 2021 meta-analysis of 12 observational cohort studies, caffeine/coffee consumption was not associated with an increased or decreased risk of new-onset AF compared with no caffeine/coffee consumption (pooled RR=0.98; 95% CI, 0.88–1.09) [ 97 ]. The highest category of caffeine/coffee consumption (≥5 cups/day) was not associated with an increased or decreased risk of new-onset AF compared with the lowest category (1–2 cups/day) (pooled RR=0.95; 95% CI, 0.84–1.06) [ 97 ]. These findings were consistent with previous meta-analyses on the same topic [ 98 , 99 , 100 ]. In a 2022 analysis of the UK Biobank cohort comprising approximately half a million participants, Chieng and colleagues [ 35 ] demonstrated a U-shaped relationship between increasing levels of coffee consumption and incidence of any arrhythmia (defined as ectopy, AF/flutter, supraventricular tachycardia (SVT), or ventricular tachycardia (VT)/ventricular fibrillation (VF)). The lowest risk for arrhythmias was seen in those who consumed 2–3 coffee cups/day, with a HR of 0.91 (95% CI, 0.88–0.94). For AF/flutter, significant risk reductions were seen in those who consumed between 1 and 5 cups/day, with the peak risk reduction seen in 4–5 cups/day (HR=0.88, 95% CI, 0.83–0.94). For VT/VF, increasing coffee consumption was associated with lower risk of incident arrhythmia, with the lowest risk seen in 4–5 cups/day (HR=0.83, 95% CI 0.70–0.97). In specific evaluation of coffee subtypes, ground and instant coffee consumption was associated with a significant reduction in arrhythmia at 1–5 cups/day but not for decaffeinated coffee. The lowest risk was 4–5 cups/day for ground coffee (HR=0.83, 95% CI, 0.76–0.91) and 2–3 cups/day for instant coffee (HR=0.88, 95% CI, 0.85–0.92) [ 35 ]. In a 2022 updated meta-analysis of 10 observational cohort studies, coffee consumption was not associated with the risk of AF: compared with the lowest coffee intake level, the pooled RR for AF was 0.96 (95% CI, 0.88–1.03) for the highest intake (median ≥ 4 cups/day) and 0.93 (95% CI, 0.88–1.03) for the second-highest (median 2.5 cups/day) intake of coffee [ 101 ]. In dose-response analysis, the RRs of AF risk estimated directly from the dose–response curve were 1.01 (95% CI, 0.98–1.03), 1.00 (95% CI, 0.97–1.04), 0.99 (95% CI, 0.92–1.02), 0.95 (95% CI, 0.89–1.01), 0.94 (95% CI, 0.87–1.01), 0.89 (95% CI, 0.79–1.02), and 0.87 (95% CI, 0.76–1.02) for 1–7 cups of coffee per day, respectively [ 101 ]. There was no significant evidence that sex modified the associations between coffee consumption and AF risk [ 101 ]. In a 2023 prospective, randomized, case-crossover trial to examine the effects of caffeinated coffee on cardiac ectopy, arrhythmias, and other outcomes, Marcus and colleagues [ 102 ] demonstrated that the consumption of caffeinated coffee did not result in significantly more daily premature atrial contractions than the avoidance of caffeine.

The overall evidence remains mixed, with most of the evidence showing no significant evidence of an association between coffee consumption and risk of AF. However, a weak association between moderate coffee consumption and reduced risk of AF cannot be ruled out (Fig. 1 ).

All-cause mortality

The relationship between coffee consumption and all-cause mortality has been extensively studied, with most research indicating a beneficial link. Malerba and colleagues [ 103 ] in their 2013 meta-analysis which was based on 23 prospective cohort studies showed that coffee intake was inversely associated with all-cause mortality. The pooled RR of all-cause mortality comparing the highest versus lowest (≤1 cup/day) coffee drinking categories was 0.88 (95 % CI, 0.84–0.93) [ 103 ]. Similar associations were observed in males and females [ 103 ]. In a 2014 meta-analysis of 20 prospective cohort studies, coffee consumption was shown to be associated with a reduced risk of all-cause mortality, consistent with a nonlinear dose-response relationship [ 104 ]. The RR of all-cause mortality comparing high (≥5–9 or ≥2–4 cups/day) vs low/no coffee consumption was 0.86 (95% CI, 0.80–0.92). The pooled RR comparing moderate (1–2 cups/day) vs low/no coffee consumption was 0.92 (95% CI, 0.87–0.98). The inverse association was similar for men and women [ 104 ]. In another 2014 meta-analysis which was based on 21 prospective cohort studies, Crippa and colleagues [ 105 ] demonstrated strong evidence of nonlinear associations between coffee consumption and all-cause mortality. The largest risk reduction was observed for 4 cups/day: RR of 0.84 (95% CI, 0.82–0.87) [ 105 ]. The associations were similar for males and females [ 105 ]. In a 2015 analysis of three large ongoing cohort studies (NHS, NHS II, and HPFS), Ding and colleagues [ 106 ] demonstrated a nonlinear association between coffee consumption and risk of all-cause mortality, with moderate coffee consumption being associated with lower mortality risk, and high coffee consumption not being associated with mortality risk. Relative to no coffee consumption, the pooled HR was 0.95 (95% CI, 0.91–0.99) for ≤ 1cup/day, 0.91 (95% CI, 0.88–0.95) for 1.1–3 cups/day, 0.93 (95% CI, 0.89–0.97) for 3.1–5 cups/day, and 1.02 (95% CI, 0.96–1.07) for >5 cups per day. Similar results were found for caffeinated and decaffeinated coffee. The association became linear and inverse when analysis was restricted to never smokers [ 106 ]. Zhao and colleagues in a 2015 meta-analysis of 17 prospective cohort studies demonstrated a U-shaped dose-response relationship between coffee consumption and all-cause mortality [ 107 ]. Compared with non/occasional coffee drinkers, the RRs for all-cause mortality were 0.89 (95% CI, 0.85, 0.93) for 1 to <3 cups/day, 0.87 (95% CI, 0.83, 0.91) for 3 to <5 cups/day, and 0.90 (95% CI 0.87, 0.94) for ≥5 cups/day, and the relationship was more marked in females than in males [ 107 ]. Nordestgaard and Nordestgaard [ 87 ] in 2016 investigated observational and causal associations between coffee intake and all-cause mortality among 95,000–223,000 individuals. Their observational analyses showed U-shaped associations between coffee intake and all-cause mortality; the lowest risk was observed in individuals with moderate coffee intake (2–5 cups/day) [ 87 ]. Compared with individuals with no coffee intake, HRs were 0.87 (95% CI, 0.78–0.96) for 0–1 cup/day, 0.89 (95% CI, 0.79–0.99) for 1–2 cups/day, 0.79 (95% CI, 0.70–0.88) for 2–3 cups/day, 0.87 (95% CI, 0.77–0.99) for 3–4 cups/day, 0.78 (95% CI, 0.68–0.89) for 4–5 cups/day, and 0.81 (95% CI, 0.72-0.93 ) for >5 cups/day [ 87 ]. In a 2016 dose-response meta-analysis of 31 prospective cohort studies on the association between coffee consumption and all-cause mortality risk, Grosso and colleagues [ 90 ] demonstrated decreased all-cause mortality risk (RR=0.86, 95% CI, 0.82–0.89) for consumption of up to 4 cups/day of coffee, with no further decrease in risk for additional consumption. The dose-response relationship was J-shaped for smokers, but linear for non-smokers. The coffee–CVD mortality association did not significantly differ by gender, geographical area, year of publication, and type of coffee [ 90 ]. In an updated dose-response meta-analysis of 40 prospective cohort studies, Kim and colleagues [ 91 ] in 2019 showed a non-linear inverse association between coffee consumption and all-cause mortality. The lowest RR was at 3.5 cups/day for all-cause mortality (RR=0.85, 95% CI, 0.82–0.89), with no further increase in risk with additional consumption [ 91 ]. The inverse association between coffee consumption and all-cause mortality did not vary by age, overweight status, alcohol drinking, smoking status, and caffeine content of coffee [ 91 ]. In another 2019 dose-response meta-analysis of 21 observational cohort studies, a nonlinear association between coffee consumption and all-cause mortality was observed [ 108 ]. Compared with no or rare coffee consumption, the RR for all-cause mortality for consumption of 3 cups/day was 0.87 (95% CI, 0.84–0.89). Similar inverse associations were observed for males and females and for caffeinated and decaffeinated coffee [ 108 ]. In pooled analysis of 12 prospective cohort studies including 248,050 men and 280,454 women from the Asia Cohort Consortium conducted in China, Japan, Korea, and Singapore, Shin and colleagues [ 109 ] in 2022 reported an association between coffee consumption and lower risk of all-cause mortality in men and women. Compared to non-coffee drinkers, the pooled RR of all-cause mortality for men were 0.83 (95% CI, 0.79–0.87) for <1 cup/day, 0.78 (95% CI, 0.73–0.83) for 1 to <3 cups/day, 0.76 (0.67–0.85) for 3 to <5 cups/day, and 0.76 (95% CI, 0.71–0.83) for ≥5 cups/day [ 109 ]. The corresponding RRs in women were 0.86 (95% CI, 0.82–0.90) for <1 cup/day, 0.80 (95% CI, 0.72–0.89) for 1 to <3 cups/day, 0.65 (0.54–0.78) for 3 to <5 cups/day, and 0.72 (95% CI, 0.63–0.81) for ≥5 cups/day [ 109 ]. In a 2022 analysis of the UK Biobank cohort comprising approximately half a million participants, a significant reduction in all-cause mortality was associated with coffee consumption up to 5 cups/day, with the greatest effect seen with 2–3 cups/day (HR=0.86, 95% CI, 0.83–0.89) [ 35 ]. All-cause mortality was significantly reduced for all coffee subtypes, with the greatest risk reduction seen with 2–3 cups/day [ 35 ].

In summary, coffee consumption is generally associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality consistent with a nonlinear U-shape, with the largest risk reduction being observed for moderate consumption (range 1–5 cups/day) (Fig. 1 ).

Enhancing the healthspan and increasing longevity

Healthspan refers to the period of one’s life that is spent in good health, free from the chronic diseases and disabilities typically associated with aging [ 110 ]. The objective of extending the healthspan is to maximize the years of active, healthy living, rather than merely prolonging life. Common strategies to enhance the healthspan include maintaining a balanced diet, engaging in regular physical activity, managing stress, and avoiding harmful substances. Longevity, on the other hand, is defined as the length of an individual’s life. Increasing longevity means extending the number of years lived, ideally while also enhancing the quality of life in those additional years. The evidence suggests that moderate coffee consumption (typically 1–5 cups per day) may play a protective role against several major cardiometabolic diseases, including T2D and CKD, which are prominent contributors to morbidity and mortality. Additionally, coffee’s potential to prevent stroke and its association with reduced all-cause mortality further supports its role in enhancing healthspan and potentially increasing longevity.

Evidence from Mendelian randomization studies

Mendelian randomization studies provide valuable insights into the causal relationships between exposures and outcomes. Several MR studies have been conducted to assess the causal effects of coffee consumption on adverse cardiometabolic outcomes (Table 1 ). These studies have mostly utilized genetic variants demonstrated to be associated with coffee and total caffeine consumption in several Genome Wide Association Studies (GWAS) of European, North American, and South American Populations. These include four variants near the CYP1A1/2 genes (rs2492297, rs2470893) on chromosome 15 and the AHR gene (rs4410790, rs6968865) on chromosome 7 [ 111 , 112 ]. Evidence on the causal relevance of coffee consumption to T2D risk is mixed. While some MR studies have found evidence of a causal association [ 113 ], others have found no evidence [ 56 , 114 ]. Results from recent MR studies have shown evidence of a causal beneficial effect of coffee consumption on kidney function using outcomes such as CKD and albuminuria [ 115 , 116 ]. Mendelian randomization studies have not conclusively demonstrated a strong causal link between coffee consumption and the risk of hypertension [ 117 ], MetS [ 56 ], NAFLD [ 118 , 119 ], CVD [ 87 ], specific cardiovascular outcomes such as stroke and its subtypes [ 87 , 120 , 121 ], HF [ 121 , 122 ], and AF[ 121 , 123 ] and all-cause mortality [ 87 ]. Mendelian randomization studies of coffee consumption and CHD (ischemic heart disease and coronary artery disease (CAD)) have shown no strong evidence of causal associations [ 87 , 114 , 121 ], except for one recent study which showed that genetically predicted coffee consumption was associated with an increased risk of CAD [ 124 ].

In summary, whiles some MR studies indicate that coffee consumption may have a protective effect against certain cardiometabolic diseases such as T2D and CKD, the evidence is less clear for other adverse cardiometabolic conditions. The overall impact of coffee on cardiometabolic health appears to be complex and influenced by various factors.

Potential pathways underlying the cardiometabolic effects of coffee consumption and its bioactive components

The beneficial effects of coffee on cardiometabolic health are multifaceted, involving a complex interplay of antioxidative, anti-inflammatory, lipid-modulating, insulin-sensitizing, and thermogenic effects (Fig. 2 ). These mechanisms collectively contribute to reducing the risk of a spectrum of adverse cardiometabolic outcomes, including hypertension, MetS, NAFLD, T2D, CKD, CVDs, and all-cause mortality.

Proposed mechanistic pathways underlying the beneficial effects of coffee consumption on adverse cardiometabolic outcomes

Coffee is rich in numerous bioactive components that are proposed to exert these favorable cardiometabolic effects [ 125 , 126 ]. Caffeine and its methylxanthine metabolites are known to modulate oxidative stress and inflammation [ 127 ], which are pathways involved in the genesis of many cardiometabolic disorders. Polyphenols such as chlorogenic acid and phytic acid also combat oxidative stress and inflammation [ 128 ], key factors in the development of CVDs and T2D.

Several polyphenols found in coffee or as metabolites of coffee compounds play significant roles in glucose homeostasis and the health complications associated with glucose dysregulation. These polyphenols include enterodiol, enterolactone, matairesinol, secoisolariciresinol, kaempferol, quercetin, and chlorogenic acid [ 129 ]. Enterodiol and enterolactone are lignans metabolized from precursors in coffee by intestinal bacteria and have been studied for their potential in modulating blood glucose levels and improving insulin sensitivity [ 130 , 131 ]. Similarly, matairesinol and secoisolariciresinol contribute to these lignans’ profiles [ 131 , 132 , 133 , 134 , 135 ], enhancing their effects on metabolic health. Kaempferol and quercetin, both flavonoids, are known for their antioxidant properties, which can mitigate oxidative stress, a key contributor to the pathogenesis of diabetes and its complications [ 136 , 137 , 138 , 139 , 140 ]. These compounds can influence glucose metabolism by modulating signaling pathways involved in insulin signaling and glucose uptake in cells, thereby helping to stabilize blood glucose levels. Chlorogenic acid, one of the most abundant polyphenols in coffee, has a direct impact on glucose metabolism. It inhibits the activity of glucose-6-phosphatase [ 141 , 142 , 143 ], an enzyme involved in the release of glucose into the bloodstream, and enhances the performance of insulin, thereby improving glucose uptake in tissues. Chlorogenic acid also modulates gut hormones that regulate glucose and satiety, further aiding in glucose management [ 144 , 145 ]. In particular, chlorogenic acid and trigonelline have been shown to enhance insulin sensitivity, reduce intestinal absorption of glucose, improve glucose tolerance and metabolism, inhibit gut incretin hormones, and enhance lipid metabolism [ 146 , 147 , 148 , 149 , 150 , 151 , 152 , 153 , 154 ], thereby reducing levels of glucose and lipids, consequently lowering the risk or delaying the onset of T2D, MetS, NAFLD, and CVD. The collective impact of these polyphenols on glucose homeostasis makes coffee a significant dietary component in managing and potentially preventing complications associated with glucose dysregulation such as T2D. Their mechanisms of action include anti-inflammatory effects, enhancement of insulin action, modulation of glucose transport, and overall antioxidant protection, all of which are relevant for maintaining cardiometabolic health.

Caffeine promotes lipolysis through phosphodiesterase inhibition, which increases cyclic adenosine monophosphate (cAMP) levels and activates β-adrenergic receptors, stimulating the breakdown of fats [ 155 , 156 ]. Caffeine regulates fat metabolism via the sympathetic nervous system, promoting the secretion of catecholamines that activates β-adrenergic receptors and downstream pathways for lipid metabolism [ 156 , 157 ]. Glycochenodeoxycholate, a metabolite of coffee consumption and a lipid involved in primary bile acid metabolism, may contribute to the favorable kidney health outcomes associated with coffee consumption [ 158 ]. Coffee is a risk source of minerals and trace elements—it has been reported that 5 cups of coffee/day contribute to approximately 26% of the daily intake of potassium, 12% of the daily intake of magnesium, 10% of the daily intake of manganese, and 15% of the daily intake of niacin [ 159 ]. Magnesium for instance may explain some of the beneficial effects of coffee intake on T2D via its positive effects on carbohydrate metabolism [ 160 , 161 ]. It has been suggested that coffee consumption might reduce the risk of metabolic conditions such as T2D via stimulation of thermogenesis and induction of weight loss [ 162 ].

The evidence also suggests that caffeine is likely to be the main ingredient that contributes to the thermogenic effects of coffee, but there is limited evidence from human studies [ 162 ]; caffeine has been shown to increase thermogenesis of brown adipose tissue partly by upregulating the expression of an uncoupling protein in rodents [ 163 ]. While the acute effects of coffee can temporarily increase BP [ 51 ], long-term consumption has been linked to a neutral or beneficial effect on BP [ 51 ], potentially producing no adverse impact on hypertension and CVD. A number of proposed mechanisms for the acute BP raising effect of coffee include sympathetic overactivation, antagonism of adenosine receptors, increased norepinephrine release via direct effects on the adrenal medulla, renal effects, and activation of the renin–angiotensin system [ 164 , 165 ]. Coffee consumption via caffeine potentially lowers BP through enhanced endothelium-dependent vasodilation [ 166 ]. Coffee consumption may also exert its favorable cardiometabolic effects via improvement in endothelial function and arterial stiffness [ 167 , 168 ]. The consistent reduction in the risk of all-cause mortality could be due to the comprehensive effects of coffee on various aspects of cardiometabolic health, including reduced inflammation and oxidation, improved insulin sensitivity, and better lipid profiles [ 146 ]. Conversely, phenotypic and genetic evidence suggests that long-term heavy coffee consumption is associated with increased levels of lipids—LDL-C, ApoB, and total-C, with the highest lipid levels seen among participants reported drinking >6 cups/day [ 169 ]. In a meta-analysis of 14 RCTs of the effects of coffee consumption on serum lipids, drinking 6 cups/day was significantly associated with an increase in levels of total cholesterol, LDL-C, and triglycerides, but not HDL-C [ 170 ]. These results appear to be driven by trials of unfiltered or boiled coffee; furthermore, the increases in levels of serum lipids were greater in individuals with hyperlipidemia [ 170 ]. These findings were replicated in another meta-analysis of 12 RCTs [ 171 ].

Exosomes are small extracellular vesicles that play a crucial role in intercellular communication. They are involved in various physiological processes, including inflammation, immune response, and tissue repair [ 172 ]. Recent studies have highlighted their significance in cardioprotection, demonstrating that exosomes can convey protective signals to cardiac cells, thereby mitigating damage and promoting repair [ 173 , 174 , 175 , 176 ]. Bioactive compounds found in coffee, such as caffeine and chlorogenic acids, which have been shown to have anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, and cardioprotective effects, can influence the release and composition of exosomes [ 177 , 178 ], enhancing their adaptive functions. The adaptive exosomes released in response to coffee’s bioactive compounds can carry a variety of protective molecules, including microRNAs (miRNAs), proteins, and lipids [ 179 ], which may play a critical role in mediating the protective effects of coffee on cardiovascular health and potentially other organs.

Boiled or unfiltered coffee has a rich diterpene content (namely cafestol and kahweol), which inhibits bile acid synthesis and negatively affects lipid metabolism, making it atherogenic [ 33 , 171 , 180 ]. On the contrary, filtered coffee does not contain diterpene and may exert antiatherogenic effects via increase in HDL-mediated cholesterol efflux from macrophages through the influence of plasma phenolic acid [ 33 ]. This unfavourable lipid profile may potentially increase the risk of cardiovascular outcomes, as observed in some studies [ 88 , 181 ]. However, it has been reported that variations in CYP1A2 activity among coffee consumers rather determines the risk of CVD and not the diterpene content. The caffeine in coffee is metabolized by the polymorphic cytochrome P450 1A2 (CYP1A2) enzyme; CYP1A2 accounts for approximately 95% of caffeine metabolism. Individuals who are homozygous for the CYP1A2*1A allele are “rapid” caffeine metabolizers, whereas carriers of the variant CYP1A2*1F are “slow” caffeine metabolizers [ 181 ]. Cornelis and colleagues [ 181 ] in their study which sought to determine whether the CYP1A2 genotype modifies the association between coffee consumption and risk of acute nonfatal MI showed that coffee consumption was associated with an increased risk of nonfatal MI only among individuals with slow caffeine metabolism. When that analysis was limited to only individuals who consumed filtered coffee, the association between coffee consumption and increased risk of acute nonfatal MI remained consistent. The findings by Cornelis and colleagues [ 181 ] were, however, not replicated by Zhou and Hyppönen [ 88 ]. It has also been suggested that the conflicting associations between coffee consumption and CVD may be due to the confounding or effect-modifying effects of smoking as well as the fact that smokers metabolize caffeine more rapidly than nonsmokers due to the well-known CYP1A2-inducing effect of smoking [ 182 ]. Some studies have shown that the associations are less prominent in never smokers compared with former and current smokers, others have shown stronger associations among never and past smokers than among current smokers, and still others have shown similar associations among never, former and current smokers [ 82 , 87 , 89 , 181 ]. These observations suggest that the pathways underlying the effects of coffee consumption on cardiovascular outcomes are more complex than originally thought. It has been reported the CYP1A2 genotype may modify the association between coffee intake and kidney disease; caffeinated coffee intake has been shown to be associated with an increase in the risk of kidney disease in slow metabolizers but not fast metabolizers [ 183 ].

Bioactive compounds in coffee, such as polyphenols, flavonoids, and alkaloids, have been shown to exert significant epigenetic effects that can contribute to cardioprotection. These compounds can influence gene expression through several mechanisms, including DNA methylation, histone modifications, and non-coding RNA (ncRNA) expression [ 184 ]. Bioactive compounds, such as chlorogenic acid and caffeic acid, have been shown to modulate DNA methylation patterns [ 184 , 185 , 186 ]. These modifications can influence the expression of genes involved in inflammatory pathways, lipid metabolism, and oxidative stress response, which are critical for maintaining cardiovascular health. Coffee components like trigonelline and kahweol have been found to induce histone modifications such as acetylation and methylation [ 184 ]. These histone modifications can activate or repress the transcription of genes involved in cellular processes that protect against cardiometabolic diseases. Compounds in coffee can alter the expression of specific ncRNAs, including miRNAs and long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) [ 187 ] that regulate pathways linked to inflammation, oxidative stress, endothelial function, cell proliferation, and apoptosis. The epigenetic modifications induced by coffee consumption have the potential to exert long-lasting impacts on the epigenome of vital organs, contributing to the maintenance of cardiovascular health.

While most studies have demonstrated similar associations between coffee consumption and adverse cardiometabolic outcomes in males and females, others have shown disparities, especially for the outcome of CKD [ 71 , 76 ]. This potentially reflects the sex disparity in the pathogenesis of CKD. It has been suggested that sex hormones such as testosterone and sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG) may partly account for the sex disparities in the associations; the reno-protective effect of coffee appears to be more evident in individuals with higher SHBG and lower testosterone concentrations [ 76 ].

Acrylamide is a chemical compound that forms in some foods during high-temperature cooking processes, such as roasting, frying, and baking [ 188 ]. In coffee, acrylamide is primarily formed during the roasting process. Different coffee types, such as instant coffee, espresso, and filter coffee, contain varying levels of acrylamide, with instant coffee generally having higher levels compared to espresso and filter coffee due to the differences in roasting and processing methods [ 189 ]. Acrylamide has been shown to be both neurotoxic and carcinogenic in animal studies. It has been linked to an increased risk of cancer and damage to the nervous system [ 190 , 191 ]. However, human epidemiological studies have revealed a general lack of association between dietary acrylamide exposure and the incidence of cancer [ 188 , 192 ]. The World Health Organization (WHO) and the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) have acknowledged the potential risks but also highlight the need for more research to fully understand the implications for human health [ 193 ]. From a cardiometabolic perspective, acrylamide’s effects are less clear. While there is evidence that acrylamide exposure can influence metabolic pathways and potentially contribute to adverse cardiovascular outcomes [ 194 ], the overall impact of dietary acrylamide, particularly from coffee consumption, remains inconclusive. Some studies suggest that the beneficial compounds in coffee, such as antioxidants, may counteract the potential harmful effects of acrylamide [ 188 ], but further research is needed to clarify these interactions.

Coffee consumption and its bioactive components: impacts on cellular and molecular mechanisms of aging

Coffee consumption may support longevity and healthspan through its effects on fundamental biological processes involved in aging. These include mitigating oxidative stress and inflammation, improving mitochondrial function, enhancing DNA repair, stimulating autophagy, modulating epigenetic regulation, and regulating cellular metabolic pathways. Each of these mechanisms plays a critical role in decelerating the aging process and reducing the incidence of age-related diseases [ 195 ].

Research using invertebrate models, such as Caenorhabditis elegans [ 196 , 197 , 198 ] and Drosophila melanogaster [ 199 , 200 ], provided valuable insights into the potential anti-aging and lifespan-extending effects of coffee and its components. These studies highlighted fundamental biological mechanisms that might also be relevant in higher organisms, including humans. Importantly, there are studies showing that caffeine can extend lifespan in C. elegans by influencing cellular stress pathways and metabolism [ 201 , 202 , 203 , 204 , 205 , 206 , 207 , 208 , 209 ]. Of note, there are also studies showing no extension of lifespan in fruit flies reared on food containing caffeine [ 210 ]. Research also has been conducted on various coffee polyphenols like chlorogenic acid and their impact on aging in invertebrates. These studies predominantly focused on antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties that could contribute to lifespan extension. For example, chlorogenic acid has been shown to improve stress resistance and extend lifespan in C. elegans [ 196 , 197 , 198 ] and D. melanogaster [ 199 , 200 ]. Additionally, recent studies provided evidence that coffee compounds, particularly flavonoids, also promote longevity in Saccharomyces cerevisiae likely by attenuating oxidative stress [ 211 ].

Oxidative stress is also a major contributor to cellular aging and the development of age-related diseases such as cardiometabolic diseases in vertebrates including humans [ 212 , 213 , 214 , 215 , 216 , 217 , 218 , 219 ]. Antioxidants, such as chlorogenic acids, present in coffee can help reduce oxidative stress in the body [ 128 , 220 ], thereby attenuating cellular aging processes and interfering with the pathogenesis of age-related diseases [ 221 , 222 , 223 , 224 , 225 , 226 ].

Nuclear factor erythroid 2–related factor 2 (Nrf2) is a critical transcription factor that plays a central role in cellular defense against oxidative stress and is an essential regulator of the cellular aging process [ 212 , 216 , 227 , 228 , 229 , 230 , 231 , 232 ]. Nrf2 regulates the expression of antioxidant proteins that protect against oxidative damage triggered by injury and inflammation, which are common contributors to the aging process. As organisms age, the efficiency of this protective response can diminish, leading to an increased buildup of oxidative damage and cellular senescence [ 212 , 216 , 228 ]. Importantly, chlorogenic acid, a polyphenol abundant in coffee, has been shown to positively influence the Nrf2 pathway. Research indicates that chlorogenic acid can activate Nrf2 [ 225 ], leading to an enhanced transcriptional activity of antioxidant response element (ARE)–driven genes. This activation increases the production of endogenous antioxidant enzymes such as heme oxygenase-1 (HO-1), NAD(P)H quinone oxidoreductase 1 (NQO1), and glutathione S-transferase (GST). These enzymes play pivotal roles in detoxifying reactive oxidants and thus maintaining cellular redox balance. By stimulating the Nrf2 pathway, chlorogenic acid helps fortify cellular homeostatic defense mechanisms against oxidative stressors, potentially mitigating the effects of aging and reducing the risk of age-related diseases. This mechanism underscores the therapeutic potential of dietary components like chlorogenic acid in promoting longevity and enhancing healthspan through modulation of critical aging-related biochemical pathways.

In addition to its antioxidative capabilities, caffeine and its methylxanthine metabolites possess anti-inflammatory effects [ 127 ]. Chronic inflammation is a hallmark of aging and is closely associated with the progression of many age-related diseases [ 195 , 213 , 233 , 234 , 235 , 236 , 237 , 238 , 239 ]. By reducing inflammation, coffee can help maintain cellular health and improve overall longevity.

Coffee has been shown to boost cellular DNA repair mechanisms [ 240 , 241 , 242 , 243 , 244 ]. Caffeine, in particular, supports the preservation of genomic integrity by enhancing the repair of DNA damage [ 245 ], which accumulates with age and contributes significantly to the aging process and the onset of age-related diseases [ 246 ]. Telomeres are protective caps on the ends of chromosomes that shorten with each cell division, and their length is an indicator of cellular aging [ 247 ] and linked to a variety of aging-related disorders, such as T2D and CVD [ 248 , 249 ]. Some studies have indicated that higher coffee consumption could be associated with longer telomeres [ 250 ], suggesting a potential protective effect against accelerated aging.

Coffee contains various bioactive compounds that influence the expression and activity of sirtuin-1 (SIRT1) [ 251 ], a protein that plays a crucial role in cellular regulation, aging, and cardiometabolic health. SIRT1 is a NAD+-dependent deacetylase involved in numerous cellular processes, including DNA repair, inflammation regulation, and mitochondrial function [ 252 ]. Polyphenols such as chlorogenic acid have been shown to enhance SIRT1 expression and activity [ 253 ]. SIRT1 activation by coffee compounds contributes to longevity by improving mitochondrial function, reducing oxidative stress, maintaining cellular homeostasis, and delaying the onset of age-related diseases [ 254 , 255 , 256 , 257 , 258 , 259 , 260 , 261 ]. Enhanced SIRT1 activity can lower blood lipids, glucose levels, and inflammation [ 262 , 263 ], thus reducing the risk of CVDs and T2D. SIRT1’s role in deacetylating key transcription factors and enzymes involved in metabolic regulation underscores its importance in maintaining cardiometabolic health.

Coffee and its constituents can stimulate autophagy [ 264 ], a process essential for removing damaged cellular components. By enhancing autophagy, coffee helps in maintaining cellular function and longevity. This process is necessary for preventing the buildup of cellular waste that can contribute to aging and related disorders [ 265 ]. Coffee influences several metabolic pathways that are linked to aging and metabolic health. It affects lipid metabolism, glucose metabolism, and insulin sensitivity [ 146 , 147 , 148 , 149 , 150 , 151 ], which are vital for preventing metabolic diseases, common age-related conditions. The caffeine in coffee has been shown to improve energy metabolism and increase caloric expenditure [ 163 ], which can delay the onset of metabolic decline associated with aging.

Adverse effects of coffee consumption

While coffee consumption is associated with numerous cardiometabolic health benefits, excessive intake can lead to several adverse effects. The most commonly reported negative effects are linked to its main active ingredient, caffeine, which can affect various aspects of health and well-being. Individuals vary greatly in their sensitivity to caffeine. Caffeine stimulates the nervous system causing the release of adrenaline, leading to rapid or irregular heartbeat and temporary spikes in blood pressure [ 266 ]. Some may experience jitteriness or palpitations even with small amounts of coffee. High levels of caffeine in coffee can exacerbate feelings of anxiety. Coffee can also significantly disrupt sleep patterns, leading to insomnia, particularly if consumed in the afternoon or evening. Caffeine’s stimulatory effect can delay the onset of sleep and reduce sleep quality [ 267 , 268 , 269 , 270 ]. Excessive coffee consumption can lead to digestive discomfort in some individuals. Coffee stimulates gastric acid production, which can exacerbate gastrointestinal conditions such as gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and ulcers. It may also cause symptoms like stomach upset and exacerbate irritable bowel syndrome [ 271 ]. Rarely, excessive coffee intake can lead to rhabdomyolysis [ 272 ], a serious condition in which muscle fibers break down and enter the bloodstream, potentially leading to kidney damage.

High caffeine intake has been linked to reduced calcium absorption, which could potentially lead to bone thinning and osteoporosis. However, the evidence surrounding this association remains controversial [ 273 , 274 ]. Many studies actually suggest that consumption of coffee is beneficial for bone health [ 275 , 276 , 277 ].

Regular, heavy use of caffeine can lead to physical dependence [ 278 ]. Caffeine withdrawal can trigger symptoms like headache, fatigue, irritability, and difficulty concentrating. Caffeine can cross the placental barrier during pregnancy and may cause spontaneous abortion and impaired fetal growth [ 279 ]. It is recommended that caffeine intake for women who plan to become pregnant and or who are pregnant should not exceed 300mg/day [ 280 ].

Clinical and public health implications

The findings from various studies on coffee consumption and its impact on cardiometabolic outcomes have significant clinical and public health implications. The evidence indicates that while coffee may cause short-term increases in BP, it does not adversely affect long-term BP levels or increase hypertension risk. The weak association with decreased hypertension risk suggests that coffee consumption should not be a primary concern in hypertension management. The suggestion of a reduced risk of MetS with moderate to high coffee consumption, despite limited evidence, highlights a potential area for public health intervention. Further research may validate coffee as a simple dietary intervention to mitigate MetS risk. The strong inverse association between coffee consumption and T2D risk, especially with higher consumption levels, is highly relevant for diabetes prevention strategies. Public health initiatives might consider incorporating coffee consumption as part of lifestyle modification recommendations. The protective effect of coffee against CKD, particularly at higher doses, indicates potential renal benefits of coffee consumption. This could influence dietary advice given to individuals at risk of or managing CKD. The mixed evidence regarding coffee’s impact on heart health, particularly its association with reduced stroke risk but uncertain effects on CHD, highlights the need for individualized dietary recommendations based on personal CVD risk profiles. The J-shaped relationship between coffee consumption and HF risk, with moderate intake offering the most benefit, suggests that moderate coffee consumption could be a simple, accessible measure to reduce HF risk. The mixed evidence on coffee’s impact on AF risk indicates that moderate coffee consumption is unlikely to significantly affect AF risk. This information can reassure patients and clinicians regarding coffee consumption in the context of heart rhythm disorders. The findings on cardiovascular outcomes appear to reflect recommendations in the 2021 European Society of Cardiology guidelines which indicate that coffee consumption of 3–4 cups/day may be moderately beneficial in the prevention of CVD [ 281 ]. The general association of coffee consumption with lower all-cause mortality, particularly at moderate levels, supports the inclusion of coffee in a healthy diet. This could be an important consideration in public health guidelines and dietary recommendations. The findings that inverse associations between coffee consumption and adverse cardiometabolic outcomes are generally consistent across different age groups, sexes, geographical regions, and coffee types (instant, ground, decaffeinated) carry relevant implications. These suggest that the health benefits of coffee could be broadly applicable, making coffee a universally beneficial component in dietary guidelines aimed at preventing cardiometabolic conditions. This broad applicability across demographic groups can simplify public health messages and dietary recommendations. The consistency of these health benefits across various coffee types, including decaffeinated coffee, opens the door for a wider population to benefit from coffee consumption, including individuals who are sensitive to caffeine or have specific health concerns like hypertension or anxiety disorders. Clinicians may recommend moderate coffee consumption as part of a healthy lifestyle for most individuals, regardless of their age or sex, knowing that the potential benefits are not significantly influenced by these demographic factors. Given the lack of significant variation in benefits between coffee types, the focus shifts to the quantity of consumption. The importance of considering the method of coffee preparation also needs to be taken into consideration. Boiled or unfiltered coffee, due to its high diterpene content, may pose a risk for cardiovascular health by increasing atherogenic lipids. This suggests that individuals with or at risk for CVD particularly those with dyslipidemia might need to be cautious about their choice of coffee preparation method. Filtered coffee, which lacks diterpenes, could be a healthier alternative. Its potential antiatherogenic effects may make it a more suitable option for those concerned about cardiovascular health, including individuals with a history of heart diseases or elevated lipid levels. Findings from MR studies reinforce the potential protective effects of coffee consumption against specific diseases such as T2D and CKD, highlighting the importance of inclusion of coffee consumption in these disease specific guidelines. The overall evidence suggests that moderate coffee consumption (range of 1–5 cups/day) is generally beneficial or neutral for various cardiometabolic outcomes. By potentially mitigating the risk factors associated with common age-related diseases such as cardiometabolic diseases, regular, moderate coffee consumption could be a valuable component of strategies aimed at extending the healthspan and increasing longevity. This aligns with the broader goal of not only living longer but also living healthier.

Gaps and future directions

Future research directions in the context of coffee consumption and cardiometabolic outcomes should address several critical areas. Though a number of studies incorporated repeated assessments of coffee consumption over time in their analysis, rather than relying solely on baseline data, more studies adopting this approach are needed. This approach will help minimize regression dilution bias and provide a more accurate picture of coffee consumption patterns and their long-term health impacts. However, it should be acknowledged that coffee consumption is one of the most reproducible dietary items and therefore barely changes over time [ 282 ]. For outcomes like hypertension, MetS, NAFLD, CVD, CHD, and AF, where evidence remains limited, inconsistent, and sometimes weak, further large-scale longitudinal studies are required. These studies should aim to clarify the extent of the beneficial associations of coffee consumption with these conditions. Given the variability in defining moderate coffee consumption across studies (ranging from 1 to 5 cups/day), future research should focus on establishing a more precise definition and optimal levels of coffee consumption. This involves investigating the detailed dose-response relationships to determine the optimal amount and frequency of coffee intake for maximum health benefits. Though studies generally suggest that the inverse associations of coffee consumption with adverse cardiometabolic outcomes do not vary substantially across different age groups, sexes, and coffee subtypes, the evidence is still limited and inconsistent in some instances. Future studies should explore these specific associations to understand how coffee consumption impacts diverse populations and to identify any unique effects of different types of coffee. Given the potential influence of the method of coffee preparation (boiled or unfiltered vs filtered) on lipid levels and subsequently on cardiovascular outcomes, additional research is warranted to understand the extent of the impact of diterpenes in boiled/unfiltered coffee on long-term cardiovascular health. This could also include investigating whether certain populations may be more affected by the lipid-raising effects of these coffee types. Apart from T2D and CKD, it appears observational studies showing evidence of inverse associations between coffee consumption and other adverse cardiometabolic outcomes may be confounded by diet and lifestyle factors associated with coffee consumption. These include factors such as smoking, excessive alcohol consumption, poor diet, and a sedentary lifestyle. However, it has been argued that the confounding effects of these variables would tend to bias the results toward positive and not inverse associations [ 66 ]. Larger-scale studies are needed to investigate in more detail the confounding and effect-modifying effects (restricting analysis to smokers or never smokers alone) of smoking and other lifestyle factors, which are major risk factors for these adverse cardiometabolic outcomes. A recent MR study indicated evidence that coffee consumption might be causally associated with an increased risk of CAD (CHD) [ 124 ], findings which are consistent with some observational studies [ 37 , 79 ]. Given the inconsistencies and likely limitations of observational studies, additional and adequately powered MR studies are warranted to help determine if coffee consumption is a causal therapeutic target for these cardiometabolic conditions, providing a genetic perspective to the observed associations. It should be acknowledged that MR studies on coffee consumption and outcomes have major shortcomings of relying on gene loci ( CYP1A1/2 and AHR gene regions) with major pleiotropic effects [ 283 , 284 ]. Therefore, all MR assumptions may not hold, which may potentially yield biased causal estimates. Large-scale GWAS are needed to uncover specific genetic determinants of caffeine and coffee consumption. Understanding the biological mechanisms through which coffee exerts its effects is essential. Mechanistic studies should explore the pathways and processes by which coffee consumption influences various cardiometabolic outcomes. Such studies will not only provide scientific insights but may also lead to the development of targeted therapies and interventions. These future directions will not only deepen our understanding of the impact of coffee consumption on health but also inform public health guidelines and clinical practice, ensuring that recommendations regarding coffee consumption are grounded in robust scientific evidence.

Conclusions

The current body of evidence on coffee consumption and its relationship with various cardiometabolic outcomes presents a complex but largely positive picture. While coffee may cause short-term increases in BP, its long-term consumption does not seem to adversely affect BP and may weakly reduce hypertension risk. There is limited evidence suggesting a potential protective effect of moderate to high coffee consumption against MetS. However, these findings are not conclusive and warrant further investigation. Preliminary evidence indicates a potential dose-response relationship between coffee consumption and a reduced risk of NAFLD, though this is based on limited data. Consistent evidence suggests a dose-response protective effect of coffee consumption against T2D and CKD, with higher intake linked to greater risk reductions; these associations are also consistent with causal relationships. The impact of coffee on heart health remains a topic of ongoing research. While the evidence is mixed, especially for CHD, coffee consumption may be associated with a reduced risk of stroke. A U-shaped relationship with CVD outcomes is possible but not definitively established. Coffee consumption is generally associated with a reduced risk of HF, particularly with moderate intake (range 2–5 cups/day). However, higher consumption levels might increase this risk. The majority of evidence does not show a significant association between coffee consumption and AF risk, although a slight protective effect of moderate coffee intake cannot be entirely dismissed. Coffee consumption is generally associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality, with a nonlinear U-shaped relationship and the largest risk reduction observed with moderate consumption (range 1–5 cups/day). The inverse associations between coffee consumption and adverse outcomes seem consistent across age, sex, geographical regions, and coffee subtypes, underscoring the broad applicability of these findings. Overall, these findings suggest that moderate coffee consumption (potentially filtered coffee) is generally safe and may offer protective benefits against several adverse cardiometabolic outcomes; it also has the potential to contribute to extending the healthspan and increasing longevity. Future research, particularly large-scale longitudinal observational, interventional, and MR studies and mechanistic investigations, are needed to further clarify these associations and understand the underlying biological mechanisms. This will aid in developing more targeted dietary recommendations regarding coffee consumption.

Data availability

This is a narrative review; no new scientific data was generated, and all data are within the paper.

Mills KT, Stefanescu A, He J. The global epidemiology of hypertension. Nat Rev Nephrol. 2020;16(4):223–37.

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

World Health Organization. Hypertension: Key Facts (2023). https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/hypertension . Accessed 22 Dec 2023.

Google Scholar  

Cornier MA, Dabelea D, Hernandez TL, Lindstrom RC, Steig AJ, Stob NR, et al. The metabolic syndrome. Endocr Rev. 2008;29(7):777–822.

Grundy SM, Cleeman JI, Daniels SR, Donato KA, Eckel RH, Franklin BA, et al. Diagnosis and management of the metabolic syndrome: an American Heart Association/National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Scientific Statement. Circulation. 2005;112(17):2735–52.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Sattar N, Gaw A, Scherbakova O, Ford I, O'Reilly DS, Haffner SM, et al. Metabolic syndrome with and without C-reactive protein as a predictor of coronary heart disease and diabetes in the West of Scotland Coronary Prevention Study. Circulation. 2003;108(4):414–9.

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Laaksonen DE, Lakka HM, Niskanen LK, Kaplan GA, Salonen JT, Lakka TA. Metabolic syndrome and development of diabetes mellitus: application and validation of recently suggested definitions of the metabolic syndrome in a prospective cohort study. Am J Epidemiol. 2002;156(11):1070–7.

Isomaa B, Almgren P, Tuomi T, Forsen B, Lahti K, Nissen M, et al. Cardiovascular morbidity and mortality associated with the metabolic syndrome. Diabetes Care. 2001;24(4):683–9.

Lakka HM, Laaksonen DE, Lakka TA, Niskanen LK, Kumpusalo E, Tuomilehto J, et al. The metabolic syndrome and total and cardiovascular disease mortality in middle-aged men. JAMA. 2002;288(21):2709–16.

Lidofsky SD. Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: diagnosis and relation to metabolic syndrome and approach to treatment. Curr Diab Rep. 2008;8(1):25–30.

Zheng Y, Ley SH, Hu FB. Global aetiology and epidemiology of type 2 diabetes mellitus and its complications. Nat Rev Endocrinol. 2018;14(2):88–98.

World Health Organization. Fact sheets. The top 10 causes of death. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/the-top-10-causes-of-death . Retrieved on 10 Sep 2021.

Couser WG, Remuzzi G, Mendis S, Tonelli M. The contribution of chronic kidney disease to the global burden of major noncommunicable diseases. Kidney Int. 2011;80(12):1258–70.

WHO. World Health Organization. Fact sheets. The top 10 causes of death. 2020. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/the-top-10-causes-of-death . Retrieved on 10 Sep 2021.

Lunenfeld B, Stratton P. The clinical consequences of an ageing world and preventive strategies. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2013;27(5):643–59.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

American DA. 2. Classification and Diagnosis of Diabetes: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes-2020. Diabetes Care. 2020;43(Suppl 1):S14–31.

Article   Google Scholar  

Virani SS, Alonso A, Aparicio HJ, Benjamin EJ, Bittencourt MS, Callaway CW, et al. Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics-2021 Update: a report From the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2021;143(8):e254–743.

Mallamaci F, Tripepi G. Risk factors of chronic kidney disease progression: between old and new concepts. J Clin Med. 2024;13(3)

Zhou YF, Song XY, Pan XF, Feng L, Luo N, Yuan JM, et al. Association between combined lifestyle factors and healthy ageing in Chinese adults: the Singapore Chinese Health Study. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2021;76(10):1796–805.

Akbar Z, Fituri S, Ouagueni A, Alalwani J, Sukik A, Al-Jayyousi GF, et al. Associations of the MIND diet with cardiometabolic diseases and their risk factors: a systematic review. Diabetes Metab Syndr Obes. 2023;16:3353–71.

Petersen KS, Flock MR, Richter CK, Mukherjea R, Slavin JL, Kris-Etherton PM. Healthy dietary patterns for preventing cardiometabolic disease: the role of plant-based foods and animal products. Curr Dev Nutr. 2017;1(12)

Widmer RJ, Flammer AJ, Lerman LO, Lerman A. The Mediterranean diet, its components, and cardiovascular disease. Am J Med. 2015;128(3):229–38.

Filippou CD, Tsioufis CP, Thomopoulos CG, Mihas CC, Dimitriadis KS, Sotiropoulou LI, et al. Dietary approaches to stop hypertension (DASH) diet and blood pressure reduction in adults with and without hypertension: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Adv Nutr. 2020;11(5):1150–60.

Storey ML, Forshee RA, Anderson PA. Beverage consumption in the US population. J Am Diet Assoc. 2006;106(12):1992–2000.

van Dam RM, Hu FB, Willett WC. Coffee, caffeine, and health. N Engl J Med. 2020;383(4):369–78.

National Coffee Association: the history of coffee. https://www.ncausa.org/About-Coffee/History-of-Coffee Accessed 16 May 2024.

Fischer EF, Victor B, Robinson D, Farah A, Martin PR. Coffee: consumption and health implication; CHAPTER 1: Coffee Consumption and Health Impacts: A Brief History of Changing Conceptions; https://doi.org/10.1039/9781788015028; https://books.rsc.org/books/edited-volume/814/chapter/557358/Coffee-Consumption-and-Health-Impacts-A-Brief , Accessed 16 May 2024. 2019.

Afshari R. Gustav III's risk assessment on coffee consumption; a medical history report. Avicenna J Phytomed. 2017;7(2):99–100.

PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Weinberg BA, Bealer BK. The world of caffeine: the science and culture of the world's most popular drug. Psychology Press; 2001. p. 92.

Hughes JR, Amori G, Hatsukami DK. A survey of physician advice about caffeine. J Subst Abuse. 1988;1(1):67–70.

Robertson D, Frolich JC, Carr RK, Watson JT, Hollifield JW, Shand DG, et al. Effects of caffeine on plasma renin activity, catecholamines and blood pressure. N Engl J Med. 1978;298(4):181–6.

Dobmeyer DJ, Stine RA, Leier CV, Greenberg R, Schaal SF. The arrhythmogenic effects of caffeine in human beings. N Engl J Med. 1983;308(14):814–6.

Paul O, Lepper MH, Phelan WH, Dupertuis GW, Macmillan A, Mc KH, et al. A longitudinal study of coronary heart disease. Circulation. 1963;28:20–31.

Mendoza MF, Sulague RM, Posas-Mendoza T, Lavie CJ. Impact of coffee consumption on cardiovascular health. Ochsner J. 2023;23(2):152–8.

O'Keefe JH, DiNicolantonio JJ, Lavie CJ. Coffee for cardioprotection and longevity. Prog Cardiovasc Dis. 2018;61(1):38–42.

Chieng D, Canovas R, Segan L, Sugumar H, Voskoboinik A, Prabhu S, et al. The impact of coffee subtypes on incident cardiovascular disease, arrhythmias, and mortality: long-term outcomes from the UK Biobank. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2022;29(17):2240–9.

Carlstrom M, Larsson SC. Coffee consumption and reduced risk of developing type 2 diabetes: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Nutr Rev. 2018;76(6):395–417.

Sofi F, Conti AA, Gori AM, Eliana Luisi ML, Casini A, Abbate R, et al. Coffee consumption and risk of coronary heart disease: a meta-analysis. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis. 2007;17(3):209–23.

Park Y, Cho H, Myung SK. Effect of coffee consumption on risk of coronary heart disease in a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies. Am J Cardiol. 2023;186:17–29.

OCEBM Levels of Evidence Working Group. The Oxford 2011 levels of evidence. Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. https://www.cebm.ox.ac.uk/resources/levels-of-evidence/ocebm-levels-of-evidence . Accessed 8 Oct 2020

Spiller MA. The chemical components of coffee. Prog Clin Biol Res. 1984;158:91–147.

CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Voskoboinik A, Koh Y, Kistler PM. Cardiovascular effects of caffeinated beverages. Trends Cardiovasc Med. 2019;29(6):345–50.

Olechno E, Puscion-Jakubik A, Zujko ME, Socha K. Influence of various factors on caffeine content in coffee brews. Foods. 2021;27:10(6).

List of coffee drinks. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_coffee_drinks . Accessed 2 Jan 2024.

History of the Espresso Coffee machine: from its origins to the present day. https://cellinicaffe.com/en/blogs/coffee-vibes/history-of-the-espresso-coffee-machine#:~:text=Bezzera%2C%20perhaps%20inspired%20by%20Moriondo 's,granted%20on%205%20June%201902. Accessed 6 June 2024.

Expresso. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espresso . Accessed 6 Jun 2024.

Coffee Review. https://www.coffeereview.com/coffee-reference/espresso/espresso-basics/history/ . Accessed 6 Jun 6 2024.

van Tol A, Urgert R, de Jong-Caesar R, van Gent T, Scheek LM, de Roos B, et al. The cholesterol-raising diterpenes from coffee beans increase serum lipid transfer protein activity levels in humans. Atherosclerosis. 1997;132(2):251–4.

Jee SH, He J, Whelton PK, Suh I, Klag MJ. The effect of chronic coffee drinking on blood pressure: a meta-analysis of controlled clinical trials. Hypertension. 1999;33(2):647–52.

Noordzij M, Uiterwaal CS, Arends LR, Kok FJ, Grobbee DE, Geleijnse JM. Blood pressure response to chronic intake of coffee and caffeine: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Hypertens. 2005;23(5):921–8.

Ramli NNS, Alkhaldy AA, Mhd Jalil AM. Effects of caffeinated and decaffeinated coffee consumption on metabolic syndrome parameters: a systematic review and meta-analysis of data from randomised controlled trials. Medicina (Kaunas). 2021;57(9)

Mesas AE, Leon-Munoz LM, Rodriguez-Artalejo F, Lopez-Garcia E. The effect of coffee on blood pressure and cardiovascular disease in hypertensive individuals: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Clin Nutr. 2011;94(4):1113–26.

Grosso G, Micek A, Godos J, Pajak A, Sciacca S, Bes-Rastrollo M, et al. Long-term coffee consumption is associated with decreased incidence of new-onset hypertension: a dose-response meta-analysis. Nutrients. 2017;9(8)

Xie C, Cui L, Zhu J, Wang K, Sun N, Sun C. Coffee consumption and risk of hypertension: a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of cohort studies. J Hum Hypertens. 2018;32(2):83–93.

D'Elia L, La Fata E, Galletti F, Scalfi L, Strazzullo P. Coffee consumption and risk of hypertension: a dose-response meta-analysis of prospective studies. Eur J Nutr. 2019;58(1):271–80.

Haghighatdoost F, Hajihashemi P, de Sousa Romeiro AM, Mohammadifard N, Sarrafzadegan N, de Oliveira C, et al. Coffee consumption and risk of hypertension in adults: systematic review and meta-analysis. Nutrients. 2023;15(13)

Nordestgaard AT, Thomsen M, Nordestgaard BG. Coffee intake and risk of obesity, metabolic syndrome and type 2 diabetes: a Mendelian randomization study. Int J Epidemiol. 2015;44(2):551–65.

Wong THT, Burlutsky G, Gopinath B, Flood VM, Mitchell P, Louie JCY. The longitudinal association between coffee and tea consumption and the risk of metabolic syndrome and its component conditions in an older adult population. J Nutr Sci. 2022;11:e79.

Corbi-Cobo-Losey MJ, Martinez-Gonzalez MA, Gribble AK, Fernandez-Montero A, Navarro AM, Dominguez LJ, et al. Coffee consumption and the risk of metabolic syndrome in the ‘Seguimiento Universidad de Navarra’ project. Antioxidants (Basel). 2023;12(3)

Wong THT, Wong CH, Zhang X, Zhou Y, Xu J, Yuen KC, et al. The association between coffee consumption and metabolic syndrome in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Adv Nutr. 2021;12(3):708–21.

Zelber-Sagi S, Salomone F, Webb M, Lotan R, Yeshua H, Halpern Z, et al. Coffee consumption and nonalcoholic fatty liver onset: a prospective study in the general population. Transl Res. 2015;165(3):428–36.

Setiawan VW, Porcel J, Wei P, Stram DO, Noureddin N, Lu SC, et al. Coffee drinking and alcoholic and nonalcoholic fatty liver diseases and viral hepatitis in the multiethnic cohort. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2017;15(8):1305–7.

Chung HK, Nam JS, Lee MY, Kim YB, Won YS, Song WJ, et al. The increased amount of coffee consumption lowers the incidence of fatty liver disease in Korean men. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis. 2020;30(10):1653–61.

Wijarnpreecha K, Thongprayoon C, Ungprasert P. Coffee consumption and risk of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2017;29(2):e8–e12.

Chen YP, Lu FB, Hu YB, Xu LM, Zheng MH, Hu ED. A systematic review and a dose-response meta-analysis of coffee dose and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Clin Nutr. 2019;38(6):2552–7.

Kositamongkol C, Kanchanasurakit S, Auttamalang C, Inchai N, Kabkaew T, Kitpark S, et al. Coffee consumption and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: an umbrella review and a systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Pharmacol. 2021;12:786596.

Salazar-Martinez E, Willett WC, Ascherio A, Manson JE, Leitzmann MF, Stampfer MJ, et al. Coffee consumption and risk for type 2 diabetes mellitus. Ann Intern Med. 2004;140(1):1–8.

Pereira MA, Parker ED, Folsom AR. Coffee consumption and risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus: an 11-year prospective study of 28 812 postmenopausal women. Arch Intern Med. 2006;166(12):1311–6.

Bhupathiraju SN, Pan A, Manson JE, Willett WC, van Dam RM, Hu FB. Changes in coffee intake and subsequent risk of type 2 diabetes: three large cohorts of US men and women. Diabetologia. 2014;57(7):1346–54.

van Dam RM, Hu FB. Coffee consumption and risk of type 2 diabetes: a systematic review. JAMA. 2005;294(1):97–104.

Ding M, Bhupathiraju SN, Chen M, van Dam RM, Hu FB. Caffeinated and decaffeinated coffee consumption and risk of type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and a dose-response meta-analysis. Diabetes Care. 2014;37(2):569–86.

Lew QJ, Jafar TH, Jin A, Yuan JM, Koh WP. Consumption of coffee but not of other caffeine-containing beverages reduces the risk of end-stage renal disease in the Singapore Chinese Health Study. J Nutr. 2018;148(8):1315–22.

Jhee JH, Nam KH, An SY, Cha MU, Lee M, Park S, et al. Effects of coffee intake on incident chronic kidney disease: a community-based prospective cohort study. Am J Med. 2018;131(12):1482–90. e3

Hu EA, Selvin E, Grams ME, Steffen LM, Coresh J, Rebholz CM. Coffee consumption and incident kidney disease: results from the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) study. Am J Kidney Dis. 2018;72(2):214–22.

Srithongkul T, Ungprasert P. Coffee consumption is associated with a decreased risk of incident chronic kidney disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies. Eur J Intern Med. 2020;77:111–6.

Kanbay M, Siriopol D, Copur S, Tapoi L, Benchea L, Kuwabara M, et al. Effect of coffee consumption on renal outcome: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical studies. J Ren Nutr. 2021;31(1):5–20.

Tang L, Yang L, Chen W, Li C, Zeng Y, Yang H, et al. Sex-specific association between coffee consumption and incident chronic kidney disease: a population-based analysis of 359,906 participants from the UK Biobank. Chin Med J (Engl). 2022;135(12):1414–24.

Kleemola P, Jousilahti P, Pietinen P, Vartiainen E, Tuomilehto J. Coffee consumption and the risk of coronary heart disease and death. Arch Intern Med. 2000;160(22):3393–400.

Lopez-Garcia E, van Dam RM, Willett WC, Rimm EB, Manson JE, Stampfer MJ, et al. Coffee consumption and coronary heart disease in men and women: a prospective cohort study. Circulation. 2006;113(17):2045–53.

Grioni S, Agnoli C, Sieri S, Pala V, Ricceri F, Masala G, et al. Espresso coffee consumption and risk of coronary heart disease in a large Italian cohort. PLoS One. 2015;10(5):e0126550.

Wu JN, Ho SC, Zhou C, Ling WH, Chen WQ, Wang CL, et al. Coffee consumption and risk of coronary heart diseases: a meta-analysis of 21 prospective cohort studies. Int J Cardiol. 2009;137(3):216–25.

Mo L, Xie W, Pu X, Ouyang D. Coffee consumption and risk of myocardial infarction: a dose-response meta-analysis of observational studies. Oncotarget. 2018;9(30):21530–40.

Lopez-Garcia E, Rodriguez-Artalejo F, Rexrode KM, Logroscino G, Hu FB, van Dam RM. Coffee consumption and risk of stroke in women. Circulation. 2009;119(8):1116–23.

Zhang Y, Yang H, Li S, Li WD, Wang Y. Consumption of coffee and tea and risk of developing stroke, dementia, and poststroke dementia: a cohort study in the UK Biobank. PLoS Med. 2021;18(11):e1003830.

Larsson SC, Orsini N. Coffee consumption and risk of stroke: a dose-response meta-analysis of prospective studies. Am J Epidemiol. 2011;174(9):993–1001.

Chan L, Hong CT, Bai CH. Coffee consumption and the risk of cerebrovascular disease: a meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies. BMC Neurol. 2021;21(1):380.

Shao C, Tang H, Wang X, He J. Coffee consumption and stroke risk: evidence from a systematic review and meta-analysis of more than 2.4 million men and women. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2021;30(1):105452.

Nordestgaard AT, Nordestgaard BG. Coffee intake, cardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality: observational and Mendelian randomization analyses in 95 000-223 000 individuals. Int J Epidemiol. 2016;45(6):1938–52.

PubMed   Google Scholar  

Zhou A, Hypponen E. Long-term coffee consumption, caffeine metabolism genetics, and risk of cardiovascular disease: a prospective analysis of up to 347,077 individuals and 8368 cases. Am J Clin Nutr. 2019;109(3):509–16.

Ding M, Bhupathiraju SN, Satija A, van Dam RM, Hu FB. Long-term coffee consumption and risk of cardiovascular disease: a systematic review and a dose-response meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies. Circulation. 2014;129(6):643–59.

Grosso G, Micek A, Godos J, Sciacca S, Pajak A, Martinez-Gonzalez MA, et al. Coffee consumption and risk of all-cause, cardiovascular, and cancer mortality in smokers and non-smokers: a dose-response meta-analysis. Eur J Epidemiol. 2016;31(12):1191–205.

Kim Y, Je Y, Giovannucci E. Coffee consumption and all-cause and cause-specific mortality: a meta-analysis by potential modifiers. Eur J Epidemiol. 2019;34(8):731–52.

Teramoto M, Yamagishi K, Muraki I, Tamakoshi A, Iso H. Coffee and green tea consumption and cardiovascular disease mortality among people with and without hypertension. J Am Heart Assoc. 2023;12(2):e026477.

Mostofsky E, Rice MS, Levitan EB, Mittleman MA. Habitual coffee consumption and risk of heart failure: a dose-response meta-analysis. Circ Heart Fail. 2012;5(4):401–5.

Stevens LM, Linstead E, Hall JL, Kao DP. Association between coffee intake and incident heart failure risk: a machine learning analysis of the FHS, the ARIC study, and the CHS. Circ Heart Fail. 2021;14(2):e006799.

Han Q, Chu J, Hu W, Liu S, Sun N, Chen X, et al. Association between coffee and incident heart failure: a prospective cohort study from the UK Biobank. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis. 2023;33(11):2119–27.

Cheng M, Hu Z, Lu X, Huang J, Gu D. Caffeine intake and atrial fibrillation incidence: dose response meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies. Can J Cardiol. 2014;30(4):448–54.

Krittanawong C, Tunhasiriwet A, Wang Z, Farrell AM, Chirapongsathorn S, Zhang H, et al. Is caffeine or coffee consumption a risk for new-onset atrial fibrillation? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2021;28(12):e13–e5.

Caldeira D, Martins C, Alves LB, Pereira H, Ferreira JJ, Costa J. Caffeine does not increase the risk of atrial fibrillation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. Heart. 2013;99(19):1383–9.

Abdelfattah R, Kamran H, Lazar J, Kassotis J. Does caffeine consumption increase the risk of new-onset atrial fibrillation? Cardiology. 2018;140(2):106–14.

Larsson SC, Drca N, Jensen-Urstad M, Wolk A. Coffee consumption is not associated with increased risk of atrial fibrillation: results from two prospective cohorts and a meta-analysis. BMC Med. 2015;13:207.

Cao Y, Liu X, Xue Z, Yin K, Ma J, Zhu W, et al. Association of coffee consumption with atrial fibrillation risk: an updated dose-response meta-analysis of prospective studies. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2022;9:894664.

Marcus GM, Rosenthal DG, Nah G, Vittinghoff E, Fang C, Ogomori K, et al. Acute effects of coffee consumption on health among ambulatory adults. N Engl J Med. 2023;388(12):1092–100.

Malerba S, Turati F, Galeone C, Pelucchi C, Verga F, La Vecchia C, et al. A meta-analysis of prospective studies of coffee consumption and mortality for all causes, cancers and cardiovascular diseases. Eur J Epidemiol. 2013;28(7):527–39.

Je Y, Giovannucci E. Coffee consumption and total mortality: a meta-analysis of twenty prospective cohort studies. Br J Nutr. 2014;111(7):1162–73.

Crippa A, Discacciati A, Larsson SC, Wolk A, Orsini N. Coffee consumption and mortality from all causes, cardiovascular disease, and cancer: a dose-response meta-analysis. Am J Epidemiol. 2014;180(8):763–75.

Ding M, Satija A, Bhupathiraju SN, Hu Y, Sun Q, Han J, et al. Association of coffee consumption with total and cause-specific mortality in 3 large prospective cohorts. Circulation. 2015;132(24):2305–15.

Zhao Y, Wu K, Zheng J, Zuo R, Li D. Association of coffee drinking with all-cause mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Public Health Nutr. 2015;18(7):1282–91.

Li Q, Liu Y, Sun X, Yin Z, Li H, Cheng C, et al. Caffeinated and decaffeinated coffee consumption and risk of all-cause mortality: a dose-response meta-analysis of cohort studies. J Hum Nutr Diet. 2019;32(3):279–87.

Shin S, Lee JE, Loftfield E, Shu XO, Abe SK, Rahman MS, et al. Coffee and tea consumption and mortality from all causes, cardiovascular disease and cancer: a pooled analysis of prospective studies from the Asia Cohort Consortium. Int J Epidemiol. 2022;51(2):626–40.

Kaeberlein M. How healthy is the healthspan concept? Geroscience. 2018;40(4):361–4.

Sulem P, Gudbjartsson DF, Geller F, Prokopenko I, Feenstra B, Aben KK, et al. Sequence variants at CYP1A1-CYP1A2 and AHR associate with coffee consumption. Hum Mol Genet. 2011;20(10):2071–7.

McMahon G, Taylor AE, Davey Smith G, Munafo MR. Phenotype refinement strengthens the association of AHR and CYP1A1 genotype with caffeine consumption. PLoS One. 2014;9(7):e103448.

Lu J, Wang Z. C-reactive protein partially mediates the inverse effect of coffee consumption on risk of type 2 diabetes: evidence from two-stage Mendelian randomization analysis. Clin Nutr. 2023;42(9):1747–8.

Kwok MK, Leung GM, Schooling CM. Habitual coffee consumption and risk of type 2 diabetes, ischemic heart disease, depression and Alzheimer's disease: a Mendelian randomization study. Sci Rep. 2016;6:36500.

Kennedy OJ, Pirastu N, Poole R, Fallowfield JA, Hayes PC, Grzeszkowiak EJ, et al. Coffee consumption and kidney function: a Mendelian randomization study. Am J Kidney Dis. 2020;75(5):753–61.

Giontella A, de La Harpe R, Cronje HT, Zagkos L, Woolf B, Larsson SC, et al. Caffeine intake, plasma caffeine level, and kidney function: a Mendelian randomization study. Nutrients. 2023;15(20)

van Oort S, Beulens JWJ, van Ballegooijen AJ, Grobbee DE, Larsson SC. Association of cardiovascular risk factors and lifestyle behaviors with hypertension: a Mendelian randomization study. Hypertension. 2020;76(6):1971–9.

Zhang Y, Liu Z, Choudhury T, Cornelis MC, Liu W. Habitual coffee intake and risk for nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: a two-sample Mendelian randomization study. Eur J Nutr. 2021;60(4):1761–7.

Yuan S, Chen J, Li X, Fan R, Arsenault B, Gill D, et al. Lifestyle and metabolic factors for nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: Mendelian randomization study. Eur J Epidemiol. 2022;37(7):723–33.

Qian Y, Ye D, Huang H, Wu DJH, Zhuang Y, Jiang X, et al. Coffee consumption and risk of stroke: a Mendelian randomization study. Ann Neurol. 2020;87(4):525–32.

Yuan S, Carter P, Mason AM, Burgess S, Larsson SC. Coffee consumption and cardiovascular diseases: a Mendelian randomization study. Nutrients. 2021;13(7)

van Oort S, Beulens JWJ, van Ballegooijen AJ, Handoko ML, Larsson SC. Modifiable lifestyle factors and heart failure: a Mendelian randomization study. Am Heart J. 2020;227:64–73.

Yuan S, Larsson SC. No association between coffee consumption and risk of atrial fibrillation: a Mendelian randomization study. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis. 2019;29(11):1185–8.

Zhang Z, Wang M, Yuan S, Liu X. Coffee consumption and risk of coronary artery disease. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2022;29(1):e29–31.

van Dam RM. Coffee and type 2 diabetes: from beans to beta-cells. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis. 2006;16(1):69–77.

Natella F, Scaccini C. Role of coffee in modulation of diabetes risk. Nutr Rev. 2012;70(4):207–17.

Barcelos RP, Lima FD, Carvalho NR, Bresciani G, Royes LF. Caffeine effects on systemic metabolism, oxidative-inflammatory pathways, and exercise performance. Nutr Res. 2020;80:1–17.

Murai T, Matsuda S. The chemopreventive effects of chlorogenic acids, phenolic compounds in coffee, against inflammation, cancer, and neurological diseases. Molecules. 2023;28:–5.

Chapple B, Woodfin S, Moore W. The perfect cup? Coffee-derived polyphenols and their roles in mitigating factors affecting type 2 diabetes pathogenesis. Molecules. 2024;29(4)

Baldi S, Tristan Asensi M, Pallecchi M, Sofi F, Bartolucci G, Amedei A. Interplay between lignans and gut microbiota: nutritional, functional and methodological aspects. Molecules. 2023;28(1)

Mazur WM, Wahala K, Rasku S, Salakka A, Hase T, Adlercreutz H. Lignan and isoflavonoid concentrations in tea and coffee. Br J Nutr. 1998;79(1):37–45.

Nurmi T, Mursu J, Penalvo JL, Poulsen HE, Voutilainen S. Dietary intake and urinary excretion of lignans in Finnish men. Br J Nutr. 2010;103(5):677–85.

Angeloni S, Navarini L, Sagratini G, Torregiani E, Vittori S, Caprioli G. Development of an extraction method for the quantification of lignans in espresso coffee by using HPLC-MS/MS triple quadrupole. J Mass Spectrom. 2018;53(9):842–8.

Angeloni S, Navarini L, Khamitova G, Sagratini G, Vittori S, Caprioli G. Quantification of lignans in 30 ground coffee samples and evaluation of theirs extraction yield in espresso coffee by HPLC-MS/MS triple quadrupole. Int J Food Sci Nutr. 2020;71(2):193–200.

Angeloni S, Navarini L, Khamitova G, Maggi F, Sagratini G, Vittori S, et al. A new analytical method for the simultaneous quantification of isoflavones and lignans in 25 green coffee samples by HPLC-MS/MS. Food Chem. 2020;325:126924.

Shabir I, Kumar Pandey V, Shams R, Dar AH, Dash KK, Khan SA, et al. Promising bioactive properties of quercetin for potential food applications and health benefits: a review. Front Nutr. 2022;9:999752.

Mori N, Murphy N, Sawada N, Achaintre D, Yamaji T, Scalbert A, et al. Reproducibility and dietary correlates of plasma polyphenols in the JPHC-NEXT Protocol Area study. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2024;78(1):34–42.

Mannino G, Kunz R, Maffei ME. Discrimination of green coffee (Coffea arabica and Coffea canephora) of different geographical origin based on antioxidant activity, high-throughput metabolomics, and DNA RFLP fingerprinting. Antioxidants (Basel). 2023;12(5)

Lestari W, Hasballah K, Listiawan MY, Sofia S. Antioxidant and phytometabolite profiles of ethanolic extract from the cascara pulp of Coffea arabica collected from Gayo Highland: a study for potential anti-photoaging agent. F1000Res. 2023;12:12.

CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Gil-Lespinard M, Castaneda J, Almanza-Aguilera E, Gomez JH, Tjonneland A, Kyro C, et al. Dietary intake of 91 individual polyphenols and 5-year body weight change in the EPIC-PANACEA cohort. Antioxidants (Basel). 2022;11(12)

Henry-Vitrac C, Ibarra A, Roller M, Merillon JM, Vitrac X. Contribution of chlorogenic acids to the inhibition of human hepatic glucose-6-phosphatase activity in vitro by Svetol, a standardized decaffeinated green coffee extract. J Agric Food Chem. 2010;58(7):4141–4.

Bassoli BK, Cassolla P, Borba-Murad GR, Constantin J, Salgueiro-Pagadigorria CL, Bazotte RB, et al. Instant coffee extract with high chlorogenic acids content inhibits hepatic G-6-Pase in vitro, but does not reduce the glycaemia. Cell Biochem Funct. 2015;33(4):183–7.

Akash MS, Rehman K, Chen S. Effects of coffee on type 2 diabetes mellitus. Nutrition. 2014;30(7-8):755–63.

Williamson G. Protection against developing type 2 diabetes by coffee consumption: assessment of the role of chlorogenic acid and metabolites on glycaemic responses. Food Funct. 2020;11(6):4826–33.

Tunnicliffe JM, Shearer J. Coffee, glucose homeostasis, and insulin resistance: physiological mechanisms and mediators. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab. 2008;33(6):1290–300.

Rebello SA, van Dam RM. Coffee consumption and cardiovascular health: getting to the heart of the matter. Curr Cardiol Rep. 2013;15(10):403.

Sinha RA, Farah BL, Singh BK, Siddique MM, Li Y, Wu Y, et al. Caffeine stimulates hepatic lipid metabolism by the autophagy-lysosomal pathway in mice. Hepatology. 2014;59(4):1366–80.

Yeo SE, Jentjens RL, Wallis GA, Jeukendrup AE. Caffeine increases exogenous carbohydrate oxidation during exercise. J Appl Physiol (1985). 2005;99(3):844–50.

Kobayashi Y, Suzuki M, Satsu H, Arai S, Hara Y, Suzuki K, et al. Green tea polyphenols inhibit the sodium-dependent glucose transporter of intestinal epithelial cells by a competitive mechanism. J Agric Food Chem. 2000;48(11):5618–23.

Meier JJ, Hucking K, Holst JJ, Deacon CF, Schmiegel WH, Nauck MA. Reduced insulinotropic effect of gastric inhibitory polypeptide in first-degree relatives of patients with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes. 2001;50(11):2497–504.

Nauck MA, Heimesaat MM, Orskov C, Holst JJ, Ebert R, Creutzfeldt W. Preserved incretin activity of glucagon-like peptide 1 [7-36 amide] but not of synthetic human gastric inhibitory polypeptide in patients with type-2 diabetes mellitus. J Clin Invest. 1993;91(1):301–7.

Johnston KL, Clifford MN, Morgan LM. Coffee acutely modifies gastrointestinal hormone secretion and glucose tolerance in humans: glycemic effects of chlorogenic acid and caffeine. Am J Clin Nutr. 2003;78(4):728–33.

van Dijk AE, Olthof MR, Meeuse JC, Seebus E, Heine RJ, van Dam RM. Acute effects of decaffeinated coffee and the major coffee components chlorogenic acid and trigonelline on glucose tolerance. Diabetes Care. 2009;32(6):1023–5.

Yanagimoto A, Matsui Y, Yamaguchi T, Hibi M, Kobayashi S, Osaki N. Effects of ingesting both catechins and chlorogenic acids on glucose, incretin, and insulin sensitivity in healthy men: a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled crossover trial. Nutrients. 2022;14(23)

Meeusen R, Roelands B, Spriet LL. Caffeine, exercise and the brain. Nestle Nutr Inst Workshop Ser. 2013;76:1–12.

Graham TE. Caffeine and exercise: metabolism, endurance and performance. Sports Med. 2001;31(11):785–807.

Acheson KJ, Gremaud G, Meirim I, Montigon F, Krebs Y, Fay LB, et al. Metabolic effects of caffeine in humans: lipid oxidation or futile cycling? Am J Clin Nutr. 2004;79(1):40–6.

He WJ, Chen J, Razavi AC, Hu EA, Grams ME, Yu B, et al. Metabolites associated with coffee consumption and incident chronic kidney disease. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2021;16(11):1620–9.

Geleijnse JM. Habitual coffee consumption and blood pressure: an epidemiological perspective. Vasc Health Risk Manag. 2008;4(5):963–70.

Barbagallo M, Dominguez LJ, Galioto A, Ferlisi A, Cani C, Malfa L, et al. Role of magnesium in insulin action, diabetes and cardio-metabolic syndrome X. Mol Aspects Med. 2003;24(1-3):39–52.

Song Y, Manson JE, Buring JE, Liu S. Dietary magnesium intake in relation to plasma insulin levels and risk of type 2 diabetes in women. Diabetes Care. 2004;27(1):59–65.

Greenberg JA, Boozer CN, Geliebter A. Coffee, diabetes, and weight control. Am J Clin Nutr. 2006;84(4):682–93.

Kogure A, Sakane N, Takakura Y, Umekawa T, Yoshioka K, Nishino H, et al. Effects of caffeine on the uncoupling protein family in obese yellow KK mice. Clin Exp Pharmacol Physiol. 2002;29(5-6):391–4.

Myers MG. Effects of caffeine on blood pressure. Arch Intern Med. 1988;148(5):1189–93.

Nurminen ML, Niittynen L, Korpela R, Vapaatalo H. Coffee, caffeine and blood pressure: a critical review. Eur J Clin Nutr. 1999;53(11):831–9.

Umemura T, Ueda K, Nishioka K, Hidaka T, Takemoto H, Nakamura S, et al. Effects of acute administration of caffeine on vascular function. Am J Cardiol. 2006;98(11):1538–41.

Higashi Y. Coffee and endothelial function: a coffee paradox? Nutrients. 2019;11(9)

Del Giorno R, Scanzio S, De Napoli E, Stefanelli K, Gabutti S, Troiani C, et al. Habitual coffee and caffeinated beverages consumption is inversely associated with arterial stiffness and central and peripheral blood pressure. Int J Food Sci Nutr. 2022;73(1):106–15.

Zhou A, Hypponen E. Habitual coffee intake and plasma lipid profile: evidence from UK Biobank. Clin Nutr. 2021;40(6):4404–13.

Jee SH, He J, Appel LJ, Whelton PK, Suh I, Klag MJ. Coffee consumption and serum lipids: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled clinical trials. Am J Epidemiol. 2001;153(4):353–62.

Cai L, Ma D, Zhang Y, Liu Z, Wang P. The effect of coffee consumption on serum lipids: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2012;66(8):872–7.

Hannafon BN, Ding WQ. Intercellular communication by exosome-derived microRNAs in cancer. Int J Mol Sci. 2013;14(7):14240–69.

Barile L, Cervio E, Lionetti V, Milano G, Ciullo A, Biemmi V, et al. Cardioprotection by cardiac progenitor cell-secreted exosomes: role of pregnancy-associated plasma protein-A. Cardiovasc Res. 2018;114(7):992–1005.

Casieri V, Matteucci M, Pasanisi EM, Papa A, Barile L, Fritsche-Danielson R, et al. Ticagrelor enhances release of anti-hypoxic cardiac progenitor cell-derived exosomes through increasing cell proliferation in vitro. Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):2494.

Carrozzo A, Casieri V, Di Silvestre D, Brambilla F, De Nitto E, Sardaro N, et al. Plasma exosomes characterization reveals a perioperative protein signature in older patients undergoing different types of on-pump cardiac surgery. Geroscience. 2021;43(2):773–89.

Pizzino F, Furini G, Casieri V, Mariani M, Bianchi G, Storti S, et al. Late plasma exosome microRNA-21-5p depicts magnitude of reverse ventricular remodeling after early surgical repair of primary mitral valve regurgitation. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2022;9:943068.

Soleti R, Andriantsitohaina R, Martinez MC. Impact of polyphenols on extracellular vesicle levels and effects and their properties as tools for drug delivery for nutrition and health. Arch Biochem Biophys. 2018;644:57–63.

Garcia-Seisdedos D, Babiy B, Lerma M, Casado ME, Martinez-Botas J, Lasuncion MA, et al. Curcumin stimulates exosome/microvesicle release in an in vitro model of intracellular lipid accumulation by increasing ceramide synthesis. Biochim Biophys Acta Mol Cell Biol Lipids. 2020;1865(5):158638.

Jahromi FNA, Dowran R, Jafari R. Recent advances in the roles of exosomal microRNAs (exomiRs) in hematologic neoplasms: pathogenesis, diagnosis, and treatment. Cell Commun Signal. 2023;21(1):88.

Svatun AL, Lochen ML, Thelle DS, Wilsgaard T. Association between espresso coffee and serum total cholesterol: the Tromso Study 2015-2016. Open Heart. 2022;9(1)

Cornelis MC, El-Sohemy A, Kabagambe EK, Campos H. Coffee, CYP1A2 genotype, and risk of myocardial infarction. JAMA. 2006;295(10):1135–41.

Kalow W, Tang BK. Caffeine as a metabolic probe: exploration of the enzyme-inducing effect of cigarette smoking. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 1991;49(1):44–8.

Mahdavi S, Palatini P, El-Sohemy A. CYP1A2 genetic variation, coffee intake, and kidney dysfunction. JAMA Netw Open. 2023;6(1):e2247868.

Ding Q, Xu YM, Lau ATY. The epigenetic effects of coffee. Molecules. 2023;28(4)

Lionetti V, Tuana BS, Casieri V, Parikh M, Pierce GN. Importance of functional food compounds in cardioprotection through action on the epigenome. Eur Heart J. 2019;40(7):575–82.

Stefanska B, Karlic H, Varga F, Fabianowska-Majewska K, Haslberger A. Epigenetic mechanisms in anti-cancer actions of bioactive food components--the implications in cancer prevention. Br J Pharmacol. 2012;167(2):279–97.

Hayakawa S, Ohishi T, Oishi Y, Isemura M, Miyoshi N. Contribution of non-coding RNAs to anticancer effects of dietary polyphenols: chlorogenic acid, curcumin, epigallocatechin-3-gallate, genistein, quercetin and resveratrol. Antioxidants (Basel). 2022;11(12)

Nehlig A, Cunha RA. The coffee-acrylamide apparent paradox: an example of why the health impact of a specific compound in a complex mixture should not be evaluated in isolation. Nutrients. 2020;12:–10.

Mojska H, Gielecinska I. Studies of acrylamide level in coffee and coffee substitutes: influence of raw material and manufacturing conditions. Rocz Panstw Zakl Hig. 2013;64(3):173–81.

Johnson KA, Gorzinski SJ, Bodner KM, Campbell RA, Wolf CH, Friedman MA, et al. Chronic toxicity and oncogenicity study on acrylamide incorporated in the drinking water of Fischer 344 rats. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol. 1986;85(2):154–68.

Friedman MA, Dulak LH, Stedham MA. A lifetime oncogenicity study in rats with acrylamide. Fundam Appl Toxicol. 1995;27(1):95–105.

Adani G, Filippini T, Wise LA, Halldorsson TI, Blaha L, Vinceti M. Dietary intake of acrylamide and risk of breast, endometrial, and ovarian cancers: a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2020;29(6):1095–106.

Health implications of acrylamide in food : report of a joint FAO/WHO consultation, WHO Headquarters, Geneva, Switzerland, 25-27 June 2002. https://hero.epa.gov/hero/index.cfm/reference/details/reference_id/324865 . Accessed 6 June 2024.

Wang B, Wang X, Yu L, Liu W, Song J, Fan L, et al. Acrylamide exposure increases cardiovascular risk of general adult population probably by inducing oxidative stress, inflammation, and TGF-beta1: a prospective cohort study. Environ Int. 2022;164:107261.

Fekete M, Major D, Feher A, Fazekas-Pongor V, Lehoczki A. Geroscience and pathology: a new frontier in understanding age-related diseases. Pathol Oncol Res. 2024; https://doi.org/10.3389/pore.2024.1611623 .

Zheng SQ, Huang XB, Xing TK, Ding AJ, Wu GS, Luo HR. Chlorogenic acid extends the lifespan of caenorhabditis elegans via insulin/IGF-1 signaling pathway. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2017;72(4):464–72.

Siswanto FM, Sakuma R, Oguro A, Imaoka S. Chlorogenic acid activates Nrf2/SKN-1 and prolongs the lifespan of Caenorhabditis elegans via the Akt-FOXO3/DAF16a-DDB1 pathway and activation of DAF16f. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2022;77(8):1503–16.

Carranza ADV, Saragusti A, Chiabrando GA, Carrari F, Asis R. Effects of chlorogenic acid on thermal stress tolerance in C. elegans via HIF-1, HSF-1 and autophagy. Phytomedicine. 2020;66:153132.

Sotibran AN, Ordaz-Tellez MG, Rodriguez-Arnaiz R. Flavonoids and oxidative stress in Drosophila melanogaster. Mutat Res. 2011;726(1):60–5.

Holvoet H, Long DM, Yang L, Choi J, Marney L, Poeck B, et al. Chlorogenic acids, acting via calcineurin, are the main compounds in centella asiatica extracts that mediate resilience to chronic stress in Drosophila melanogaster. Nutrients. 2023;15(18)

Wang Y, Xiang YF, Liu AL. Comparative and combined effects of epigallocatechin-3-gallate and caffeine in reducing lipid accumulation in Caenorhabditis elegans. Plant Foods Hum Nutr. 2022;77(2):279–85.

Sutphin GL, Bishop E, Yanos ME, Moller RM, Kaeberlein M. Caffeine extends life span, improves healthspan, and delays age-associated pathology in Caenorhabditis elegans. Longev Healthspan. 2012;1:9.

Min H, Youn E, Shim YH. Long-Term Caffeine Intake Exerts Protective Effects on Intestinal Aging by Regulating Vitellogenesis and Mitochondrial Function in an Aged Caenorhabditis Elegans Model. Nutrients. 2021;13(8)

Min H, Youn E, Kim J, Son SY, Lee CH, Shim YH. Effects of phosphoethanolamine supplementation on mitochondrial activity and lipogenesis in a caffeine ingestion Caenorhabditis elegans model. Nutrients. 2020;12(11)

Guo C, Shen W, Jin W, Jia X, Ji Z, Jinling L, et al. Effects of epigallocatechin gallate, caffeine, and their combination on fat accumulation in high-glucose diet-fed Caenorhabditis elegans. Biosci Biotechnol Biochem. 2023;87(8):898–906.

Du X, Guan Y, Huang Q, Lv M, He X, Yan L, et al. Low concentrations of caffeine and its analogs extend the lifespan of Caenorhabditis elegans by modulating IGF-1-like pathway. Front Aging Neurosci. 2018;10:211.

Brunquell J, Morris S, Snyder A, Westerheide SD. Coffee extract and caffeine enhance the heat shock response and promote proteostasis in an HSF-1-dependent manner in Caenorhabditis elegans. Cell Stress Chaperones. 2018;23(1):65–75.

Bridi JC, Barros AG, Sampaio LR, Ferreira JC, Antunes Soares FA, Romano-Silva MA. Lifespan extension induced by caffeine in Caenorhabditis elegans is partially dependent on adenosine signaling. Front Aging Neurosci. 2015;7:220.

Al-Amin M, Kawasaki I, Gong J, Shim YH. Caffeine induces the stress response and up-regulates heat shock proteins in Caenorhabditis elegans. Mol Cells. 2016;39(2):163–8.

Nikitin AG, Navitskas S, Gordon LA. Effect of varying doses of caffeine on life span of Drosophila melanogaster. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2008;63(2):149–50.

Czachor J, Milek M, Galiniak S, Stepien K, Dzugan M, Molon M. Coffee extends yeast chronological lifespan through antioxidant properties. Int J Mol Sci. 2020;21(24)

Ungvari Z, Tarantini S, Nyul-Toth A, Kiss T, Yabluchanskiy A, Csipo T, et al. Nrf2 dysfunction and impaired cellular resilience to oxidative stressors in the aged vasculature: from increased cellular senescence to the pathogenesis of age-related vascular diseases. Geroscience. 2019;41(6):727–38.

Ungvari Z, Tarantini S, Donato AJ, Galvan V, Csiszar A. Mechanisms of vascular aging. Circ Res. 2018;123(7):849–67.

Tarantini S, Valcarcel-Ares NM, Yabluchanskiy A, Fulop GA, Hertelendy P, Gautam T, et al. Treatment with the mitochondrial-targeted antioxidant peptide SS-31 rescues neurovascular coupling responses and cerebrovascular endothelial function and improves cognition in aged mice. Aging Cell. 2018;17(2)

Tucsek Z, Toth P, Sosnowsk D, Gautam T, Mitschelen M, Koller A, et al. Obesity in aging exacerbates blood brain barrier disruption, neuroinflammation and oxidative stress in the mouse hippocampus: effects on expression of genes involved in beta-amyloid generation and Alzheimer’s disease. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2014;69(10):1212–26.

Ungvari Z, Bailey-Downs L, Sosnowska D, Gautam T, Koncz P, Losonczy G, et al. Vascular oxidative stress in aging: a homeostatic failure due to dysregulation of Nrf2-mediated antioxidant response. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol. 2011;301(2):H363–72.

Csiszar A, Labinskyy N, Jimenez R, Pinto JT, Ballabh P, Losonczy G, et al. Anti-oxidative and anti-inflammatory vasoprotective effects of caloric restriction in aging: role of circulating factors and SIRT1. Mech Ageing Dev. 2009;130(8):518–27.

Ungvari Z, Orosz Z, Labinskyy N, Rivera A, Xiangmin Z, Smith K, et al. Increased mitochondrial H2O2 production promotes endothelial NF-kappaB activation in aged rat arteries. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol. 2007;293(1):H37–47.

Csiszar A, Ungvari Z, Edwards JG, Kaminski PM, Wolin MS, Koller A, et al. Aging-induced phenotypic changes and oxidative stress impair coronary arteriolar function. Circ Res. 2002;90(11):1159–66.

Kobayashi T, Maruyama T, Yoneda T, Miyai H, Azuma T, Tomofuji T, et al. Effects of coffee intake on oxidative stress during aging-related alterations in periodontal tissue. In Vivo. 2020;34(2):615–22.

Wang D, Hou J, Wan J, Yang Y, Liu S, Li X, et al. Dietary chlorogenic acid ameliorates oxidative stress and improves endothelial function in diabetic mice via Nrf2 activation. J Int Med Res. 2021;49(1):300060520985363.

Tang Y, Fang C, Shi J, Chen H, Chen X, Yao X. Antioxidant potential of chlorogenic acid in age-related eye diseases. Pharmacol Res Perspect. 2024;12(1):e1162.

Shi D, Hao Z, Qi W, Jiang F, Liu K, Shi X. Aerobic exercise combined with chlorogenic acid exerts neuroprotective effects and reverses cognitive decline in Alzheimer's disease model mice (APP/PS1) via the SIRT1/ /PGC-1alpha/PPARgamma signaling pathway. Front Aging Neurosci. 2023;15:1269952.

Li Y, Ren X, Lio C, Sun W, Lai K, Liu Y, et al. A chlorogenic acid-phospholipid complex ameliorates post-myocardial infarction inflammatory response mediated by mitochondrial reactive oxygen species in SAMP8 mice. Pharmacol Res. 2018;130:110–22.

Hada Y, Uchida HA, Otaka N, Onishi Y, Okamoto S, Nishiwaki M, et al. The protective effect of chlorogenic acid on vascular senescence via the Nrf2/HO-1 pathway. Int J Mol Sci. 2020;21(12)

Girsang E, Ginting CN, Lister INE, Gunawan KY, Widowati W. Anti-inflammatory and antiaging properties of chlorogenic acid on UV-induced fibroblast cell. PeerJ. 2021;9:e11419.

Valcarcel-Ares MN, Gautam T, Warrington JP, Bailey-Downs L, Sosnowska D, de Cabo R, et al. Disruption of Nrf2 signaling impairs angiogenic capacity of endothelial cells: implications for microvascular aging. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2012;67(8):821–9.

Ungvari Z, Bailey-Downs L, Gautam T, Sosnowska D, Wang M, Monticone RE, et al. Age-associated vascular oxidative stress, Nrf2 dysfunction and NF-kB activation in the non-human primate Macaca mulatta. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2011;66(8):866–75.

Tarantini S, Valcarcel-Ares MN, Yabluchanskiy A, Tucsek Z, Hertelendy P, Kiss T, et al. Nrf2 deficiency exacerbates obesity-induced oxidative stress, neurovascular dysfunction, blood brain barrier disruption, neuroinflammation, amyloidogenic gene expression and cognitive decline in mice, mimicking the aging phenotype. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2018; in press

Pearson KJ, Lewis KN, Price NL, Chang JW, Perez E, Cascajo MV, et al. Nrf2 mediates cancer protection but not prolongevity induced by caloric restriction. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008;105(7):2325–30.

Fulop GA, Kiss T, Tarantini S, Balasubramanian P, Yabluchanskiy A, Farkas E, et al. Nrf2 deficiency in aged mice exacerbates cellular senescence promoting cerebrovascular inflammation. Geroscience. 2018;40(5-6):513–21.

Ahn B, Pharaoh G, Premkumar P, Huseman K, Ranjit R, Kinter M, et al. Nrf2 deficiency exacerbates age-related contractile dysfunction and loss of skeletal muscle mass. Redox Biol. 2018;17:47–58.

Ungvari Z, Tarantini S, Sorond F, Merkely B, Csiszar A. Mechanisms of vascular aging, a geroscience perspective: JACC Focus Seminar. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020;75(8):931–41.

Ungvari Z, Csiszar A, Kaley G. Vascular inflammation in aging. Herz. 2004;29(8):733–40.

Csiszar A, Wang M, Lakatta EG, Ungvari ZI. Inflammation and endothelial dysfunction during aging: role of NF-{kappa}B. J Appl Physiol. 2008;105(4):1333–41.

Rebelo-Marques A, De Sousa LA, Andrade R, Ribeiro CF, Mota-Pinto A, Carrilho F, et al. Aging hallmarks: the benefits of physical exercise. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2018;9:258.

Garatachea N, Pareja-Galeano H, Sanchis-Gomar F, Santos-Lozano A, Fiuza-Luces C, Moran M, et al. Exercise attenuates the major hallmarks of aging. Rejuvenation Res. 2015;18(1):57–89.

Wilson DM 3rd, Cookson MR, Van Den Bosch L, Zetterberg H, Holtzman DM, Dewachter I. Hallmarks of neurodegenerative diseases. Cell. 2023;186(4):693–714.

Lopez-Otin C, Blasco MA, Partridge L, Serrano M, Kroemer G. The hallmarks of aging. Cell. 2013;153(6):1194–217.

Unno K, Taguchi K, Hase T, Meguro S, Nakamura Y. DNA mutagenicity of hydroxyhydroquinone in roasted coffee products and its suppression by chlorogenic acid, a coffee polyphenol, in oxidative-damage-sensitive SAMP8 mice. Int J Mol Sci. 2024;25(2)

Obana H, Nakamura S, Tanaka R. Suppressive effects of coffee on the SOS responses induced by UV and chemical mutagens. Mutat Res. 1986;175(2):47–50.

Majer BJ, Hofer E, Cavin C, Lhoste E, Uhl M, Glatt HR, et al. Coffee diterpenes prevent the genotoxic effects of 2-amino-1-methyl-6-phenylimidazo[4,5-b]pyridine (PhIP) and N-nitrosodimethylamine in a human derived liver cell line (HepG2). Food Chem Toxicol. 2005;43(3):433–41.

Huber WW, Scharf G, Nagel G, Prustomersky S, Schulte-Hermann R, Kaina B. Coffee and its chemopreventive components kahweol and cafestol increase the activity of O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase in rat liver--comparison with phase II xenobiotic metabolism. Mutat Res. 2003;522(1-2):57–68.

Hori A, Kasai H, Kawai K, Nanri A, Sato M, Ohta M, et al. Coffee intake is associated with lower levels of oxidative DNA damage and decreasing body iron storage in healthy women. Nutr Cancer. 2014;66(6):964–9.

Nikitina D, Chen Z, Vallis K, Poll A, Ainsworth P, Narod SA, et al. Relationship between caffeine and levels of DNA repair and oxidative stress in women with and without a BRCA1 mutation. J Nutrigenet Nutrigenomics. 2015;8(4-6):174–84.

Schumacher B, Pothof J, Vijg J, Hoeijmakers JHJ. The central role of DNA damage in the ageing process. Nature. 2021;592(7856):695–703.

Rizvi S, Raza ST, Mahdi F. Telomere length variations in aging and age-related diseases. Curr Aging Sci. 2014;7(3):161–7.

Zhao J, Miao K, Wang H, Ding H, Wang DW. Association between telomere length and type 2 diabetes mellitus: a meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2013;8(11):e79993.

Schneider CV, Schneider KM, Teumer A, Rudolph KL, Hartmann D, Rader DJ, et al. Association of telomere length with risk of disease and mortality. JAMA Intern Med. 2022;182(3):291–300.

Tucker LA. Caffeine consumption and telomere length in men and women of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). Nutr Metab (Lond). 2017;14:10.

Goncalinho GHF, Nascimento JRO, Mioto BM, Amato RV, Moretti MA, Strunz CMC, et al. Effects of coffee on sirtuin-1, homocysteine, and cholesterol of healthy adults: does the coffee powder matter? J Clin Med. 2022;11(11)

Lee SH, Lee JH, Lee HY, Min KJ. Sirtuin signaling in cellular senescence and aging. BMB Rep. 2019;52(1):24–34.

JJ DN, MF MC, O'Keefe JH. Nutraceutical activation of Sirt1: a review. Open Heart. 2022;9(2)

Cohen HY, Miller C, Bitterman KJ, Wall NR, Hekking B, Kessler B, et al. Calorie restriction promotes mammalian cell survival by inducing the SIRT1 deacetylase. Science. 2004;305(5682):390–2.

Moroz N, Carmona JJ, Anderson E, Hart AC, Sinclair DA, Blackwell TK. Dietary restriction involves NAD(+) -dependent mechanisms and a shift toward oxidative metabolism. Aging Cell. 2014;13(6):1075–85.

Benigni A, Cassis P, Conti S, Perico L, Corna D, Cerullo D, et al. Sirt3 deficiency shortens life span and impairs cardiac mitochondrial function rescued by Opa1 gene transfer. Antioxid Redox Signal. 2019;31(17):1255–71.

Mitchell SJ, Bernier M, Aon MA, Cortassa S, Kim EY, Fang EF, et al. Nicotinamide improves aspects of healthspan, but not lifespan, in mice. Cell Metab. 2018;27(3):667–76 e4.

Bause AS, Haigis MC. SIRT3 regulation of mitochondrial oxidative stress. Exp Gerontol. 2013;48(7):634–9.

Zhou L, Pinho R, Gu Y, Radak Z. The role of SIRT3 in exercise and aging. Cells. 2022;11(16)

Kiss T, Nyul-Toth A, Balasubramanian P, Tarantini S, Ahire C, Yabluchanskiy A, et al. Nicotinamide mononucleotide (NMN) supplementation promotes neurovascular rejuvenation in aged mice: transcriptional footprint of SIRT1 activation, mitochondrial protection, anti-inflammatory, and anti-apoptotic effects. Geroscience. 2020;42(2):527–46.

Baur JA, Ungvari Z, Minor RK, Le Couteur DG, de Cabo R. Are sirtuins viable targets for improving healthspan and lifespan? Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2012;11(6):443–61.

Majeed Y, Halabi N, Madani AY, Engelke R, Bhagwat AM, Abdesselem H, et al. SIRT1 promotes lipid metabolism and mitochondrial biogenesis in adipocytes and coordinates adipogenesis by targeting key enzymatic pathways. Sci Rep. 2021;11(1):8177.

Pacifici F, Di Cola D, Pastore D, Abete P, Guadagni F, Donadel G, et al. Proposed tandem effect of physical activity and sirtuin 1 and 3 activation in regulating glucose homeostasis. Int J Mol Sci. 2019;20(19)

Li YF, Ouyang SH, Tu LF, Wang X, Yuan WL, Wang GE, et al. Caffeine protects skin from oxidative stress-induced senescence through the activation of autophagy. Theranostics. 2018;8(20):5713–30.

Madeo F, Zimmermann A, Maiuri MC, Kroemer G. Essential role for autophagy in life span extension. J Clin Invest. 2015;125(1):85–93.

Wikoff D, Welsh BT, Henderson R, Brorby GP, Britt J, Myers E, et al. Systematic review of the potential adverse effects of caffeine consumption in healthy adults, pregnant women, adolescents, and children. Food Chem Toxicol. 2017;109(Pt 1):585–648.

Roehrs T, Roth T. Caffeine: sleep and daytime sleepiness. Sleep Med Rev. 2008;12(2):153–62.

Bonnet MH, Arand DL. Caffeine use as a model of acute and chronic insomnia. Sleep. 1992;15(6):526–36.

Karacan I, Thornby JI, Anch M, Booth GH, Williams RL, Salis PJ. Dose-related sleep disturbances induced by coffee and caffeine. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 1976;20(6):682–9.

Lasagna L. Dose-related sleep disturbances induced by coffee and caffeine. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 1977;21(2):244.

Nehlig A. Effects of coffee on the gastro-intestinal tract: a narrative review and literature update. Nutrients. 2022;14(2)

Chiang WF, Liao MT, Cheng CJ, Lin SH. Rhabdomyolysis induced by excessive coffee drinking. Hum Exp Toxicol. 2014;33(8):878–81.

Ye Y, Zhong R, Xiong XM, Wang CE. Association of coffee intake with bone mineral density: a Mendelian randomization study. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2024;15:1328748.

Chen CC, Shen YM, Li SB, Huang SW, Kuo YJ, Chen YP. Association of coffee and tea intake with bone mineral density and hip fracture: a meta-analysis. Medicina (Kaunas). 2023;59(6)

Xu J, Zhai T. Coffee drinking and the odds of osteopenia and osteoporosis in middle-aged and older Americans: a cross-sectional study in NHANES 2005-2014. Calcif Tissue Int. 2024;114(4):348–59.

Zeng X, Su Y, Tan A, Zou L, Zha W, Yi S, et al. The association of coffee consumption with the risk of osteoporosis and fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Osteoporos Int. 2022;33(9):1871–93.

Chau YP, Au PCM, Li GHY, Sing CW, Cheng VKF, Tan KCB, et al. Serum Metabolome of coffee consumption and its association with bone mineral density: the Hong Kong Osteoporosis Study. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2020;105(3)

Meredith SE, Juliano LM, Hughes JR, Griffiths RR. Caffeine use disorder: a comprehensive review and research agenda. J Caffeine Res. 2013;3(3):114–30.

Higdon JV, Frei B. Coffee and health: a review of recent human research. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2006;46(2):101–23.

Bae JH, Park JH, Im SS, Song DK. Coffee and health. Integr Med Res. 2014;3(4):189–91.

Visseren FLJ, Mach F, Smulders YM, Carballo D, Koskinas KC, Back M, et al. 2021 ESC Guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice. Eur Heart J. 2021;42(34):3227–337.

Feskanich D, Rimm EB, Giovannucci EL, Colditz GA, Stampfer MJ, Litin LB, et al. Reproducibility and validity of food intake measurements from a semiquantitative food frequency questionnaire. J Am Diet Assoc. 1993;93(7):790–6.

Rodenburg EM, Eijgelsheim M, Geleijnse JM, Amin N, van Duijn CM, Hofman A, et al. CYP1A2 and coffee intake and the modifying effect of sex, age, and smoking. Am J Clin Nutr. 2012;96(1):182–7.

Gkouskou KG, Georgiopoulos G, Vlastos I, Lazou E, Chaniotis D, Papaioannou TG, et al. CYP1A2 polymorphisms modify the association of habitual coffee consumption with appetite, macronutrient intake, and body mass index: results from an observational cohort and a cross-over randomized study. Int J Obes (Lond). 2022;46(1):162–8.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Vascular Cognitive Impairment, Neurodegeneration and Healthy Brain Aging Program, Department of Neurosurgery, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, USA

Zoltan Ungvari

Stephenson Cancer Center, University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, OK, USA

Oklahoma Center for Geroscience and Healthy Brain Aging, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, USA

Department of Health Promotion Sciences, College of Public Health, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, USA

International Training Program in Geroscience, Doctoral College/Department of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary

Leicester Real World Evidence Unit, Diabetes Research Centre, University of Leicester, Leicester General Hospital, Gwendolen Road, Leicester, LE5 4WP, UK

Setor K. Kunutsor

Section of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, Saint Boniface Hospital, Winnipeg, MB, R2H 2A6, Canada

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Setor K. Kunutsor: conceptualization, methodology, data curation, formal analysis, investigation, original draft, writing—review and editing. Zoltan Ungvari: methodology, data curation, formal analysis, investigation, original draft, writing—review and editing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Setor K. Kunutsor .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

This article is published under an open access license. Please check the 'Copyright Information' section either on this page or in the PDF for details of this license and what re-use is permitted. If your intended use exceeds what is permitted by the license or if you are unable to locate the licence and re-use information, please contact the Rights and Permissions team .

About this article

Ungvari, Z., Kunutsor, S.K. Coffee consumption and cardiometabolic health: a comprehensive review of the evidence. GeroScience (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11357-024-01262-5

Download citation

Received : 17 May 2024

Accepted : 21 June 2024

Published : 04 July 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11357-024-01262-5

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Coffee consumption
• Cardiometabolic
• Hypertension
• Cardiovascular disease
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Featured Topics

Featured series.

A series of random questions answered by Harvard experts.

Explore the Gazette

Read the latest.

You won’t even know you’re exercising, but your body will

What’s another word for ‘neuronal map-maker’?

How leaders find happiness — and teach it

A new cohort study finds sugar does not negate the benefits of drinking coffee in moderation.

iStock by Getty Images

Coffee is good for you, probably

Alvin Powell

Harvard Staff Writer

Professor who edited mortality findings says evidence is strong but not yet definitive

Past research has linked coffee consumption to reduced mortality and suggested protective effects against diabetes and cancer. Now, a study published in the Annals of Internal Medicine says that adding a bit of sugar to your cup does not eliminate observed mortality effects, contrary to concerns that sweetener might negate the brew’s benefits. In fact, the study showed that those who drank 1.5 to 4.5 cups a day, even with a teaspoon of sugar, were up to 30 percent less likely to die during a seven-year period than non-coffee drinkers. The study was edited by Christina Wee , an associate professor at Harvard Medical School, who penned a companion editorial . She explained the findings in a conversation with the Gazette. The interview has been edited for clarity and length.

Christina Wee

GAZETTE:  Where we are with the science of coffee and its health benefits?

WEE:  Generally speaking, coffee drinkers tend to have a substantially reduced risk of mortality compared to non-coffee drinkers. The main evidence to date is based largely on observational cohort studies, where you’re comparing coffee drinkers and non-coffee drinkers over time. There are also some smaller Mendelian randomization studies which, rather than measuring coffee drinking directly, look at genetic markers that are correlated with caffeine metabolism and are, in essence, markers of who might better tolerate coffee — and thus be more likely to consume coffee. They then look to see whether people with that genetic makeup — a proxy for greater likelihood to consume coffee — do better. Those studies have largely found no difference in mortality. However, those studies also have limitations. Mendelian randomization is a strong study design, in the sense that you don’t worry about confounding as much — whether coffee drinking is associated with some other health behavior that is really the reason for the better outcome. On the other hand, the genetic markers of coffee consumption are pretty weak proxies for actual coffee consumption. Even if you have a genetic marker for coffee tolerance and your likelihood of drinking coffee is higher, it may be only a little higher. It’s akin to assigning people to drink coffee in a randomized trial, but only a small percentage of those assigned to drink coffee actually drink it, so when you don’t find a difference you can’t be sure that it’s because coffee has no health effects or because not enough people in the coffee group did as they were told.

“If you’re not a coffee drinker and you don’t particularly like drinking coffee, I wouldn’t start drinking coffee because of the potential health benefits. That’s a leap.”

More like this

Coffee connection gets stronger

How coffee loves us back

Coffee drinking tied to lower risk of suicide

GAZETTE:   Does that mean the jury’s still out?

WEE:  The jury’s still out. But there are smaller physiology studies that suggest there are certain components of coffee that may be beneficial as well. Caffeine and chlorogenic acids, which are found in coffee, seem to have antioxidant effects and also inhibit platelet aggregation. Whenever we see an effect in observational studies, we first ask, “Is it biologically plausible?” In the case of coffee, there is evidence to suggest that there are substances that do appear to have some beneficial physiological effects that could lead to the reductions in mortality that we’re seeing. So all of this is supportive, but not definitive, evidence.

GAZETTE:  One of the things I’ve heard over the years is that if you put a lot of cream and sugar in coffee, that might negate whatever benefit there may be. This study addressed that specific question, correct?

WEE:  To some degree. They looked specifically at coffee drinking when you add sugar or artificial sweeteners compared to people who didn’t drink coffee: If you drink coffee and add a little sugar to it, is it still potentially beneficial or at least not harmful? And these researchers did find that moderate consumption of coffee with a bit of added sugar was still associated with a substantial reduction in mortality risk. They did not look at coffee with cream or milk added specifically. They also did not compare drinking coffee with sugar to drinking coffee without sugar head-to-head. So we can’t say whether drinking coffee with sugar is worse or better than drinking coffee without sugar because, statistically, they didn’t make that comparison. The only thing we can really conclude is that when you look at people who drink coffee and add a little bit of sugar, they still do a whole lot better than people who don’t drink coffee.

GAZETTE:  Where does this leave us, if you were to sum up where we are with the science?

WEE:  What we can be most confident about saying is that drinking moderate levels of coffee is likely not harmful. If you’re someone who drinks coffee on a regular basis, up to three cups a day, you’re probably fine. If you add a little bit of sugar, you’re probably fine. And this type of coffee drinking may even be beneficial. I find it hard, though, to recommend that people start drinking coffee when the evidence is not definitive. If you’re not a coffee drinker and you don’t particularly like drinking coffee, I wouldn’t start drinking coffee because of the potential health benefits. That’s a leap.

The harder question to answer is what to do if you’re a regular coffee drinker and like two to three teaspoons of sugar in your coffee and you’re drinking four cups a day. If we believe the data that drinking coffee with a teaspoon of sugar is potentially good for you, I don’t think adding a second teaspoon is going to make it harmful. But it’s a matter of degree, and once you get into drinking multiple cups of caramel macchiatos — that’s a different story. I would take a commonsense approach. Ask yourself, “How far off am I from that typical drinker in the study?” and then, based on that, “How likely is it that any of this applies to my behavior?”

Share this article

You might like.

Real surfing is better than channel surfing, says research focused on healthy aging. But housework is better than nothing.

Researchers discover microscopic ‘brain thesaurus’ that lets neurons derive meaning from spoken words

Symposium examines science, outlines opportunities to tackle mental health crisis

When should Harvard speak out?

Institutional Voice Working Group provides a roadmap in new report

Had a bad experience meditating? You're not alone.

Altered states of consciousness through yoga, mindfulness more common than thought and mostly beneficial, study finds — though clinicians ill-equipped to help those who struggle

College sees strong yield for students accepted to Class of 2028  

Financial aid was a critical factor, dean says

Global main menu

• Queen Mary University of London
• News stories

New study shows light-to-moderate coffee consumption is associated with health-benefits

The study by Queen Mary University of London and the Budapest Semmelweis University has shown that having up to three cups of coffee a day is associated with a protective effect on heart health. It is also associated with a reduction in the overall mortality rate and the risk of stroke. The results have recently been published in the European Journal of Preventative Cardiology.

The researchers analysed data from 468,629 UK Biobank participants, who didn’t have any record of heart disease at the start of the research period.

The participants were asked about their coffee-drinking habits and lifestyle (for example smoking and physical exercise) in a detailed questionnaire and data was also gathered on their individual cardiovascular risk factors such as high blood pressure, diabetes, and cholesterol level.

The participants were divided into three groups: non-coffee drinkers, light-to-moderate coffee-drinkers and those who consumed a significant amount of coffee a day. The researchers also used MRI scans to gain a better understanding of how coffee-drinking habits affect the anatomy and functioning of the heart over time.

Professor Steffen Petersen of the William Harvey Research Institute at Queen Mary University of London said: “The large sample size, linked health data, and detailed heart MRI scans available in the UK Biobank offered a strong base to address this research question. According to the results, light-to-moderate coffee consumption is not damaging from a cardiovascular point of view, and it could be beneficial. As far as we know, this has been the largest study to date which focused on the effect of coffee on cardiovascular health.”

Co-author Dr. Zahra Raisi-Estabragh, NIHR Clinical Lecturer at Queen Mary University of London, added: “Most of the participants drank either ground or instant coffee. The ground coffee in moderate amounts was associated with lower mortality risk – but this benefit was not found amongst the regular instant coffee drinkers. The reason behind this may relate to the different production process of the ground and instant forms as they contain different additives.”

Dr. Judit Simon, PhD student at the Semmelweis University, who led the study said: “Light-to-moderate coffee consumption was associated with a 12% lower risk of overall mortality, and with a 17% lower risk of death caused by cardiovascular diseases compared to non-coffee drinkers. In addition, from half to three cups of coffee was associated with a 21 % lower risk of stroke.”

Dr. Pál Maurovich-Horvat, the Director of the Medical Imaging Centre at the Semmelweis University, who supervised the study said: “Using the MRI scans we were able to analyse the effect of regular coffee intake on the structure and function of the heart. We found that regular light-to-moderate coffee consumption is beneficial for the health of the heart, with suggestion that it can slow down age-related cardiac changes.”

It also emerged from the study that the type of coffee also matters in relation to health benefits.

“The research also found that even decaffeinated coffee was associated with lower all-cause mortality risk which also suggests that it’s not only the caffeine which plays a role in the positive effects of coffee, but this will need further research,” said Dr. Judit Simon of Semmelweis University.

“It’s also important to highlight that even for those who were heavy coffee-drinkers, we did not find evidence of negative cardiovascular consequences,” – said Dr. Maurovich-Horvat. “However, there were no positive health benefits observed in this group - as in the group of the light-to-moderate drinkers.”  

Queen Mary’s Professor Petersen added:  “Coffee is one of the most consumed beverages in the world, however its cardiovascular effects are not well-known, and some previous studies have shown contradictory results. This latest analysis of the UK Biobank data is a valuable contribution to existing research in this field providing a comprehensive evaluation of the relationship between coffee consumption and several aspects of cardiovascular health."

Related items

For media information, contact:

Can daily coffee use increase your lifespan? Here's what the latest research says

You’ve probably heard of the many benefits of drinking coffee . There is no shortage of research studies attesting to the benefits of one (or two or three) cups of joe every day. Some of the studied benefits include reduction of risk of:

• Parkinson’s disease
• Type 2 diabetes
• Heart disease
• Prostate cancer
• Depression and suicide
• Cirrhosis of the liver
• Liver cancer

But did you know that coffee can also increase your lifespan? That’s what scientists behind a new research study announced recently.

So, what’s so special about coffee? How is it able to reduce our risk of dying from so many diseases? Let’s dive in.

Can coffee grounds be used to stop bleeding?  The answer might surprise you

More: Coffee with sugar can be good for your health and help you live longer, study suggests

What we know about coffee

Coffee is actually a complex mixture of over 1,000 different chemicals . It can pose a challenge for scientists to nail down which of these constituents provide the health benefits of coffee. In fact, coffee has had a checkered past. Some of its many chemicals have been identified as possible carcinogens – in 1991, the World Health Organization actually included coffee on a list of possible carcinogens. However, coffee was subsequently exonerated and removed from that infamous list.

Coffee is thought to be beneficial through the following mechanisms:

• Anti-inflammatory
• Reduced insulin resistance
• High amounts of antioxidants that can prevent or delay cell damage
• Lignans, which disrupt growth and spread of cancer cells
• Chlorogenic acid, which lowers blood sugar levels

What does the research show?

The newest study in the Annals of Internal Medicine analyzed coffee consumption habits of more than 170,000 people in the United Kingdom ages 37 to 73 and followed them for an average of seven years. Researchers found that those who drank between 1.5 to 3.5 cups of coffee per day were 16% to 21% less likely to die from all-cause, cancer-related and cardiovascular disease-related mortality during the study period than non-coffee drinkers.

But this is not the first study to look at the reduction in mortality from regular daily coffee use. A study published in 2015  in the journal Circulation tracked more than 200,000 participants for 30 years. Those who drank 3 to 5 cups of coffee a day were 15% less likely to die from all causes of mortality including cardiovascular disease, Parkinson’s disease and suicide. A more recent study in 2018 tracked over 500,000 participants across 10 years. Compared to non-coffee drinkers, participants who downed 6 to 7 cups daily had a 16% lower risk of early death.

In all studies, the benefit was enjoyed by those who drank both caffeinated and decaffeinated coffee – again, suggesting the benefit is from the myriad bioactive substances in coffee as opposed to caffeine.

Are you next?  More Americans than ever are being diagnosed with high blood pressure.

More: Which supplements are most likely to land you in the ER?

Association does not necessarily mean causation

The key takeaway from all these studies is that the data demonstrates an association between daily coffee consumption and a reduced risk of dying. But we should remember that a correlation between two things – in this case, coffee and decreased mortality – does not necessarily mean there’s direct causation. What we don’t really know is how much of the reduction in mortality is from the coffee itself, despite its known myriad benefits and this strong association.

There are many other so-called confounders that could influence this data. However, what I like about this new study is that researchers accounted for possible confounders by controlling for factors like smoking, presence of chronic medical problems, socioeconomic status and diet.

This new study is consistent with findings from a 2019 meta-analysis – which is one of the strongest evidence-based research studies that can be done. This meta-analysis examined 40 different studies that included 3.8 million participants. Researchers found that moderate coffee consumption (2 to 4 cups/day) was associated with reduced all-cause mortality compared to those who do not drink coffee. This benefit was observed irrespective of age, weight, alcohol or smoking use as well as the amount of caffeine present in the coffee.

But we must bear in mind that coffee-drinking study participants could have many other lifestyle factors contributing to reduced mortality such as a healthier diet or regular exercise routine. For example, researchers hypothesize that regular coffee drinkers will more likely opt for a cup of coffee versus a more sugar-heavy caffeine boost from an energy drink or soda.

The bottom line is that the new study is consistent with multiple studies showing a strong association between moderate daily coffee consumption (more than 1 cup/day) and a reduction in death from many causes. If you already drink coffee daily – caffeinated or decaffeinated – great! However, it’s no substitution for daily exercise and a healthy diet! If you get your caffeine from energy drinks or soda, consider switching to a cup of joe – but opt against adding a lot of sugar or whipped cream to your coffee or you might reduce the benefit.

TikTok’s ‘pomegranate pump’:  Does it actually work?

More: We've long been told salt is bad for you. Is it really?

Michael Daignault, MD, is a board-certified ER doctor in Los Angeles. He studied Global Health at Georgetown University and has a Medical Degree from Ben-Gurion University. He completed his residency training in emergency medicine at Lincoln Medical Center in the South Bronx. He is also a former United States Peace Corps Volunteer. Find him on Instagram  @dr.daignault

• Election 2024
• Entertainment
• Photography
• AP Buyline Personal Finance
• AP Buyline Shopping
• Press Releases
• Israel-Hamas War
• Russia-Ukraine War
• Global elections
• Asia Pacific
• Latin America
• Middle East
• Election Results
• Delegate Tracker
• AP & Elections
• Auto Racing
• 2024 Paris Olympic Games
• Movie reviews
• Book reviews
• Financial Markets
• Business Highlights
• Financial wellness
• Artificial Intelligence
• Social Media

What to know about new research on coffee and heart risks

FILE - A worker prepares a coffee drink at a shop in Overland Park, Kan., Thursday, Aug. 14, 2008. In a study published in the New England Journal of Medicine on Wednesday, March 22, 2023, healthy volunteers who were asked to drink coffee or skip it on different days showed no signs of an increase in a certain type of heart rhythm after sipping the caffeinated drinks, although they did walk more and sleep less. (AP Photo/Orlin Wagner)

• Copy Link copied

Coffee lovers — and their doctors — have long wondered whether a jolt of java can affect the heart. New research published Wednesday finds that drinking caffeinated coffee did not significantly affect one kind of heart hiccup that can feel like a skipped beat.

But it did signal a slight increase in another type of irregular heartbeat in people who drank more than one cup per day. And it found that people tend to walk more and sleep less on the days they drank coffee.

Coffee is one of the most common beverages in the world. In the U.S., two-thirds of Americans drink coffee every day, more than bottled water, tea or tap water, according to the National Coffee Association, a trade group. Coffee contains caffeine , a stimulant, which is widely regarded as safe for healthy adults at about 400 milligrams per day, or roughly the equivalent of four or five cups brewed at home.

Coffee has been associated with multiple health benefits and even a lower risk of dying, based on large studies that observed participants’ behavior. Despite research that has shown moderate coffee consumption doesn’t raise the risk of heart rhythm problems , some professional medical societies still caution against consuming caffeine.

The latest research:

THE EXPERIMENT

Researchers outfitted 100 healthy volunteers with gadgets that continuously monitored their heart function, daily steps, sleep patterns and blood sugar. The volunteers, who were mostly younger than 40, were sent daily text messages over two weeks instructing them to drink or avoid caffeinated coffee on certain days. The results were reported Wednesday in the New England Journal of Medicine.

This type of study, which directly measures the biological effects of drinking or not drinking caffeinated coffee in the same people, is rare and provides a dense array of data points, said study co-author Dr. Gregory Marcus, a cardiologist at the University of California, San Francisco, who specializes in treating heart arrhythmias.

THE FINDINGS

Researchers found that drinking caffeinated coffee did not result in more daily episodes of extra heartbeats, known as premature atrial contractions. These extra beats that begin in the heart’s upper chambers are common and typically don’t cause problems. But they have been shown to predict a potentially dangerous heart condition called atrial fibrillation.

They also found slight evidence of another kind of irregular heartbeat that comes from the lower heart chambers, called premature ventricular contractions. Such beats are also common and not usually serious, but they have been associated with a higher risk of heart failure. The researchers found more of these early beats in people on the days they drank coffee, but only in those who drank two or more cups per day.

The volunteers logged about 1,000 more steps per day on the days they drank coffee — and they slept about 36 minutes less, the study found. There was almost no difference in blood sugar levels.

One interesting result: People with genetic variants that make them break down caffeine faster experienced less of a sleep deficit, while folks with variants that lead them to metabolize caffeine more slowly lost more sleep.

WHAT IT MEANS FOR YOU

Because the study was performed in a small number of people over a short period of time, the results don’t necessarily apply to the general population, said Dr. Dave Kao, a cardiologist and health data expert at the University of Colorado School of Medicine, who was not involved in the study. However, the study is consistent with others that have found coffee is safe and it offers a rare controlled evaluation of caffeine’s effect, Kao added.

Co-author Marcus cautions that the effects of drinking coffee can vary from person to person. He said he advises his patients with heart arrhythmias to experiment on their own to see how caffeine affects them.

“They’re often delighted to get the good news that it’s OK to try coffee and drink coffee,” he said.

The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Science and Educational Media Group. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Personal Health

The Health Benefits of Coffee

Drinking coffee has been linked to a reduced risk of all kinds of ailments, including Parkinson’s disease, melanoma, prostate cancer, even suicide.

By Jane E. Brody

Americans sure love their coffee. Even last spring when the pandemic shut down New York, nearly every neighborhood shop that sold takeout coffee managed to stay open, and I was amazed at how many people ventured forth to start their stay-at-home days with a favorite store-made brew.

One elderly friend who prepandemic had traveled from Brooklyn to Manhattan by subway to buy her preferred blend of ground coffee arranged to have it delivered. “Well worth the added cost,” she told me. I use machine-brewed coffee from pods, and last summer when it seemed reasonably safe for me to shop I stocked up on a year’s supply of the blends I like. (Happily, the pods are now recyclable.)

All of us should be happy to know that whatever it took to secure that favorite cup of Joe may actually have helped to keep us healthy . The latest assessments of the health effects of coffee and caffeine, its main active ingredient, are reassuring indeed. Their consumption has been linked to a reduced risk of all kinds of ailments , including Parkinson’s disease, heart disease, Type 2 diabetes, gallstones, depression, suicide, cirrhosis, liver cancer, melanoma and prostate cancer.

In fact, in numerous studies conducted throughout the world, consuming four or five eight-ounce cups of coffee (or about 400 milligrams of caffeine) a day has been associated with reduced death rates . In a study of more than 200,000 participants followed for up to 30 years, those who drank three to five cups of coffee a day, with or without caffeine, were 15 percent less likely to die early from all causes than were people who shunned coffee. Perhaps most dramatic was a 50 percent reduction in the risk of suicide among both men and women who were moderate coffee drinkers, perhaps by boosting production of brain chemicals that have antidepressant effects.

As a report published last summer by a research team at the Harvard School of Public Health concluded, although current evidence may not warrant recommending coffee or caffeine to prevent disease, for most people drinking coffee in moderation “can be part of a healthy lifestyle.”

It wasn’t always thus. I’ve lived through decades of sporadic warnings that coffee could be a health hazard. Over the years, coffee’s been deemed a cause of conditions such as heart disease, stroke, Type 2 diabetes, pancreatic cancer, anxiety disorder, nutrient deficiencies, gastric reflux disease, migraine, insomnia, and premature death. As recently as 1991, the World Health Organization listed coffee as a possible carcinogen. In some of the now-discredited studies, smoking, not coffee drinking (the two often went hand-in-hand) was responsible for the purported hazard.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and  log into  your Times account, or  subscribe  for all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?  Log in .

Want all of The Times?  Subscribe .

Appointments at Mayo Clinic

• Nutrition and healthy eating

Does coffee offer health benefits?

While past studies hinted that coffee might have a dark side, newer research suggests that it may actually have health benefits.

Why the reversal? It's hard to look at just one aspect of diet and connect it to a health condition because so many other factors that could play a role. For example, early research on coffee didn't always take into account that heavy coffee drinkers also tended to use tobacco and be sedentary.

When newer studies adjusted for such factors, they found a possible association between coffee and decreased mortality. Coffee may offer some protection against:

• Parkinson's disease
• Type 2 diabetes
• Liver disease, including liver cancer
• Heart attack and stroke

Coffee still has potential risks, mostly due to its high caffeine content. For example, it can temporarily raise blood pressure. Women who are pregnant, trying to become pregnant or breastfeeding need to be cautious about caffeine. High intake of boiled, unfiltered coffee has been associated with mild increase in cholesterol levels.

The bottom line? Your coffee habit is probably fine and may even have some benefits. But if you have side effects from coffee, such as heartburn, nervousness or insomnia, consider cutting back.

Donald Hensrud, M.D.

There is a problem with information submitted for this request. Review/update the information highlighted below and resubmit the form.

From Mayo Clinic to your inbox

Sign up for free and stay up to date on research advancements, health tips, current health topics, and expertise on managing health. Click here for an email preview.

Error Email field is required

Error Include a valid email address

To provide you with the most relevant and helpful information, and understand which information is beneficial, we may combine your email and website usage information with other information we have about you. If you are a Mayo Clinic patient, this could include protected health information. If we combine this information with your protected health information, we will treat all of that information as protected health information and will only use or disclose that information as set forth in our notice of privacy practices. You may opt-out of email communications at any time by clicking on the unsubscribe link in the e-mail.

Thank you for subscribing!

You'll soon start receiving the latest Mayo Clinic health information you requested in your inbox.

Sorry something went wrong with your subscription

Please, try again in a couple of minutes

• Coconut water: Is it super hydrating?
• Diet soda: How much is too much?
• Lieberman HR, et al. Daily patterns of caffeine intake and the association of intake with multiple sociodemographic and lifestyle factors in U.S. adults based on the NHANES 2007­2012 surveys. Journal of the American Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics. 2019; doi:10.1016/j.jand.2018.08.152.
• Bordeaux B. Benefits and risks of caffeine and caffeinated beverages. https://www.uptodate.com/contents/search. Accessed Sept. 20, 2019.
• Grosso G, et al. Coffee, caffeine, and health outcomes: An umbrella review. Annual Review of Nutrition. 2019; doi:10.1146/annurev-nutr-071816-064941.
• O'Keefe JO, et al. Coffee for cardioprotection and longevity. Progress in Cardiovascular Diseases. 2018; doi:10.1016/j.pcad.2018.02.002.
• IARC Working Group on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risk to Humans. Vol. 116: Drinking coffee, mate, and very hot beverages. In: IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risk to Humans. International Agency for Research on Cancer; 2018. http://publications.iarc.fr/566. Accessed Sept. 25, 2019.
• Benefits of coffee. Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics. https://www.eatright.org/health/wellness/preventing-illness/benefits-of-coffee. Accessed Sept. 25, 2019.
• American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Committee Opinion No.462: Moderate caffeine consumption during Pregnancy. Obstetrics & Gynecology. 2010; doi:10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181eeb2a1. Reaffirmed 2016.
• Hensrud DD (expert opinion). Mayo Clinic. Feb. 6, 2020.
• Zhou A, et al. Long-term coffee consumption, caffeine metabolism genetics, and risk of cardiovascular disease: A prospective analysis of up to 347,077 individuals and 8368 cases. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 2019; doi:10.1093/ajcn/nqy297.
• Wikoff D, et al. Systematic review of the potential adverse effects of caffeine consumption in healthy adults, pregnant women, adolescents, and children. Food and Chemical Toxicology. 2017; doi: 10.1016/j.fct.2017.04.002.

Products and Services

• Available Health Products from Mayo Clinic Store
• A Book: Cook Smart, Eat Well
• A Book: Live Younger Longer
• A Book: Mayo Clinic on High Blood Pressure
• A Book: Mayo Clinic Family Health Book
• A Book: The Mayo Clinic Diet Bundle
• The Mayo Clinic Diet Online
• A Book: Mayo Clinic Guide to Home Remedies
• Newsletter: Mayo Clinic Health Letter — Digital Edition
• A Book: Mayo Clinic on Digestive Health
• Health foods
• Alcohol use
• Alkaline water
• Artificial sweeteners and other sugar substitutes
• Autism spectrum disorder and digestive symptoms
• Breastfeeding nutrition: Tips for moms
• Caffeine: How much is too much?
• Is caffeine dehydrating?
• Calorie calculator
• Can whole-grain foods lower blood pressure?
• Carbohydrates
• Chart of high-fiber foods
• Cholesterol: Top foods to improve your numbers
• Dietary fats
• Dietary fiber
• Prickly pear cactus
• Does soy really affect breast cancer risk?
• Don't get tricked by these 3 heart-health myths
• High-protein diets
• How to track saturated fat
• Is there a special diet for Crohn's disease?
• Monosodium glutamate (MSG)
• Nuts and your heart: Eating nuts for heart health
• Omega-3 in fish
• Omega-6 fatty acids
• Phenylalanine
• Portion control
• Taurine in energy drinks
• Underweight: Add pounds healthfully
• Daily water requirement

Mayo Clinic does not endorse companies or products. Advertising revenue supports our not-for-profit mission.

• Opportunities

Mayo Clinic Press

Check out these best-sellers and special offers on books and newsletters from Mayo Clinic Press .

• Mayo Clinic on Incontinence - Mayo Clinic Press Mayo Clinic on Incontinence
• The Essential Diabetes Book - Mayo Clinic Press The Essential Diabetes Book
• Mayo Clinic on Hearing and Balance - Mayo Clinic Press Mayo Clinic on Hearing and Balance
• FREE Mayo Clinic Diet Assessment - Mayo Clinic Press FREE Mayo Clinic Diet Assessment
• Mayo Clinic Health Letter - FREE book - Mayo Clinic Press Mayo Clinic Health Letter - FREE book
• Healthy Lifestyle
• Expert Answers
• Coffee and health What does the research say

Double your impact on fighting cancer

Make a gift before July 31 and it can go twice as far to fight cancer.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List

Consumers’ Perceptions of Coffee Health Benefits and Motives for Coffee Consumption and Purchasing

Coffee is popular worldwide and consumption is increasing, particularly in non-traditional markets. There is evidence that coffee consumption may have beneficial health effects. Consumers’ beliefs in the health benefits of coffee are unclear. The study aimed at analyzing consumers’ perceptions of coffee health benefits, consumption and purchasing motives of coffee consumers with positive perceptions of coffee health benefits, and willingness to pay for coffee with associated health claims. Data were collected through a face-to-face survey with consumers, resulting in a convenience sample of 250 questionnaires valid for data elaboration. Results were elaborated with factor analysis and logistic regression analysis. Findings revealed that a relevant minority of consumers believed that coffee could have positive health effects. The consumer with a positive perception of coffee health benefits is mostly male, young, works, is familiar with non-espresso-based coffee, consumes a limited amount of coffee (generally not for breakfast and often in social settings), and buys coffee at retail outlets. Consumers drink coffee for its energetic and therapeutic effects. Coffee consumption is still price-driven, but consumers are interested in purchasing coffee with associated health claims. There is the opportunity to improve the perception of coffee health benefits in consumers’ minds.

1. Introduction

Coffee is one of the most consumed beverages worldwide. Global coffee consumption is estimated to increase, particularly in non-traditional coffee drinking countries in Africa, Asia, and Oceania (+4.1%). Demand in traditional markets is estimated to grow by 1% in Europe and by 2.5% in North America [ 1 ]. Leading drivers for coffee market growth are innovations in out-of-home consumption, online commerce opportunities, and innovative brewed coffee beverage types [ 2 ]. Consumers are interested in coffee product quality and origin, as well as social, environmental, and economic sustainability [ 3 ].

Innovative coffee attributes related to the health properties of coffee could be a driver for coffee consumption [ 4 ]. Some researchers suggest that coffee might have the potential of a functional food thanks to its biochemical properties and the possible health benefits [ 5 , 6 ]. In particular, there is evidence that coffee consumption may have beneficial effects on non-communicable diseases (NCDs) [ 7 ]. This may contribute to the World Health Organization’s objective of reducing the relative risk of premature mortality from NCDs by 25% by 2025, by improving the modifiable risk factor of an unhealthy diet [ 8 ].

Consumers’ beliefs in the health benefits of coffee are unclear. Only 16% of U.S. consumers know about coffee’s health benefits, and 66% are prone to limiting their caffeine consumption [ 9 ]. Many European consumers are also confused about coffee’s impact on health, with 49% believing coffee has negative health effects [ 10 ]. On the other hand, consumption of green coffee-based beverages has become popular in recent years due to the belief in its beneficial antioxidant properties (e.g., chlorogenic acids, polyphenols) [ 5 , 11 , 12 ].

Coffee contributes to the daily intake of dietary antioxidants, more than tea, fruit, and vegetables [ 13 ]. A screening of the most consumed beverages for their bioactive non-nutrient contents identified instant coffee as the beverage with the highest total biophenol content [ 14 ]. Two other studies observed coffee to be the beverage with the highest total antioxidant capacity as compared to others like green and black tea and herbal infusions [ 15 , 16 ]. The biochemical composition of a cup of coffee depends on the degree of roasting, the type of bean (Arabica versus Robusta), and the coffee brewing method, including grind type [ 17 , 18 , 19 ]

There is little scientific knowledge on consumers’ attitude towards coffee health benefits. The perception of coffee’s health effects in consumers’ minds is unclear and has not been thoroughly researched. Past research studied consumer preferences and attitudes towards coffee attributes including sustainability, brands, coffee types, and motives for consumption like taste, energy, pleasure, socialization [ 20 ]. The paper aims to fill this gap in the literature and analyze the link between consumers’ coffee consumption behavior and their perception of coffee’s health benefits and risks. The research adds value to existing literature by analyzing what consumers perceive about coffee’s health effects. If coffee has positive effects on human health it would be important to educate consumers about the possible health benefits and the correct consumption of coffee. Therefore, it is important to first study the status of consumers’ perceptions about coffee’s health effects. Furthermore, this will allow for an exploration into whether there are marketing possibilities for coffee with health benefits considering the increasing consumption trend of healthy food.

In evaluating the healthiness of a cup of coffee it is important to consider that coffee drinking is a complex consumption behavior and that preferences and preparation methods are influenced by culture and tradition. To fully exploit coffee’s capability to impact on consumer food dietary lifestyle and health, there is need to better understand consumers’ coffee consumption habits, motives, and perception of coffee’s health benefits. Therefore, the objective of the research is to analyze consumers’ perception of coffee’s health benefits, consumption and purchasing motives of coffee consumers with positive perception of coffee health benefits, and willingness to pay for coffee with associated health claims.

Data was collected through a direct face-to-face survey with consumers using questionnaires with closed-ended questions. The structure of the paper is as follows. Section 2 provides a literature review of coffee consumption and purchasing motives and coffee and health, with a detailed review of the relevant literature on coffee’s effect on single health conditions. Section 3 describes data gathering and elaboration, and the data sample. Results are presented in Section 4 . This section first discusses the results regarding consumers’ characteristics and perception of health effects of coffee, followed by insights on consumers’ perception of coffee health effects and motives for coffee consumption and purchasing, and concludes with analyzing consumers’ willingness to pay a price premium for coffee with associated health claims. Finally, the paper provides a discussion and conclusions on consumers’ perceptions of coffee’s health effects, profiling consumers according to their attitudes towards health coffee benefits. Section 6 puts the topic into the broader context of consumers’ increasing interest in healthy food and eating behavior, and reflects on marketing possibilities for coffee focusing on specific health benefits.

2. Literature Review

2.1. coffee consumption motives.

The scientific knowledge on motives and preferences of coffee consumption and purchasing behavior is fragmented. Past research focused strongly on a limited number of specific issues, particularly on aspects of sustainability and fair-trade labelling of coffee. Evidence from a recent systematic review of 54 papers on coffee consumer research [ 20 ] identified the leading motives for consumers’ coffee consumption and purchasing behaviors. Results suggest that there are several leading motives for coffee consumption: functional, taste and pleasure, habit, tradition and culture, and socialization. The main limiting factors for coffee consumption are a dislike of coffee’s taste and a belief in its possible negative health effects. The functional and the pleasure motives are the two leading drivers for coffee consumption and are of similar importance across cultures.

2.2. Coffee Purchasing Motives

Key coffee attributes that impact on consumers’ purchasing decisions are sustainability (including organic and fair trade), intrinsic quality attributes (e.g., roast degree, country of origin, variety), extrinsic attributes (packaging, brands), and coffee type (e.g., the espresso type includes black espresso and macchiato , that is, with a small amount of milk; other types include American long coffee (i.e., espresso topped with hot water), cappuccino, decaffeinated coffee, filter coffee, iced coffee, and coffee powder) [ 20 ]. A recent review on coffee purchasing motives did not identify studies that focused specifically on the relation between coffee price and consumer behavior [ 20 ]. There is limited research on consumer preferences for coffee’s intrinsic qualities. Preference for different intrinsic qualities depends on expertise and sensory skills of the consumer [ 21 ]. The untrained consumer has difficulties in distinguishing quality levels of coffee compared to an expert. The role of familiarity with the product is important in the assessment of its quality [ 22 ]. There is not much evidence on the role that extrinsic attributes and marketing play in buying decisions towards coffee; nonetheless, brands and labels are considered essential for the coffee industry. Research on brands, labels and packaging mainly concerns the willingness to pay for sustainability labels and the role of packaging and labels for the communication of sustainability information [ 23 ].

2.3. Coffee and Health

Consumers’ beliefs in health benefits or risks of coffee are inconclusive. For some the health benefit (e.g., anti-migraine effect) is a driver for consumption [ 24 ], others avoid coffee consumption for medical reasons like anxiety and insomnia [ 25 ], or because of the belief that coffee is generally bad for health [ 10 ]. Coffee drinking is not considered a health-oriented behavior, even if scientific evidence indicates that coffee can be part of a healthy diet [ 26 , 27 ]. The main health concerns arise with regard to the caffeine content of coffee [ 28 ]. Consumers see coffee mostly as a stimulant and are not informed about beneficial components and suggested health benefits [ 10 ].

Roasted coffee is a mixture of over 1000 bioactive compounds, with potentially therapeutic antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, antifibrotic, and anticancer effects [ 11 , 29 ]. Key active compounds are caffeine, chlorogenic acids, diterpenes, cafestol, and kahweol [ 7 , 30 ]. Coffee is rich in vitamin B3 and magnesium [ 6 ], and brewed coffee maintains the potassium concentration of the original seeds [ 31 ]. Caffeine is the most studied coffee component.

Scientific research has studied extensively the associations between coffee and all-cause mortality, cancer, cardiovascular diseases, neurological and gastrointestinal as well as liver systems, and all effects on pregnancy, with differing results over the years.

Current research concludes that coffee drinking is safe when consumed by healthy, non-pregnant women and adult persons in moderate quantity, equivalent to three to four cups per day, providing 300 to 400 mg/d of caffeine [ 7 , 26 , 28 , 32 ]. The largest reduction in relative risk of all-cause mortality was found with a consumption of three cups per day as compared with no consumption. Results suggest an inverse relationship between coffee drinking and all-cause mortality in men and women [ 7 ]. Daily coffee drinkers reduced their risk of dying prematurely compared with non-drinkers by 7–12% [ 33 ]. There were beneficial effects of coffee on cancer and cardiovascular diseases, as well as metabolic and neurological conditions [ 26 ]. Adverse effects of coffee drinking were mainly limited to pregnancy and to women at increased risk of bone fracture. Negative effects are mainly associated with caffeine rather than any other components in coffee [ 7 , 26 ]. Table 1 provides details on the studies focused on the effects of coffee on single health conditions.

Effects of coffee on single health conditions.

The main limitation in drawing conclusions on coffee health associations is that existing evidence is observational and of lower quality. More research is needed with data from long-term randomized controlled trials [ 7 , 26 , 28 ].

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. data gathering.

Data gathering was based on a direct face-to-face survey. Data was collected using questionnaires with closed-ended questions. The first question aimed at filtering interviewees so as to collect responses only from coffee consumers (i.e., those who generally drink coffee). The questionnaire includes five sections. Section 1 was on coffee consumption habits: types of coffee drunk (e.g., espresso, long coffee, cappuccino, decaffeinated, coffee powder, iced coffee, filter coffee); number of cups of coffee per day; occasions and places of consumption; companionship during consumption; consumption of other caffeinated drinks; type of coffee preparation; and outlets of coffee purchasing. Section 2 focused on motives of coffee consumption and purchasing ( Table 2 ). Section 3 focused on the perception of health benefits of coffee. In particular, the first sub-section included questions aimed at eliciting the view of the consumers as to whether coffee consumption can bring health benefits, can reduce diseases, can be a functional beverage for human wellness, and has nutritional properties that can improve human health. These items are based on coffee health impact literature review, past research studies exploring consumers’ perception of food healthiness [ 4 , 9 , 66 , 67 , 68 , 69 , 70 , 71 ], and the European Food Safety Agency food health and nutrition claims [ 72 ]. The second sub-section asked consumers’ opinions on the effects of moderate coffee consumption on diminishing the risk of diseases and on influencing a number of physical effects based on scientific-tested studies ( Table 1 ). Then, the third sub-section asked if consumers thought that there was a gender difference in terms of coffee consumption with respect to health, and whether decaffeinated coffee had different health impact compared to caffeinated coffee. These items are based on a coffee health impact literature review. Section 2 and Section 3 asked the respondents to rate each question using a 5-point Likert scale of agreement/disagreement (1: “totally disagree” to 5: “totally agree”, with scale end values anchored to interpretations), or with other responses options (e.g., “yes”/”no”) as reported in the Table notes.

Literature references for studied items in the questionnaire.

In the fourth section respondents were asked to state their willingness to pay (WTP) for the most common type of coffee product, the coffee brick pack. Only participants that more frequently bought this type of coffee were considered in the analysis. Participants’ WTP was assessed by applying the multi price list (MPL) in a hypothetical setting method, widely adopted in experimental economics [ 73 , 74 , 75 ]. This mechanism has the great advantage of being transparent and very simple to understand for participants. The minor disadvantage is the interval response with a psychological bias toward the middle of the list [ 76 ]. Before eliciting their WTP, participants were provided with a reference price for the product type that was identified based on current retailer prices. The price premiums went from €0.10/brick to €1.50/brick, with 15 price premium options with a €0.10 difference. Section 6 gathered information on the socio-demographic profiles of the respondents.

The questionnaire was tested in trial face-to-face interviews and the items identified as unclear or not important were revised. Interviewers carried out 272 interviews. Data cleaning led to the definition of a convenience sample of 250 questionnaires for data elaboration. The places of interviews were retail outlets, coffee shops, bars, and malls. Interviews were carried out from April to July 2018. At the beginning the interviewer declared the interview was part of a university study, wore a badge with name and university affiliation, and proceeded with the interview if the respondent agreed to participate in the research. The time necessary to carry out each interview was around seven minutes. No reward or token was awarded. Data were collected with the support of the Qualtrics survey program by uploading the answers gathered during the face-to-face interviews.

3.2. Data Elaboration

Data elaboration followed different phases. First, data elaboration calculated the consumers’ level of perception of coffee health benefits. The level of perception was calculated as mean value of the first sub-section items belonging to Section 3 , that is, whether consumers agreed that coffee consumption could bring health benefits, reduce diseases, be a functional beverage for human wellness, and have nutritional properties that can improve human health. The mean values of positively versus negatively inclined consumers were cross-checked with the analysis of variance (ANOVA). The levels of perception of positively versus negatively inclined consumers were cross-analyzed with consumers’ socio-economic characteristics and coffee consumption habits, and tested using the chi-squared test.

Second, the research identified the existing latent factors in consumers’ coffee consumption and purchasing motives, with the support of two factor analyses. Two separate factor analyses were run, one for coffee consumption motives, and one for the coffee purchasing motives in order to highlight possible different habits in the consumers’ approaches to coffee. The principal components method (PCA) and Varimax rotation (Eigenvalue criterion being higher than 1) were applied.

Third, the factors were used in the logistic regression (enter method), carried out to explore the relationship between consumers’ perceptions of health benefits of coffee and their consumption and purchasing motives. The factor variables were also checked for the multicollinearity analysis, to verify the possibility that one variable is a linear function of the other. Multicollinearity has been tested through tolerance and variable inflation factors (VIFs) [ 92 ]. Omnibus tests of model coefficient were analyzed to test the level-of-fit of the model. Model variance with Nagelkerke was considered. Finally, the research calculated the WTP and cross-analyzed values with socio-economic characteristics of the consumers. Data elaboration was carried out with the support of SPSS (version 21).

3.3. Sample

Out of the 250 respondents, the majority were women, and about half had an academic degree ( Table 3 ). There was a majority of people working, and a generally low or medium family income. The age was well distributed, as 55.2% of the respondents are aged younger than or equal to the average age, that is, 40.97 years (maximum age is 85 and minimum age 18).

Sample characteristics.

* 39.1% did not respond to this question (“I do not know” or “I do not want to respond”).

4.1. Consumers Characteristics and Perception of Health Effects of Coffee

A relevant minority of consumers (25%) thought that drinking coffee could have positive effects on health ( Table 4 ). The average value of the perception on coffee health benefits of the positively inclined consumers was fairly high (3.7). The analysis of consumers’ socio-economic characteristics, coffee consumption, and purchasing habits of the positively versus the negatively inclined consumers showed interesting elements ( Table 4 ). A higher percentage of men (31%), of younger (30.4%), and of working (27.2%) consumers had a positive perception of the health effects of coffee consumption compared to female, older, and not working consumers. The level of education was not an explanatory characteristic for the perception of health effect of coffee consumption. There were more consumers that tended to drink non-espresso based coffee (36.2%), that consumed from one to two cups of coffee per day (32.5%), that never or rarely drank coffee for breakfast (34.3%), and that bought coffee in big retailer chains (27.9%) that had a positive perception of coffee health benefits. A chi-squared p -value confirmed the results. Other data support that positively inclined consumers tended to drink coffee with other people (28.5%), and that they did not to have coffee as a break (29.4%) or after lunch (28.1%).

Consumers’ perceptions of health effect of coffee consumption and consumers’ characteristics.

Note: *, **, *** Significant at p <0.10; p <0.05; p <0.01; a Based on the average value of coffee health impact perception. Negative and neutral coffee health impact (below or equal to 3); Positive coffee health impact (above 3). b “Espresso” type includes black espresso and macchiato , that is, with a small amount of milk; “Other types” include American long coffee (espresso topped with hot water), cappuccinos, decaffeinated coffee, filter coffee, iced coffee, and coffee powder. c The moka coffee pot is the most common coffee brewing technique in Italy. This results includes only the moka coffee pot and capsules as they were the most frequently ticked answers (94%). d Other sources of caffeine consumption, in addition to coffee, are: tea, energy drinks, coke, other caffeine drinks. Low/medium caffeine consumption has values of 1, 2, 3. High caffeine consumption has values of 4 and 5 in a 5-point Likert scale where 1 is “never” and 5 is “always”.

These results suggest that consumers positively inclined towards coffee health benefits are more likely to be male, young, and working, tending to appreciate non espresso-based coffee, consume in limited amounts and in social settings, and not usually consuming in the morning. They are more likely to purchase it in common outlets, probably with other food items.

Consumers are better inclined towards a limited number of benefits of coffee consumption ( Figure 1 ). In particular, almost 80% of consumers believe that drinking coffee increases blood pressure, more than half think that it decreases depression and headache, one-third that it decreases the risk of stress and anxiety, one-fourth that it decreases the risk of cardiovascular diseases, and one-fifth that it impacts on women’s capability to absorb calcium and minerals and stimulates the reduction of body weight. Consumers do not acknowledge other medically tested effects on pregnant women, diabetes, liver, cancer, neurodegenerative diseases, and pain.

Consumers’ perception of health effect of coffee consumption (%). Note: Consumers’ response options were “yes”/”no” for each item. Therefore, the figure shows that around 80% of respondents thought that drinking coffee increased blood pressure.

Moreover, 61% of consumers believe that the correct number of cups of coffee per day is between three and four. According to scientific studies, this is the recommended quantity (equivalent to 300–400 milligrams of caffeine per day) [ 7 , 26 , 32 ]. Therefore, the vast majority has an adequate knowledge of the daily quantity of coffee to be consumed. Around 35% of consumers think that between one and two cups is adequate, values lower than the threshold set by scientists, thereby showing some skepticism towards coffee impact on health. Moreover, 84% of consumers think that the effect is similar in men and women, and 80% that decaffeinated coffee has a similar impact to caffeinated coffee on human health. These results support that consumers have adequate knowledge on the quantity to be consumed, the effects on gender, and the types of coffee, fairly in line with scientific evidence [ 7 , 26 , 32 ]. There is no evident misconception of the effects of coffee on health.

4.2. Consumers’ Perception of Coffee Health Effect and Motives for Coffee Consumption and Purchasing

The two factor analyses on consumers’ coffee consumption and purchasing motives identified seven main components ( Table 5 and Table 6 ). Four components derive from the factor analysis on the initial 12 items on coffee consumption motives, and three components derive from the factor analysis on the initial 13 items on purchasing motives. The second factor analysis was tested until all identified components had satisfactory internal consistency values. This lead to delete three items. In both factor analyses items were loaded into single factors, with factor loadings above 0.585. The Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin measure of sampling adequacy and Bartlett’s test of sphericity were calculated to assess the appropriateness of the data for factor analysis. The Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin index was 0.649 in the coffee consumption motives PCA and 0.660 in the coffee purchasing motives PCA. Bartlett’s tests of sphericity were highly significant (0.000). The cumulated variance values explained by the factors were respectively 66.2 and 66.3. Elaboration results confirmed the data appropriateness. The values of the factors were calculated based on the mean of the items loading into the single factors.

Factor analysis on motives for coffee consumption and convergent validity and discriminant validity for each construct.

Note: Diagonal data (in italics) represent Fornell and Larcker’s average variance extracted (AVE). Subdiagonal represent the inter-construct correlations.

Factor analysis on motives for coffee purchasing and convergent validity and discriminant validity for each construct.

The internal consistency and convergent and discriminant validity of each component was verified ( Table 5 and Table 6 ). The internal consistency of each set of items was measured using Cronbach’s alpha and composite reliability (CR). Alpha component values were from 0.633 to 0.771, and CR values were from 0.77 to 0.88 in the first factor analysis. In the second factor analysis, alpha component values were from 0.675 to 0.836 and CR values were from 0.81 to 0.94. Values were satisfactory and acceptable [ 93 , 94 ]. The average variance extracted (AVE) provides a measure of convergent validity, and ranged from 0.504 to 0.696 in the first factor analysis and from 0.510 and 0.776 in the second factor analysis. These were satisfactory as above the 0.50 threshold [ 95 ]. To confirm discriminant validity, the square root of each construct’s AVE was calculated to ensure it was greater than its bivariate correlation with other constructs in the model. This led to adequate outcomes. The results confirm the reliability and validity of the research components.

The factors were labeled according to coffee consumption and purchasing motives associated with the statements. Coffee consumption is driven by four main factors. The most important factor is the habit and pleasure of drinking it (3.1). This connects to the organoleptic characteristics that are coffee smell and taste, family traditions and habits, and the emotions and moods created by coffee. The energetic physical and mental awakening power of coffee is as important as its role in having a break during the day and socializing at work (2.7). The fourth motive for drinking coffee is its therapeutic impact, that is, the capability of coffee to help digestion, increase blood pressure, and alleviate headaches (1.7). Coffee purchasing is driven by three main motives. The main driving element is the price, that is promotion and value for money (3.3). Another key aspect is the declared aroma, recipe, level of roasting, and intensity (3.2). The coffee sustainability (1.8) does not strongly influence consumers’ coffee purchasing. In synthesis, consumers have a hedonistic approach towards coffee, focused on its taste, smell, and family habits and culture. Their consumer behavior is also driven by utilitarian reasoning, focused on price. In addition, coffee is drunk for its relevant socializing and energetic power.

There is a statistically significant relationship between consumers’ perception of coffee health benefits and motives for coffee consumption and purchasing ( Table 7 and Table 8 ). The VIF values were between 1.020 and 1.401, and the lowest tolerance value was 0.714. Therefore, there was no multicollinearity between variables. The significant relation is between the perception that coffee can have health benefits, and the following motives of coffee experience: habit and pleasure (0.017), aroma (0.048), and price (0.058). The significant relation is in some cases an unpredicted direction. If the consumers believe in the coffee health benefits, they tend not to drink it as a habit or for pleasure or consume coffee for its aroma. Moreover, the positively inclined consumers believe price is a motive of coffee purchasing. Results are confirmed by p -values.

Logistic regression on the relationship between consumers’ perception of coffee health benefits and motives for coffee consumption and purchasing.

Dependent variable: level of coffee health benefit perception—(0) negative and neutral (average value below or equal to 3) vs. (1) positive (average value above 3). Note: *, ** significant at p < 0.10; p < 0.05. Omnibus tests: 0; VIF: between 1.020 and 1.041; Nagelkerke R-square: 0.313. The limited number of consumers with positive perceptions of coffee’s health benefits and with consumption behavior driven by therapeutic motives (one consumer) suggests not including the therapeutic component in the regression exercise. VIF: variable inflation factor.

Relationship between consumers’ perception of coffee health benefits and motives for coffee consumption and purchasing, with chi-squared results

Note: **, *** significant at p < 0.05; p < 0.01.

These results suggest that if consumers drink coffee for the pleasure of it, out of family and traditional habits, and because of the taste and coffee roasting/recipes, then they are distant from the idea that coffee may have a positive health impact. If their coffee purchasing experience is influenced by the product price, then they are sensitive to coffee’s health impact. If coffee purchasing and consumption are not driven by hedonism and traditional routine and are not emotional, then their perception is better inclined towards new features of coffee.

4.3. Consumers’ Willingness to Pay a Price Premium for Coffee Health Benefits

The vast majority of consumers (74%) is willing to pay a price premium for coffee with health benefits ( Table 9 ). Given that the average price is around €2.75/brick pack, a €1.03 average price premium is equivalent to +37% (average price is €2.78/250 g brick pack, equivalent to €11/kg) [ 96 ]. The price premium is significant. There are variations among the different socio-economic groups of consumers. The highest price premium (between €1.00 and €1.50) would be paid mostly by older (62.9%) and higher income consumers (17.5%). A higher percentage of women (70.4%) are favorable towards fairly high coffee price premiums (between €0.51 and €1.00).

Willingness to pay a price premium for coffee with associated health claims (%).

5. Discussion

The debate over coffee’s effects on the human body has gone through various stages, with recommendations aimed at promoting or avoiding coffee consumption. The history of coffee started in the 15th century [ 97 ]. Its consumption first grew in Arabic countries and then expanded to Persia, Egypt, Syria, and Turkey. It was known as “wine of Araby”, and drunk as a substitute for alcohol, which was prohibited according to the Islamic religion. In the 17th century coffee arrived in Europe (e.g., Italy, England, France, Austria). Consumers increasingly drank it in coffee houses that become competitors for pubs, with coffee becoming a substitute for beer and wine. During the 18th century it became common in North America, and then, thanks to the optimal weather, it was cultivated in South America. Brazil is currently the most significant coffee-exporting country. During its long history, coffee has been criticized for various reasons: because it was considered to stimulate critical thinking (Mecca), because it was considered Satanic (Italy), because it was considered as a toxic substance used to bring about death (unsuccessfully) (Sweden), and because it threatened beer consumption and therefore local agricultural production (Prussia) [ 97 , 98 ]. As history shows, coffee consumption and the beliefs in its nutritional properties have always been intertwined. Coffee properties perceptions have often shaped coffee consumption and purchasing habits, including preparation methods, favorite types of coffee, and places of consumption and purchasing.

The present research paper provides valuable insights on consumers’ perception over coffee health effects, and profiles coffee consumers’ characteristics based on their positive or negative attitudes towards coffee health effects. There are a number of results that highlight consumers’ socio-economic characteristics and coffee consumption habits, consumers’ motives for coffee consumption and purchasing, and consumers’ interest in coffee with associated health claims.

The present research shows that men are more positively inclined towards coffee health benefits as compared to women. Women appear more skeptical, whereas a higher percentage of men already believe that drinking coffee benefits their health. Considering women’s general strong propensity towards healthy food [ 99 ], coffee with certified health claims may lead women to have a more positive inclination towards it. Moreover, the consumer with a positive attitude towards coffee health benefits is fairly young, works, and has a habit of drinking coffee in social occasions, in limited quantity, and in various preparations, not necessarily espresso. This approach to coffee drinking is in line with the most recent coffee consumption trends. Recent studies support that there is an increasing number of people drinking coffee, with interest in gourmet coffee, new types of coffee (e.g., frozen blended coffee drinks, nitro coffee, and cold brew), out-of-home consumption, and lower appreciation for cafe moka [ 9 ]. Moreover consumers believe coffee has some effects on the human body (e.g., blood pressure, depression, headache, stress and anxiety, body weight). This suggests that there are no specific misconceptions over coffee, but consumers are still not fully aware of coffee’s nutritional potential and health impacts.

Results on the motives for coffee consumption support that the energy coffee provides is the key health effect consumers aim for. Coffee drinkers expect improved alertness and higher physical and mental performance [ 24 , 25 , 77 , 78 ]. There are motives for coffee consumption that differ among the positively and negatively inclined consumers with respect to coffee’s health benefits. The positively inclined consumer to a certain extent values coffee for its aroma, pleasure, habits, and socialization. This is a relevant difference compared to past studies that supported taste as the main motive for coffee drinking [ 25 , 77 , 78 , 79 ]. In consumers, coffee evokes feelings of pleasure and comfort during the drinking experience [ 77 , 78 , 79 ]. The wide audience of coffee consumers gives particular importance to coffee habit and family traditions that influence preferred occasions, locations, and types of coffee consumption [ 24 , 25 , 82 ]

Despite the fact that positively inclined consumers drink coffee with others to have a break, socialization is not a key motive. This approach brings a distinguishing interpretation with respect to past studies. These studies suggest that drinking coffee is a way to socialize and be part of a group [ 25 , 77 , 79 , 82 ]. In synthesis, the energizing effect is what the consumer aims for. The consumer aims for a functional drink with a clear mental- and body-stimulating function. This is the same consumer objective for soft drinks and energy drinks.

Results on the motives of coffee purchasing support that for the positively inclined consumer, price is a significant attribute. The consumer is influenced by extrinsic coffee attributes. Coffee purchasing is to a certain degree driven by aroma, coffee recipe, brand, information, and emotions, but rather by rational and economic elements. Therefore, for these consumers messages focused on health claims that give value to the money spent may be important for coffee consumption and purchasing. Past studies found that the use of texts, brands, and metaphorical images on coffee packaging moderately influenced product expectations, intrinsic quality perception, and purchase intention [ 89 ]. Brand identification is especially important in the coffeehouse market [ 87 , 88 , 89 , 90 ]. Drinking a specific coffee brand (e.g., Starbucks) represents a status symbol and way of life for consumers [ 87 , 88 ].

Sustainability is one of the most studied subjects in consumer purchasing research on coffee [ 20 ]. Present and past research results suggest that aroma, price, and promotions are more important factors as compared to sustainability [ 85 ]. Only consumers with a strong attitude towards sustainability gave more importance to the sustainability claims over hedonic attributes and were willing to pay more for sustainably produced coffee [ 84 , 86 , 100 ].

The present research on consumers’ interest in the economic investment over coffee products with health claims further highlights the importance of price in coffee purchasing. Results show that price is an important element for all consumers and that coffee is mostly purchased from large retailers. The importance of price in coffee purchasing shows that coffee is still a rather undifferentiated commodity. Consumers with positive attitudes towards coffee’s health benefits give particular importance to price. Moreover, consumers are generally willing to pay higher prices for coffee with health claims. This is suggested for both positively and negatively coffee health-oriented consumers. In particular, women and consumers with higher monetary resources are more favorable towards healthy food. This is consistent with past research results [ 101 , 102 , 103 ].

The willingness to pay for coffee with innovative attributes is confirmed by the market expansion of coffee capsules. Capsules have been successful thanks to the low cost of machines, the ease of use, the practicality of packaging, and effective marketing communication campaigns [ 96 , 104 ]. This success was achieved despite the high price, with consumers willing to pay up to five times more than coffee powder brick (around €55/kg for coffee capsules). This market phenomenon has been disruptive for the coffee market. It contributed to stopping the price competition that excessively lowered the price of the powder coffee brick, coffee quality, and the capability for investing in coffee research and development as well as innovations.

6. Conclusions

Consumer attitudes toward food products determine consumption behavior more than knowledge. Attitudes and perceptions influence dietary behavior intentions [ 105 ]. Results from the current study on coffee consumers’ consumption and purchasing habits can contribute to a better understanding of food lifestyle decisions. The integration of knowledge of nutritional qualities with knowledge of consumers’ expectations and perceived food qualities allows for addressing possible misconceptions and more effectively defining food consumption and purchasing behavior recommendations.

There is an expanding consumers’ interest for healthy food. Consumers are increasingly aware of the impact food has on body functions [ 69 , 71 , 106 ]. Coffee consumption has often been negatively criticized for its health effect. Recent studies show that coffee can have positive health effects, but consumers are still cautious on drinking coffee. The coffee image is of a drink with a health impact, but not necessarily positive, and not based on the latest science-based outcomes. Coffee is used for its energetic and therapeutic effects. Together with other energy drinks, it is increasingly used as a substitute for soft drinks. Coffee is a drink with some advantages. It is naturally low in calories if drunk “black”, and it is a drink good for socializing. Coffee chains are expanding. Soft drinks companies are increasingly interested in developing their business to include coffee shop chains [ 107 ].

The coffee market is very dynamic, and consumers are increasingly interested in artisanal coffee and small coffee breweries. Drinking coffee is already acknowledged as a pleasure. The aspects of aroma, taste, smell, and occasions of consumption are still crucial. However, there is space to improve perceptions of scientifically-based health benefits. To increase awareness and improve knowledge among consumers, coffee marketing strategies could focus more on health benefits and nutritional values of coffee [ 4 , 66 , 108 ] in addition to the other positive characteristics consumers already associate with coffee. As a result, coffee consumption could be marketed as being pleasant and healthy at the same time.

There are already examples for market trends and innovations focusing on the functional and health aspects of coffee. Ready-to-drink (RTD) coffee (packaged liquid coffee designed to be consumed when opened without any additional steps) is interpreted as a clean functional beverage category and a healthier alternative to soft drinks. The RTD coffee segment is expected to grow due to global trends in the coffee sector: worldwide coffee culture growth, active on-the-go-lifestyle, and investments by major players [ 109 ]. Some coffee brands already use health focused strategies for coffee marketing (RTD and ground coffee). RTD cold brew coffee is marketed as a sugar and fat-free alternative to traditional energy drinks [ 110 ] or as a probiotic cold brewed coffee supporting digestive and immune health [ 111 ]. There are examples for a prebiotic fiber-enriched ground coffees with digestive health benefits [ 112 ] and for antioxidant-enriched ground coffees [ 113 ].

The discussion whether coffee can be claimed as an actual functional food is ongoing and there is not enough long-term evidence that coffee can prevent disease. Therefore coffee consumption for health reasons requires further scientific evidence before being recommended and promoted [ 7 , 28 , 114 ].

Limitations and Future Research

There are some study limitations. Results come from a convenience sample, focused on Italian consumers. Future studies may aim for samples with statistical representativeness and compare perceptions of consumers living in different countries. Coffee consumption behavior is related to various countries’ consumption traditions and habits, and cross-country analysis may bring a more comprehensive perspective. Furthermore, considering the fast development in coffee consumption habits, future studies may focus the analysis on consumers that specifically favor coffee consumption out-of-home or specific coffee types preparations, such as filter, capsules, and powder. Future studies may also test consumers’ WTP for different combinations of coffees with associated health claims such as disease reduction and health-promoting effects. Finally, future studies may explore coffee consumption motives within the dietary lifestyle, so as to provide sound information on the food behavior of coffee consumers for nutritionists and doctors.

Author Contributions

The research reported in this paper is the result of the cooperation between authors. The specific author contributions are: Conceptualization, A.S.; Methodology, A.S.; Software, A.S.; Validation, A.S. and B.R.; Formal Analysis, A.S.; Data Curation, A.S.; Writing—Original Draft Preparation, Review & Editing, B.R. for Section 1 and Section 2 , A.S. for Section 3 , Section 4 , Section 5 and Section 6 ; Supervision, A.S.

This research received no external funding.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

A 3M plant near the Belgian port city of Antwerp was the subject of a 2022 legal settlement over release of "forever chemicals" that degrade only very slowly in the environment and the human body. 3M was one of the main companies that developed and manufactured the chemicals that are now pervasive worldwide.

'They're Everywhere': Common Foods Linked to Elevated Levels of PFAS in Body

Results from a new study "definitely point toward the need for environmental stewardship, and keeping pfas out of the environment and food chain," a co-author said..

Common foods including white rice and eggs are linked to higher levels of " forever chemicals " in the body, new research from scientists at the Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth shows.

The researchers also found elevated levels of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances ( PFAS ) in people who consumed coffee, red meat, and seafood, based on plasma and breast milk samples of 3,000 pregnant people. The findings, published in Science of the Total Environment , add to the mounting evidence of the accumulation of PFAS, which were developed by chemical companies in the mid-20th century, in the natural environment and the body.

"The results definitely point toward the need for environmental stewardship, and keeping PFAS out of the environment and food chain," Megan Romano, a Dartmouth epidemiologist and co-author of the paper, told The Guardian . “Now we're in a situation where they're everywhere and are going to stick around even if we do aggressive remediation."

PFAS are a class of 16,000 compounds linked to a wide range of adverse health conditions including cancer, with research ongoing. The chemicals' development and production went effectively unregulated for decades, but has received significant attention in recent years, with alarming studies coming out regularly.

3M, a consumer goods multinational that developed and manufactured many PFAS compounds, knew that they were accumulating dangerously in the blood of the general public, but concealed it, according to a recent investigation co-published by ProPublica and The New Yorker ; the article was written by journalist Sharon Lerner, who previously reported on PFAS-related deception by 3M and Dupont for The Intercept .

Such corporations may yet face unprecedented legal action. As Steven Shapin wrote in the London Review of Books on Thursday, "It is thought that the monetary scale of American lawsuits against companies responsible for PFAS water pollution may eventually dwarf those involving asbestos and tobacco, considering that people are in a position to decide whether or not to smoke cigarettes but everybody has to drink water."

While much of the concern about PFAS has rightly centered on drinking water—in which they're found worldwide —that is just one of the ways the chemicals can get into the human body. A new study this week showed they can be absorbed through the skin.

Food intake is also a primary means of accumulation in the body, and the new Dartmouth study indicates which foods are the worst. The study doesn't explore why, though Romano discussed some possible reasons with The Guardian . Rice is likely contaminated because of PFAS in soil or agricultural water, while coffee could have PFAS because of various factors including filters. Animal products can be contaminated if, among other reasons, the ground that the animals lived off was treated with PFAS-fouled toxic sludge, which is used by farmers as a cheap alternative to fertilizer.

Even consumption of backyard chicken eggs lead to elevated levels of PFAS, and that could be because of the table scraps the chickens are often fed, Romano said.

Join Us: News for people demanding a better world

• Forever Chemicals Are Everywhere. Here's How to Limit Your ... ›

Drinking coffee may be linked to lower risk of death, even with a little sugar

Contrary to popular myth, forgoing coffee isn’t likely to improve your health. The opposite might be true: Years of research suggests that drinking coffee is linked with a lower risk of death.

The latest addition to that body of research was published Monday in the Annals of Internal Medicine. The study looked at around 120,000 people in the U.K. who regularly drank unsweetened or sugar-sweetened coffee over seven years. The findings suggested that those who drank 1.5 to 3.5 cups a day had a lower risk of death during those seven years than non-coffee drinkers, even if they added a teaspoon of real sugar — not artificial sweetener — to every cup.

On the whole, people who drank unsweetened coffee were 16 percent to 21 percent less likely to die during the study period than people who didn’t drink coffee at all, the results showed.

But the researchers didn't look at causality, so they couldn't say whether coffee is directly responsible for the outcome.

"Biologically, it is plausible that coffee could actually confer some direct health benefits," said Dr. Christina Wee, an associate professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School. Wee edited the study and wrote an accompanying editorial about the results.

But she added: "We can’t say for sure that it’s the coffee drinking per se that leads to the lower mortality risk."

It’s possible, for example, that people who regularly drink coffee are wealthier and therefore more likely to have better health care or more time for leisure or fitness than non-coffee drinkers, which could lower their mortality risk.

A spoonful of sugar doesn't negate coffee's benefits

The participants in the new study were around 56 years old, on average, and they were recruited from 2006 to 2010. The researchers accounted for factors like diet, smoking, socioeconomic status, pre-existing health problems and exposure to air pollution.

The results suggested that people who drank sugar-sweetened coffee were 29 percent to 31 percent less likely to die than non-coffee drinkers — a slightly higher risk reduction than was observed among people who drank unsweetened coffee, though in the same range.

The study didn’t find conclusive results for people who drank coffee with artificial sweeteners; neither did it look specifically at people who added milk or cream.

Wee said the results do not suggest it's healthier to add sugar to your coffee than to drink it plain.

"My biggest caution is to not equate this to 'Oh, I can drink any kind of coffee with loads of calories,' because there are other studies that clearly show that adding sugar and high levels of empty calories is not good for you. So just do things in moderation," she said.

"What this study is really saying is that adding a little bit of sugar doesn’t take away all the potential health benefits that coffee might have," Wee said.

'Not harmful, maybe a little bit beneficial'

An association between coffee drinking and a lower risk of death is well-established: A 2019 analysis found that drinking two to four cups a day lowered a person's risk of death relative to people who didn't consume coffee. Another analysis suggested that consuming three to four daily cups lowered the risk of dying from heart disease compared to no coffee at all. The same research found that coffee drinking was associated with a decreased risk of Parkinson’s disease, chronic kidney disease, Type 2 diabetes and certain cancers.

But experts haven't determined why coffee is associated with those benefits.

Some research has suggested that the antioxidants in coffee might reduce inflammation and lower the risk of disease, but the connection is far from certain.

And other research has linked coffee to some negative health effects. A 2015 review found that drinking one to four cups a day was associated with an increased risk of blood clots, but the opposite was true among people who drank five or more cups a day. A review last year , meanwhile, found that boiled coffee was correlated with increased levels of "bad" cholesterol, while filtered coffee didn’t have the same effect. Caffeine can also raise blood pressure in the short term .

The recent research is far from definitive, Wee said. She noted, too, that some lifestyle factors associated with coffee drinking can be unhealthy: "You work long hours and you need to stay up all the time, or you’re stressed and you have deadlines."

Because of that, Wee said, "I am more confident that we can say that coffee drinking is likely not harmful, maybe a little bit beneficial."

"If you don’t enjoy coffee, I wouldn’t force yourself to like it," she added.

Aria Bendix is the breaking health reporter for NBC News Digital.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings
• My Bibliography
• Collections
• Citation manager

Save citation to file

Email citation, add to collections.

• Create a new collection
• Add to an existing collection

Add to My Bibliography

Your saved search, create a file for external citation management software, your rss feed.

• Search in PubMed
• Search in NLM Catalog
• Add to Search

Coffee and health: a review of recent human research

Affiliation.

• 1 Linus Pauling Institute, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97331, USA. [email protected]
• PMID: 16507475
• DOI: 10.1080/10408390500400009

Coffee is a complex mixture of chemicals that provides significant amounts of chlorogenic acid and caffeine. Unfiltered coffee is a significant source of cafestol and kahweol, which are diterpenes that have been implicated in the cholesterol-raising effects of coffee. The results of epidemiological research suggest that coffee consumption may help prevent several chronic diseases, including type 2 diabetes mellitus, Parkinson's disease and liver disease (cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma). Most prospective cohort studies have not found coffee consumption to be associated with significantly increased cardiovascular disease risk. However, coffee consumption is associated with increases in several cardiovascular disease risk factors, including blood pressure and plasma homocysteine. At present, there is little evidence that coffee consumption increases the risk of cancer. For adults consuming moderate amounts of coffee (3-4 cups/d providing 300-400 mg/d of caffeine), there is little evidence of health risks and some evidence of health benefits. However, some groups, including people with hypertension, children, adolescents, and the elderly, may be more vulnerable to the adverse effects of caffeine. In addition, currently available evidence suggests that it may be prudent for pregnant women to limit coffee consumption to 3 cups/d providing no more than 300 mg/d of caffeine to exclude any increased probability of spontaneous abortion or impaired fetal growth.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

• Coffee consumption and disease correlations. Gökcen BB, Şanlier N. Gökcen BB, et al. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2019;59(2):336-348. doi: 10.1080/10408398.2017.1369391. Epub 2017 Sep 29. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2019. PMID: 28853910 Review.
• The Impact of Coffee on Health. Nieber K. Nieber K. Planta Med. 2017 Nov;83(16):1256-1263. doi: 10.1055/s-0043-115007. Epub 2017 Jul 4. Planta Med. 2017. PMID: 28675917 Review.
• Coffee: biochemistry and potential impact on health. Ludwig IA, Clifford MN, Lean ME, Ashihara H, Crozier A. Ludwig IA, et al. Food Funct. 2014 Aug;5(8):1695-717. doi: 10.1039/c4fo00042k. Food Funct. 2014. PMID: 24671262 Review.
• Coffee and liver diseases. Muriel P, Arauz J. Muriel P, et al. Fitoterapia. 2010 Jul;81(5):297-305. doi: 10.1016/j.fitote.2009.10.003. Epub 2009 Oct 13. Fitoterapia. 2010. PMID: 19825397 Review.
• Coffee consumption and human health--beneficial or detrimental?--Mechanisms for effects of coffee consumption on different risk factors for cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes mellitus. Ranheim T, Halvorsen B. Ranheim T, et al. Mol Nutr Food Res. 2005 Mar;49(3):274-84. doi: 10.1002/mnfr.200400109. Mol Nutr Food Res. 2005. PMID: 15704241 Review.
• Polyphenols vs. Caffeine in Coffee from Franchise Coffee Shops: Which Serving of Coffee Provides the Optimal Amount of This Compounds to the Body. Wierzejska RE, Gielecińska I, Hallmann E, Wojda B. Wierzejska RE, et al. Molecules. 2024 May 9;29(10):2231. doi: 10.3390/molecules29102231. Molecules. 2024. PMID: 38792093 Free PMC article.
• Coffee consumption might be associated with lower potential risk and severity of metabolic syndrome: national health and nutrition examination survey 2003-2018. Zhao H, Wang S, Han Y, Yao M, Zhang Y, Zeng X. Zhao H, et al. Eur J Nutr. 2024 May 4. doi: 10.1007/s00394-024-03367-1. Online ahead of print. Eur J Nutr. 2024. PMID: 38703226
• Beverage consumption in patients with metabolic syndrome and its association with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease: a cross-sectional study. Kositamongkol C, Ngaohirunpat S, Samchusri S, Chaisathaphol T, Srivanichakorn W, Washirasaksiri C, Auesomwang C, Sitasuwan T, Tinmanee R, Sayabovorn N, Charatcharoenwitthaya P, Phisalprapa P. Kositamongkol C, et al. Front Nutr. 2024 Jan 22;11:1257969. doi: 10.3389/fnut.2024.1257969. eCollection 2024. Front Nutr. 2024. PMID: 38318474 Free PMC article.
• Nine dietary habits and risk of colorectal cancer: a Mendelian randomization study. He M, Huan L, Wang X, Fan Y, Huang J. He M, et al. BMC Med Genomics. 2024 Jan 17;17(1):21. doi: 10.1186/s12920-023-01782-7. BMC Med Genomics. 2024. PMID: 38233852 Free PMC article.
• Parkinson's disease updates: Addressing the pathophysiology, risk factors, genetics, diagnosis, along with the medical and surgical treatment. Prajjwal P, Flores Sanga HS, Acharya K, Tango T, John J, Rodriguez RSC, Dheyaa Marsool Marsool M, Sulaimanov M, Ahmed A, Hussin OA. Prajjwal P, et al. Ann Med Surg (Lond). 2023 Aug 8;85(10):4887-4902. doi: 10.1097/MS9.0000000000001142. eCollection 2023 Oct. Ann Med Surg (Lond). 2023. PMID: 37811009 Free PMC article. Review.

Publication types

• Search in MeSH

Related information

• Cited in Books
• PubChem Compound
• PubChem Compound (MeSH Keyword)
• PubChem Substance

LinkOut - more resources

Full text sources.

• Taylor & Francis

Other Literature Sources

• The Lens - Patent Citations

• Citation Manager

NCBI Literature Resources

MeSH PMC Bookshelf Disclaimer

The PubMed wordmark and PubMed logo are registered trademarks of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Unauthorized use of these marks is strictly prohibited.

• Varieties Catalog
• Become a Member

Ensure the supply quality climate resilience future of coffee

Agricultural innovation.

We drive research to preserve origin diversity and secure future supply.

Farmers to Roasters

Our inclusive approach ensures innovations deliver shared value for farmers, origins, and industry.

A Sustainable Sector

Our members are committed to the long term sustainability of the coffee, its people and communities.

Our challenges

Innovation solves critical challenges and creates new and unimagined opportunities.

60% of global coffee supply comes from smallholder farmers. 1

Farmers who have access to tools, technology, and knowledge are more likely to be profitable and to stick with farming.

5 countries produce 74% of the world’s coffee 2

The world’s coffee supply is consolidating. Thriving origin diversity brings the economic benefits of coffee to farmers in more countries and gives roasters choices.

Coffee faces a $452 million/year innovation crisis 3

To prevent supply instability, consolidation, and loss we need $452 million more per year to be invested in coffee agricultural R&D.

We are facing supply shortages of millions of bags 4 as soon as 2030 5

Estimated demand for coffee is steadily increasing while climate change puts more pressure on landscapes. More productive varieties can help us meet the challenge.

We create the foundation for a vibrant and sustainable coffee sector.

Tools and resources

We develop global tools and resources to support farmers, technicians, breeders, roasters, and policymakers to drive impact at scale for millions of farmers.

Sensory Lexicon

Coffee varieties catalog, strategy 2021–2025, latest news, the future of robusta breeding: an update, world coffee research releases 2023 annual report, evaluating cup quality in global arabica variety trial reveals complex interaction between genetics and environment, wcr welcomes josué arevalo alvarenga, research technician for latin america, enhancing access to quality planting material, economic opportunities for coffee producers in uganda, world coffee research ceo jennifer “vern” long named 2024 notable leader in sustainability, first seedlings from the innovea network transplanted for field evaluation, world coffee research releases new report on seed quality assurance, underscores opportunities to strengthen sector, wcr welcomes dr. verônica belchior, research scientist for coffee quality evaluation, where to find us at the specialty coffee association expo 2024 in chicago, new, more complete arabica genome to allow for effective variety development, forging the future of coffee—together.

Siles, P., Cerdán, C., & Staver, C. (2022). Smallholder Coffee in the Global Economy—A framework to explore transformation alternatives of traditional agroforestry for greater economic, ecological, and livelihood viability. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 6. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2022.808207.

The world's top five producers of coffee are Brazil, Vietnam, Colombia, Indonesia, and Ethiopia. This percentage was calculated using the total coffee production volume generated by the top five producing countries over the total global production volume for both arabica and robusta between 2019–2022. Source: International Coffee Organization trade statistics tables, https://www.ico.org/trade_statistics.asp.

Maredia, M. and Martínez, J. M. (2023). Coffee’s innovation crisis: Determining the size of the agricultural R&D investment gap for coffee amid growing consumer demand and the climate crisis. World Coffee Research. https://worldcoffeeresearch.org/resources/coffees-innovation-crisis

"Bags" refers to 60-kg bags.

Range calculated using historical coffee production data (1980-2020) and production projections under future demand scenarios and climate change scenarios. Source: Maredia, M. and Martínez, J. M. (2023). Coffee’s innovation crisis: Determining the size of the agricultural R&D investment gap for coffee amid growing consumer demand and the climate crisis. World Coffee Research. https://worldcoffeeresearch.org/resources/coffees-innovation-crisis

Hello There. You are using an outdated browser. Please upgrade your browser to improve your experience.

Study: Price Volatility Affects Mental Health of Smallholder Coffee Farmers

Nick Brown | July 8, 2024

International robusta coffee prices. The international robusta coffee price is shown in US$/kg for the period 2004–2020. This is based on data from the International Coffee Organization. Image shared via CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license . See the original here .

A recent public health study found that income uncertainty, particularly in the context of volatile coffee prices, negatively impacts the mental health of smallholder coffee farmers .

After studying small-scale coffee farmers in Vietnam, the world’s second-largest coffee producing country , the researchers suggested the results may be applicable to populations in other low- and middle-income countries that rely significantly on commodity-price-driven agricultural exports.

“Our results suggest that not only poverty, but also the risk of poverty caused by fluctuating prices has a significant additional negative effect on the mental well-being of farmers in low-income countries,” Finn Tarp, a professor at the University of Copenhagen and coordinator of the Development Economics Research Group (DERG) said in an announcement of the publication.

Tarp and Saurabh Singhal of Lancaster University (UK) co-authored the study, which was recently published in the American Journal of Agricultural Economics , a publication of the Agricultural and Applied Economics Association .

“ Coffee flowers ” by  Okkisafire  is licensed under  CC BY-SA 4.0 .

Commodity coffee prices have experienced extreme volatility since the collapse of an internationally established quota system more than three decades ago. Smallholder coffee farmers are particularly vulnerable to price volatility , according to numerous studies .

The researchers behind the new study found that price volatility correlated with a 12.3% to 15% increase in depressive symptoms among Vietnamese coffee farmers.

“The perennial nature of coffee trees, which have a lifespan of over 50 years, means that farmers cannot quickly switch to other crops in response to price fluctuations,” the authors wrote. “This inflexibility leaves them exposed to the volatile international commodity markets.”

Smallholder coffee farmers experiencing price volatility were found to have more pessimistic expectations of future economic well-being, increased cognitive load, higher alcohol consumption and reduced social capital.

According to the authors, the study’s findings align with broader literature on economic uncertainty, showing that income instability can lead to adverse mental health outcomes. The authors urged government intervention regarding coffee prices in order to attempt to improve mental health outcomes and public health among farmers.

Said Tarp, “Governments should consider introducing policies that stabilize farmers’ incomes, for example by offering price insurance or increasing access to market-based risk management.”

Find the full study here .

Comments? Questions? News to share? Contact DCN’s editors here . 

Related Posts

Nick Brown Nick Brown is the editor of Daily Coffee News by Roast Magazine.

• Market News
• Farmer Issues
• Sustainability

Tags: coffee prices , Development Economics Research Group (DERG) , Finn Tarp , Lancaster University , mental health , prices , public health , research , Saurabh Singhal , science , smallholder farmers , social sustainability , University of Copenhagen

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Changes in the economics of coffee production between 2008 and 2019: a tale of two central american countries.

• 1 Observatorio Económico Sostenible, Universidad del Valle de Guatemala, Guatemala City, Guatemala
• 2 Centro Agronómico Tropical de Investigación y Enseñanza (CATIE), Turrialba, Costa Rica
• 3 Universidad de la Amazonia, Florencia, Caquetá, Colombia
• 4 Natural Resources Institute, University of Greenwich, Kent, United Kingdom

Increasing costs of coffee production relative to coffee prices has led to concern across the industry of lack of profitability of coffee production especially for smallholders who comprise a large majority of producers. This study compares coffee production costs and income over a decadal interval of 2008 versus 2019 for coffee farmers in some of the main coffee growing regions of Costa Rica and Guatemala. Costs and income were collected by farmer recall using a standard questionnaire with trained research surveyors. Net income as assessed by EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization) increased by about 30% in Costa Rica, but declined to a third of its 2008 level in Guatemala. Agronomic costs of production per hectare increased by 31% in Costa Rica and 62% in Guatemala, mostly due to increased labor costs (higher daily wage rates), while fertilizer usage increased but unit costs remained stable. Gross income was stable in Guatemala but increased in Costa Rica due to receiving significantly higher prices for their coffee in 2019 compared to 2008, while in Guatemala prices declined. Nevertheless, the response was not uniform between farms in Costa Rica while high and medium productivity groupings of farms had higher EBITDA, low and very low productivity farms experienced a decline similar to Guatemala. The difference in performance of farm groups in Costa Rica was due to a decline in production per hectare of the lower productivity group; while the difference between Guatemala and Costa Rica was firstly due to price differences, and secondarily due to lower productivity of some farm groups. The investment of Costa Rican farmers was undoubtedly supported by the substantially increased price received by farmers (as compared to Guatemala), reflected in the increase in export price of coffee from Costa Rica relative to Guatemala. This shows the importance of farmers receiving higher prices for their produce in enabling them to cover increasing production costs, invest in increasing productivity and maintain profitability.

1 Introduction

Coffee production is estimated to provide livelihoods for between 12.5 to 25 million farmers and their families ( Enveritas, 2019 ; ICO, 2019 ), of which about 95% are smallholders with farms less than 5 hectares ( Enveritas, 2019 ). Although global coffee production has increased by 65% since 1990, prices continue to be highly volatile. Since the end of the International Coffee Agreement and market liberalization at the beginning of the 1990s coffee prices crashed in the early 2000s recovered toward the end of that decade and then again between 2009 and 2019 declined by 30% (ICO2019). In 2018 prices dropped below US$1.00 per pound for the first time since the price crash of the early 2000s. Coffee producers were struggling to cover their operating costs during the period of 2016–2019, due to rising input, compliance and transaction costs ( ICO, 2019 ). Even for the 2015/16 harvest, before prices declined further, between 25 and 50% of farmers across Colombia, Honduras and Guatemala were experiencing negative profits, being unable to cover their full economic costs of production. Rising costs and falling prices have resulted in up to half of coffee producing smallholders living below the extreme poverty line in some countries (ICO 2020). While coffee prices have recovered somewhat over the 2020–2022 period, price volatility is inherent and systemic in coffee production, with farmers facing prices below production costs a few years in every decade.

Over longer time frames (1970–2019) there is no significant trend of prices increasing nor decreasing ( ICO, 2019 ), but costs of production have increased sharply since 2010 thus reducing profits for producers ( Sachs et al., 2019 ). Cordes et al. (2021) found that average coffee income was below a living income for all top ten coffee producing countries except Brazil. The main drivers of poor economic performance appeared to vary between countries, while in Colombia and Guatemala high production costs were important (and in general for Latin America), in Uganda low farmgate prices and small farm size, and Ethiopia low coffee productivity were key factors.

Central America is one of the main coffee growing regions of the world producing approximately 10% of global production but specializing in high quality arabica coffees supporting about 290,000 farmers and is a major source of income and employment in rural areas ( CEPAL, 2002 ). Guatemala is the eighth largest coffee producer globally and fourth largest producer of Arabica coffee. Both Guatemala and Costa Rica have a reputation for producing very high quality and specialty coffees. The countries share some macro variables that make the comparative analysis relevant, such as inflation rates, tax burden, being in the same region, and open market economies. Moreover, both countries are exposed to changes in commodity and input prices and are dependent on importing fertilizers and other inputs and exporting their production. Agroclimatic conditions for production are similar in the two countries and coffee production systems are similar derived from traditional shaded agroforestry systems with varying degrees of intensification, but not high input, irrigated monocultures as in Vietnam or parts of Brazil. Nevertheless, socioeconomic conditions in the two countries are distinct with Guatemala having one of the highest poverty and inequality rates in Latin America ( The World Bank, 2024a ), the highest poverty level in Central America while Costa Rica has higher levels of overall income, a relatively equitable distribution of wealth and high levels of education and social welfare ( The World Bank, 2024b ). Thus, the two countries have similar conditions for coffee production but within distinct economic and social conditions.

Since the dissolution of the International Coffee Agreement in 1989 that buffered price fluctuations, there have been price crashes between 1991–1993, 2000–2003 ( Bacon, 2008 ), and substantial fluctuations subsequently. The fall in coffee prices between 2000 and 2003 led to a 25% reduction in coffee production across Central America and the loss of half a million jobs ( Castro et al., 2004 ). Addressing the financial instability among coffee producers remains an on-going challenge with many different industry and development programs attempting to address the issue. There are various initiatives between industry and development organizations seeking to determine what is a living income for coffee farmers such as the IDH (2020) Task Force for a Living Income report, while Fairtrade International ( https://www.fairtrade.net/issue/living-income ) have established a Living Income Reference Price for some countries. Most recently the International Coffee Organization with United Nations Industrial Development Organization launched a report on the sustainability and resilience of global coffee value chains and proposed the establishment of a Global Coffee Fund address the financial instability of the sector ( ICO and UNIDO, 2024 ).

Changes in costs of production summarized by Sachs et al. (2019) indicate considerable differences between countries, perhaps due to different levels of investment in labor compared to inputs. Is it stated that both increases in labor costs and inputs costs were drivers of reduced profitability. It might be expected that higher wage economies such as Costa Rica would be at a disadvantage to lower wage economies such as Guatemala. Nevertheless, clear data on changes in production costs over time appear to be lacking. Overall, past studies lack comparable data at farm level across time to ascertain the main causes and responses to the perceived decline in profitability of coffee production in countries whose primary producers are smallholders.

In this study we aim to determine the changes in the on-farm economics of coffee production over a decadal period between 2008 and 2019 under the distinct socioeconomic conditions of Guatemala and Costa Rica to understand the factors that may be contributing to falling profitability or enabling farmers to maintain their incomes.

2 Methods and data

2.1 methods.

The study applied the Committee for Sustainability Assessment (COSA) method for multi-criteria assessment of sustainability in coffee ( Giovannucci and Potts, 2008 ) to characterize farms and evaluate coffee production costs and income from coffee on farms across Guatemala and Costa Rica. This is a method that can be implemented in between half to one day per farm; while this limits the depth of evaluation it also permits larger sample sizes to be undertaken.

Two surveys were undertaken, one in 2008/09, the other in 2019/20. The 2008/09 survey was conducted across all the main coffee growing regions in each country, was structured to compare farms with sustainability certification and those without and included a total of 237 farms in Costa Rica and 273 farms in Guatemala ( Soto et al., 2011 ). Certified farms were selected from lists provided by certification bodies and traders in-country, and non-certified farms were identified from the same communities with similar characteristics.

The 2019/20 survey selected farms from the 2008/09 data-base but focused on three of the main coffee growing regions in each country covering a range of agro-environmental conditions, as described in Haggar et al. (2021) . In Costa Rica, farms were located in: (i) Turrialba-Orosi (low-medium altitude, high rainfall, standard commercial grade coffee); (ii) Valle Occidental (mid-high altitude, seasonal climate with high quality coffee), and (iii) Los Santos Tarrazú (high altitude, seasonal climate, and coffee quality that is considered the best in the country). In Guatemala, farms were located in: West (departments of Quetzaltenango, Retalhuleu, and San Marcos) low-high altitude, high rainfall, commercial grade coffee; Mid (department of Solola) high altitude, medium rainfall, high quality coffee; and East (departments of Guatemala, Sacatepequez and Chimaltenango) high altitude, low rainfall, and very high coffee quality. A total of 180 farms (90 per country, 30 per region) were initially selected from a list used in a previous study in 2008/09. Where these farms were not available or interested in participating they were replaced by nearby farms of similar characteristics (56 in total). Ethical standards of prior consent and confidentiality were followed as appropriate for socioeconomic surveys and farmers were at complete liberty to decline to participate (as a few did).

Two surveyors experienced in farm verification processes conducted the farmer questionnaires, but different surveyors were used for the two evaluation periods. Surveyors received training, conducted trial interviews, and interview responses were reviewed periodically to ensure quality with feedback provided. All variables were quality checked in order to identify values out of acceptable or standardized ranges. All the values identified as outliers were reviewed or corrected with the producer in a second visit or phone call.

In both surveys we used the COSA questionnaires to register all coffee agronomic practices and estimate the costs of those practices during the previous year, (2008 and 2019) as well as the amount of coffee produced, harvest costs and value of sales for the harvest prior to and after the period evaluated for its agronomic costs (i.e., 2007/08 and 2008/09, and 2018/19 and 2019/20 harvests). The actual timing of the survey varied as the agronomic year and start and end of harvest varied across the different regions with some completing harvest in November and others until April. The COSA format is designed to facilitate the reconstruction of costs from farmer recall by working through the practices for the farming year; this is supported by the registers of activities and use of records farmers are required to maintain when they are certified, but are less common for non-certified farmers.

To make the monetary values of both surveys comparable, the values from the 2008/09 survey were multiplied by 1.1874, which reflects the change in the composite Consumer Price Index between 2008 and 2019. Moreover, for each survey the data for production and price was averaged between two adjoining harvests given the known tendency for biennial production, i.e., a good year is generally followed by a poorer year in terms of production per hectare. This avoids excessive fluctuations. The averages are from the 2007/08 and 2008/09, and 2018/19 and 2019/20 harvests, which are referred to 2008 and 2019 for simplicity. Price and production of cherry coffee was used for all farms. When a farm sold coffee in another presentation, standard conversions were used to transform back to cherry.

2.2 Data analysis

To study a coffee farm’s profits in a given year consider that

where Π is profits per hectare, T I is total income per hectare and T C is total costs per hectare. In this study EBIDTA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization) is used as a proxy for profits. Expressing the equation with a normalization by plantation size facilitates comparability between farms, and allows for a simple conversion to totals profits, income and cost by multiplying by area. Moreover, consider that

where P is the average price and Q the average production sold per hectare for the harvest for which the production costs were evaluated, and the previous harvest. Costs can be analyzed in different ways to obtain a better picture of underlying dynamics. An initial and relatively simple way is to decompose costs among input costs and labor costs, with

where I C are input costs per hectare and LC are labor costs per hectare. For input costs, the materials (e.g., fertilizer, pesticides, etc.) and equipment (e.g., machetes, tractors, etc.) for all practices were registered noting the volume or number of the product and the cost per unit. For labor costs, the number of person-days and cost per day were registered for all activities. All person-days were considered as a cost, regardless if they generated a monetary payment or if they were family work. Another way to decompose costs is between activities, with

where ∑ A g C contains the costs per hectare of all agronomic activities (i.e., establishment, pruning, manual weed control, conservation, shade management, fertilization, and pesticides), H C are harvesting costs per hectare, and F C are fixed costs per hectare. These costs contain input and labor costs, with all person-days considered as a cost as specified above. Costs of labor for the harvest and processing were calculated (including picking, wet processing, and drying) based on a cost per volume of harvest (as this is how these services are usually paid). The amount and price of materials, tools and equipment used in harvest and processing were registered; in the case of minor equipment that lasts more than a year, total cost was divided by life-span as an estimate. Additional costs were registered including, fuel used (for machinery), transport costs, and administration costs. Fixed costs such as equipment depreciation, maintenance and administrative costs were considered yet played a relatively small part in overall costs. Farms where costs were incomplete or substantially deviated from the normal range of values were eliminated from the analysis.

Based on the 2019 dataset a coffee plantation typology of production strategies was formed for each country using multivariate cluster analysis based on the shade LAI and coffee yield as indicators of sustainability and productivity outcomes of the management strategy of the plantation ( Haggar et al., 2021 ). Cluster analysis of plantations per country was conducted using LAI and coffee productivity (kg ha −1 ), previously standardized, using the Ward method with Euclidean distance. The resulting clusters represent the coffee plantation production strategies that reflects the strategy in terms of intensification and sustainability. Four production strategies were differentiated for each country representing high, medium, low and very low productivity plantations, with varying shade levels ( Appendix Table A1 ). Production strategies significantly differed in the levels of agronomic investment, coffee yield, and shade levels, amongst other factors ( Haggar et al., 2021 ), and can be summarized as follows.

High Productivity Medium Shade (HPMS), were high yielding plantations producing between 12 and 20 tonnes of coffee cherries per hectare annually, with high investment in agronomic production over US$2000 per hectare. Most plantations had between 40 and 60% shade (LAI 0.5–1.1).

Medium Productivity Low/Medium Shade (MPLS/MS) plantations produced between 6 and 12 tonnes (Costa Rica) and 4–12 tonnes (Guatemala) of coffee cherries per hectare per year. Annual agronomic costs in Costa Rica were almost as high as Hprod-Mshade systems, but only about US$1,100 per hectare in Guatemala. Shade levels in both countries were 20–60% (LAI 0.1–1.0), although on average higher in Guatemala.

Low Productivity High Shade (LPHS) was characterized by having high shade over 60% (LAI > 1.0), while productivity ranged from <1 tonne to 9 tonnes of coffee cherries per hectare per year. Annual agronomic costs were on average half that of the Medium Productivity systems, US$1277 per hectare in Costa Rica and US$689 per hectare in Guatemala.

Very Low Productivity Low/Medium Shade (VLPLS/MS) systems had annual yields from <1 tonne up to 6 tonnes of coffee cherries per hectare and shade levels less than 60% (LAI <1.0), although on average higher for Guatemala. Agronomic production costs were very similar to that for the LPHS system.

Differences in EBITDA between 2008 and 2019 by country were made using t-tests. The subset of data that only includes farms for which there is data for both dates were compared using paired t-tests. Paired t-tests were also used to compare the differences in the components of economic costs and income between 2008 and 2019. ANOVA with Tukey means comparison was used to compare the EBITDA in 2019 of farm typology groupings, and the change in EBITDA 2008–2019 for each group.

Moreover, to further study the determinants of EBITDA a regression analysis is made on EBITDA per hectare, production per hectare, price, and unit costs. OLS with robust standard errors are used to regress each of these variables on altitude, farm area, producer age, certification of coffee (dummy), participation in a producer association (dummy), and survey year (dummy).

3.1 Change in EBIDTA across sampling groups

The absolute value of EBIDTA from coffee production in 2019 and 2008, and the differences between them were very similar whether calculated using all data from the two surveys, only from farms in the same regions, or only farms in common between the two surveys ( Table 1 ). In Costa Rica the comparison of farms in 2008 and 2019 using all data gave a weakly significant increase in EBIDTA which might have been influenced by the 2008 data covering a wider geographic area than the 2019 data. The values for farms in the same regions and farms in common gave similar absolute values but the slight increase in EBIDTA was no longer significant. In Guatemala all comparisons showed a highly significant decline in EBIDTA with income in 2019 only 30% of that in 2008 ( Table 1 ). For further exploration of the factors that contribute to this difference we have used the comparison between the same farms to ensure changes between the time periods are not influenced by differences between the farms included. This limits the sample size to 69 farms for Costa Rica for each year, and 38 for Guatemala.

Table 1 . EBIDTA - earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization - (USD per hectare) from coffee production averaged for all farms surveyed in each country in each year, those farms found in the regions in common between the two survey years, and those farms in common between the two surveys.

3.2 Drivers of changes in EBITDA

In 2008 the mean EBITDA from coffee producers in Guatemala was 180% that of Costa Rica, but by 2019 it had fallen to only 40%. This change is due to a large and statistically significant drop in EBITDA in Guatemala (i.e., a drop of 75%) compared to a small and non-statistically significant increase of EBITDA in Costa Rica ( Figure 1A ).

Figure 1 . EBITDA, coffee sales, agronomic costs, production per hectare, price and unit cost for Costa Rica and Guatemala in 2008 and 2019 (same farms; error bars represent 95% confidence intervals).

The contrasting dynamic of EBITDA seems to come from coffee sales falling in Guatemala and rising in Costa Rica, despite the changes being not statistically significant ( Figure 1B ). Costs rose in both countries by similar amounts in absolute and relative terms, which were statistically significant ( Figure 1C ). In Guatemala agronomic costs increased by USD 995 and 66% while in Costa Rica the increase was of USD 1276 and 64%.

Although not significantly, gross income from coffee sales rose in Costa Rica but fell in Guatemala due to changes in coffee prices ( Figure 1E ), while productivity remained unchanged in both countries. Guatemala experienced a statistically significant drop in price of 13.8%, while Costa Rica had a statistically significant increase of 13.6%. Thus, while in 2008 Guatemala farmers obtained $0.082/kg of coffee cherries more than Costa Rican farmers (15.4% difference), by 2019 this had inverted with Costa Rican farmers receiving $0.075/kg of coffee cherries more than Guatemala (14.2% difference). Both agronomic costs per ha and unit costs per kg of coffee increased in both countries with statistical significance and by similar amounts ( Figures 1C , F ). What is different between countries is that Guatemala also experienced an increase in variability of unit and agronomic costs suggesting differing responses among farmers in the country. A deeper understanding of this variability can be found exploring the main components of the total agronomic cost per hectare as presented in Figure 2 .

Figure 2 . Input and labor costs per hectare for Costa Rica and Guatemala in 2008 and 2019 (same farms; error bars represent 95% confidence intervals).

Mean input costs increased in both countries with statistical significance, yet rose considerably more in Guatemala (158%) than Costa Rica (35%) ( Figure 2A ). Moreover, the variability in Guatemala increased sharply, indicating that the increased investment in inputs was not uniform across farms. On the other hand, mean labor costs increased significantly only in Costa Rica by 76%, while variability increased in both countries ( Figure 2B ). This suggests that the increase in agronomic cost in Costa Rica was driven by labor costs, while Guatemala’s increase in levels and variability was mostly driven by input costs.

Further insights can be found exploring the components of the total cost per hectare as presented in Figure 3 .

Figure 3 . Decomposition of total cost per hectare for Costa Rica and Guatemala in 2008 and 2019 (same farms; error bars represent 95% confidence intervals).

Statistically significant increases in mean costs are found for both countries in the establishment of new plantations, the use of fertilization, and the use of pesticides. These increases in means are accompanied by a notable increase in variability, especially in Guatemala. In the case of fertilization in Guatemala, the increase in variability makes the increase statistically significant only at the 10% level of significance. Establishment costs increased by 1,516% in Guatemala and 669% in Costa Rica, fertilizer cost by 123% in Guatemala and 40% in Costa Rica, and pesticide costs by 4,126% in Guatemala and 196% in Costa Rica. Harvest cost also increased, albeit with lower statistical significance, by 53% in Guatemala and 24% in Costa Rica. This may in part be due to a larger percentage increase in production per hectare in Guatemala than Costa Rica, although overall production costs per hectare was higher in Costa Rica than Guatemala ( Figure 1D ). Lastly, in Costa Rica there was a notable increase in manual weed control costs, which while not statistically significant explains the larger increase in labor costs in Costa Rica ( Figure 3C ).

3.3 Farm characteristics associated with differences in EBITDA

Multiple regression models showed the same differences between survey years in production per hectare, unit cost of production, price, and resulting EBITDA as indicated above ( Table 2 ). Production per hectare was significantly and positively associated with altitude in both countries and with certification in Guatemala but was negatively associated with farmers being part of an association in Guatemala ( Table 2A ). Coffee price was positively associated with altitude and farm size in Costa Rica, and with certification in Guatemala ( Table 2B ). Costs of production of a kilogram of coffee were negatively associated with altitude in Costa. These effects combined led to higher altitude and larger farm size significantly and positively affecting EBIDTA in Costa Rica, and certification significantly and positively affecting EBIDTA in Guatemala. There was a weakly significant negative effect of association on EBIDTA in Guatemala which is likely an effect of the low production per hectare of associated farmers, but it is not possible to determine whether this is because low productivity farmers tend to be members of associations, or being a member of an association somehow leads to lower productivity. It should be noted that in many cases to be certified farmers need to be members of an association (and there is a certain correlation between the two rho = 0.33), but that the variance associated with certification has been allocated as a separate variable.

Table 2 . Influence of farm characteristics on (A) EBITDA and coffee productivity, and (B) coffee price and unit costs of production based on all farms in regions present in both surveys.

3.4 Changes in EBIDTA and economics of production for different farm typology groups

The EBIDTA of farms in different typology groups representing different production strategies were significantly different in both countries ( Table 3A ), and thus indicate that the responses described above were not uniform across all farm types. High productivity Medium Shade had the highest EBIDTA in both countries although not statistically different from Medium Productivity Medium Shade in Guatemala. Low Productivity High Shade EBIDTA was not statistically different from Medium Productivity Medium/Low Shade in both countries, but was significantly higher than Very Low Productivity Low Shade in Costa Rica. Differences in EBIDTA between typology groups were closely related to productivity (as productivity was the main factor the groups were based upon). The price received for coffee was similar across typology groups except for Very Low Productivity Low Shade in Costa Rica which received a significantly lower price than Low Productivity High Shade. Unit costs of producing a kilogram of coffee were significantly higher for very low productivity groups in both countries compared to high and medium productivity groups.

Table 3 . Economic performance of coffee farms by typology grouping for (A) all farms in 2019 and (B) change between 2008 and 2019 for those farms in both surveys.

Changes in EBIDTA between 2008 and 2019 were only positive for High and Medium productivity farms in Costa Rica ( Table 3B ). The other typology groups in Costa Rica and all Guatemalan groups in Guatemala had reduced EBIDTA between these two dates. There were no statistically significant differences between typology groups in Guatemala probably due to the small sample size for paired farms. The changes in EBIDTA were again partially related to changes in productivity with high and medium productivity groups in both countries experiencing increases in productivity compared to declines for Low and very low productivity groups (although not statistically significant for medium productivity from those with reduced productivity in Guatemala). All groups in Costa Rica except the very low productivity group had significant increases in price received for coffee, while all the groups in Guatemala experienced declines in price received.

4 Discussion

As claimed by other studies (e.g., ICO, 2019 ; Sachs et al., 2019 ) agronomic costs of production per hectare have increased by about 30–60% due to both increases in labor and input costs in both countries, even when costs are dollarized and adjusted for inflation. However, these differences integrate both increased unit costs and increased investment in production. The daily rate for labor increased by 31% (from US$ 5.2 to 6.8/day) in Guatemala and 71% in Costa Rica (from US$ 9.3 to 15.9/day). While the cost of the main fertilizers used decreased by 10–22% in Guatemala and 11–29% in Costa Rica, with very similar costs in the two countries [it should be noted that there was a sharp rise in fertilizer prices in 2008 prior to the economic crash ( Hedebrand and Laborde, 2022 )]. The decrease in unit costs of fertilizer but increase in total fertilizer costs indicates that in both countries farmers increased the rate of fertilization. Although production per hectare on average remained the same in both countries there was high and medium productivity farms increased their productivity while on low and very low productivity farms productivity declined. This may represent two different responses by farmers to increasing costs, one to reduce investment in production and the other to increase investment, especially in fertilizer, to boost production and thus increase income. Analysis by Lalani et al. (2023) found that the high productivity group was the most profitable across a range of input and labor cost scenarios.

Both countries were investing considerably more in establishment of coffee plantations in 2019 than 2008, possibly due to impacts of the coffee rust outbreak in 2013. Furthermore, Guatemalan farms are investing relatively more than their Costa Rican counterparts. This indicates that Guatemalan farms have a larger area of new as yet unproductive coffee, which would reduce farm-level production per hectare of coffee plantation. As this probably only affects a proportion of farms it probably also contributes to the high variability in cost per kilogram produced due to the additional costs from establishment of new plantings being included in some cases.

The positive economic impact of Costa Rican farmers intensifying production appears to contradict conclusions from the systematic review of Jezeer et al. (2017) that lower intensity production systems were more profitable. The economic performance of the production strategies from the typology were analyzed by Lalani et al. (2023) demonstrating that high input but also moderately shaded coffee generated the highest net, but if there was a 50% fall in coffee prices then high input production had the greatest losses. In contrast low-input highly shaded coffee had lower returns under the labor and input cost variations tested but generated the lowest losses if coffee prices crashed. It needs to be assessed whether the higher use of fertilizer by Costa Rican farmers can be sustained with the doubling of fertilizer costs that occurred in 2022 ( Hedebrand & Laborde, 2022 ), which was greater than the 50% increase modeled by Lalani et al. (2023) .

Other factors that appear to support reducing production costs and increasing EBIDTA are higher altitude and larger farm size (both in Costa Rica), and certification in Guatemala. Haggar et al. (2017) also found in Nicaragua that farmers under some certifications achieved a greater EBIDTA than their matched peers. Unfortunately, altitude and farm size are not factors farmers can easily change, and certification requires investment and close alliance with private traders or trading farmer cooperatives. Nevertheless, Wollni and Zeller (2007) found that farmers in Costa Rica do benefit from price differentials associated with specialty markets and that cooperative association was an important means for them to access those markets.

In terms of impact on EBIDTA, the differences in prices received by farmers in Costa Rica and Guatemala probably has the greatest impact. In 2008 farmers in Guatemala reported farm gate prices 10% higher than in Costa Rica, but by 2019 this had substantially reversed. The 2008 differences in the farm gate prices are similar to those reported on the ICO website ( https://www.ico.org/new_historical.asp accessed August 2022), with prices of USD 1.11 vs. USD 1.06 per lb. green coffee in Guatemala and Costa Rica, respectively (note our prices are quoted as USD per kg of coffee cherries), and thus not a sampling effect. Unfortunately no comparable data are available for 2019. Estimates of average export prices taken from the United Nations COMTRADE database ( https://comtrade.un.org/data/ , accessed July 2022) indicate that the average coffee export prices for Guatemala and Costa Rica were USD 2.81 versus USD 3.07 per kilo green coffee in 2008, and USD 3.09 versus USD 4.38 per kilo green coffee in 2019. It should be noted that these prices have not been adjusted for inflation, unlike the prices shown in Figure 3 , if a similar adjustment is made to these prices it would also show a lower inflation-adjusted price in 2019 of USD 2.06 for Guatemala yet still a higher one of USD 3.69 for Costa Rica in agreement with the data used in this study. Thus the farm-gate prices reported to us by farmers correspond to and are likely a result of differences in export prices. The USDA Global Agricultural Information Network annual reports indicate similar export prices for 2019 of USD 3.33–3.66 per kilo for Guatemala and USD 4.35 per kilo for Costa Rica ( https://www.fas.usda.gov/data/costa-rica-coffee-annual-6 , https://www.fas.usda.gov/data/guatemala-coffee-annual-5 ); this against world market prices for “other milds” as reported by ICO ( https://www.ico.org/new_historical.asp accessed August 2022) for 2008 and 2019 of USD 3.07 and USD 2.87 per kilo green coffee. Thus, both countries had managed to improve export prices compared to market trends, though Costa Rica managed to increase its export price differential substantially more during this period.

Nevertheless, production and export of coffee in Costa Rica has declined (from over 2.2 million sacks in early 2000s, to 1.8 million 2011/2012 to just over 1.4 million sacks 2018/19), while in Guatemala it has more or less been maintained fluctuating between 3.2 and 4.0 million sacks between 2000 and 2019 ( https://www.ico.org/new_historical.asp accessed August 2022). Indeed in 2018/19 Guatemala maintained production of about 3.7 million sacks, while Costa Rican production was below average compared to the previous decade. This may have increased prices internally in Costa Rica as exporters competed for coffee to meet their contracts with buyers. The Specialty Coffee Transaction Guide: 2022 ( www.transactionguide.coffee ) developed by researchers from Emory University summarizes contract values for specialty coffee between 2019 and 2022 calculated a median price for Costa Rica of USD 3.65 per pound compared to USD 3.00 for Guatemala, this despite Guatemala having a slightly higher median quality score. It has been noted that Costa Rican producers have invested in many micro-mills to process and sell high quality micro-lots at substantially higher prices, but also maintaining a reputation for environmental and social standards as well as product quality ( USDA, 2022 ). Thus, Costa Rican farmers and their organizations have taken the next step from simply accessing markets that provide specialty prices (as reported by Wollni and Zeller, 2007 ) to now adding further value through micro-processing for direct sales to specialist roasters. As Jacobi et al. (2024) found in Colombia and Bolivia, direct sales of coffee to international buyers or even local markets provide the greatest economic benefits to farmers.

5 Conclusion

Without doubt increased production costs, and above all labor costs have affected the economics of coffee production in the two countries studied. However, it is notable that while labor costs in Costa Rica are about double that in Guatemala, Costa Rican farmers have been able to maintain their profitability better than Guatemalan farmers. In part this seems to be due to some groups of Costa Rican farmers having achieved higher productivity through higher investment, indeed only high and medium productivity farms had increased EBITDA. However, this investment has been substantially supported by increases in prices received by most Costa Rican farmers, while prices received in Guatemala declined. Indeed, high productivity Guatemalan farmers who invested in increasing productivity did not benefit economically due to the lower price they received for their coffee. Higher prices in Costa Rica have been supported by a reduction in the volume of coffee offered by Costa Rica, but also by higher social and environmental standards, and increases in direct sales and sales of processed coffee. This demonstrates the role of buyers and consumers paying prices that appropriately compensate the costs of production and provide a living income to farmers. Ultimately the higher prices received by Costa Rican farmers is probably what has enabled them to maintain or even increase coffee productivity while paying substantially higher wages compared to other countries in the region such as Guatemala.

Data availability statement

The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.

Ethics statement

Ethics procedures of the University of Greenwich and the Centro Agronómico Tropical de Investigación y Enseñanza were followed, ensuring prior informed consent of all participants.

Author contributions

BL: Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. FC: Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Supervision, Writing – review & editing. AV: Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Writing – review & editing. JH: Conceptualization, Funding acquisition, Methodology, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing.

The author(s) declare that financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. The 2019/20 data was collected as part of research was funded by the UK Research and Innovation Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (UKRI/BBSRC), from the Global Challenges Research Fund (GCRF) under the Agri-systems research to enhance rural livelihoods in developing countries programme, grant number BB/S01490X/1. The 2008 data was collected by the EC funded project “CAFNET: Connecting, enhancing and sustaining environmental services and market values of coffee agroforestry in Central America, East Africa and India” EuropeAid/ENV/2006/114-382/TPS.

Acknowledgments

The study was led by Gabriela Soto and Eduardo Corrales. Both surveys received the institutional support of the National Coffee Association of Guatemala (ANACAFE) and the Institute for Coffee in Costa Rica (ICAFE), as well as the many coffee farmers who gave their time to enable us to conduct this research.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Bacon, C. (2008). “Confronting the coffee crisis: can fair trade, organic and specialty coffees reduce the vulnerability of small-scale farmers in northern Nicaragua?” in Confronting the coffee crisis: Fair trade, sustainable livelihoods and ecosystems in Mexico and Central America . eds. C. M. Bacon, V. E. Mendez, S. R. Gliessman, and J. A. Fox (Cambridge, MA: MIT), 155–178.

Google Scholar

Castro, F., Montes, E., and Raine, M. (2004). “La crisis cafetalera: Efectos y estrategias para hacerle frente” in Sustainable development working paper 23 (The World Bank: Washington).

CEPAL (2002). Centroamérica: El impacto de la caída de los precios de café en 2001 . Chile: Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe.

Cordes, KY, Sagan, M, and Kennedy, S. (2021). “Responsible coffee sourcing: towards a living income for producers,” Columbia Center on Sustainable Investment. Available at: https://scholarship.law.columbia.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1198&context=sustainable_investment_staffpubs

Enveritas. (2019). How many coffee farmers are there? Global coffee farm study. Available at: https://carto.com/blog/enveritas-coffee-poverty-visualization/ (Accessed June 16, 2023).

Giovannucci, D., and Potts, J. (2008). Seeking sustainability: COSA preliminary analysis of sustainability initiatives in the coffee sector . Winnipeg, Canada: IISD, 37.

Haggar, J., Casanoves, F., Cerda, R., Cerretelli, S., Gonzalez, S., Lanza, G., et al. (2021). Shade and agronomic intensification in coffee agroforestry systems: trade-off or synergy? Front. Sustain. Food Syst. 5:645958. doi: 10.3389/fsufs.2021.645958

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Haggar, J., Soto, G., Casanoves, F., and de Melo, V. E. (2017). Environmental-economic trade-offs and benefits of sustainably certified coffee farms. Ecol. Indic. 79, 330–337. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2017.04.023

Hedebrand, C, and Laborde, D (2022). High fertilizer prices contribute to rising global food security concerns. Available at: https://www.ifpri.org/blog/high-fertilizer-prices-contribute-rising-global-food-security-concerns (Accessed June 16, 2023).

ICO. (2019). Coffee development report 2019: growing for prosperity – economic viability as the catalyst for a sustainable coffee sector. Available at: https://www.internationalcoffeecouncil.org/eng/coffee-development-report.php

ICO and UNIDO. (2024) Sustainability and resilience of the coffee global value chain: towards a coffee investment vehicle. Available at: https://www.unido.org/news/unido-and-ico-publish-report-sustainability-resilience-coffee-global-value-chain-towards-global-investment-vehicle (Accessed June 21, 2024).

IDH. (2020) Task force for coffee living income. Available at: https://www.idhsustainabletrade.com/publication/task-force-for-coffee-living-income-report-summary (Accessed June 21, 2024).

Jacobi, J., Lara, D., Opitz, S., de Castelberg, S., Urioste, S., Irazoque, A., et al. (2024). Making specialty coffee and coffee-cherry value chains work for family farmers’ livelihoods: a participatory action research approach. World Dev. Perspect. 33:100551. doi: 10.1016/j.wdp.2023.100551

Jezeer, R. E., Verweij, P. A., Santos, M. J., and Boot, R. G. A. (2017). Shaded coffee and cocoa – double dividend for biodiversity and small-scale farmers. Ecol. Econ. 140, 136–145. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.04.019

Lalani, B., Lanza, G., Leiva, B., Mercado, L., and Haggar, J. (2023). Shade versus intensification: trade-off or synergy for profitability in coffee agroforestry systems? Agric. Syst. 214:103814. doi: 10.1016/j.agsy.2023.103814

Sachs, J, Cordes, KY, Rising, J, Toledano, P, and Maennling, N. (2019). Ensuring economic viability and sustainability of coffee production. Columbia Center Sustain. Invest. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.3660936

Soto, G., Haggar, J, Le Coq, JF, Gonzalez, C, Soto, A, Casanoves, F, et al., (2011). Environmental and socioeconomic impact of organic coffee certification in Central America as compared with other certification seals. Pp. 120–123 in eds D Neuhoff, S Mok Sohn, C Ssekyewa, N Halberg, I Rasmussen, and J Hermansen, Organic is Life - Knowledge for Tomorrow. Volume 1 - Organic Crop Production. Proceedings of the Third Scientific Conference of the International Society of Organic Agriculture Research (ISOFAR)

The World Bank. (2024a). The World Bank in Guatemala: overview. Available at: https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/guatemala/overview

The World Bank. (2024b). The World Bank in Costa Rica: overview. Available at: https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/costarica/overview

USDA. (2022). Costa Rica: coffee annual. Report Number CS2022-CS0008. Available at: https://fas.usda.gov/data/costa-rica-coffee-annual-6

Wollni, M., and Zeller, M. (2007). Do farmers benefit from participating in specialty markets and cooperatives? The case of coffee marketing in Costa Rica. Agric. Econ. 37, 243–248. doi: 10.1111/j.1574-0862.2007.00270.x

Table A1 . Coffee production strategy according to productivity and shade level as assessed by LAI (Leaf Area Index) ( N  = number of farms in the group) [adapted from Haggar et al. (2021) ].

Keywords: agronomic costs, coffee prices, Guatemala, Costa Rica, EBITDA, productivity

Citation: Leiva B, Vargas A, Casanoves F and Haggar J (2024) Changes in the economics of coffee production between 2008 and 2019: a tale of two Central American countries. Front. Sustain. Food Syst . 8:1376051. doi: 10.3389/fsufs.2024.1376051

Received: 24 January 2024; Accepted: 27 June 2024; Published: 10 July 2024.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2024 Leiva, Vargas, Casanoves and Haggar. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Jeremy Haggar, [email protected]

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

• RTÉ Archives
• RTÉ Brainstorm
• RTÉ Learn
• RTÉ Radio 1
• RTÉ lyric fm
• RTÉ Raidió na Gaeltachta
• RTÉ Weather
• Century Ireland
• Policies and Reports
• Terms & Conditions
• Individual Rights Guide
• Privacy Policy
• Cookie Policy
• Freedom of Information
• Latest Annual Report
• Advertise with RTÉ
• Newsletters
• RTÉ Supporting the Arts

Can quitting coffee really benefit your health?

Analysis: If you're thinking about giving up caffeine and are wondering what benefits it may have, here's what the research says

By Adam Taylor , Lancaster University

Caffeine is the most consumed psychoactive compound in the world. Even if you don't drink coffee or tea, you probably still regularly consume caffeine since it's found in everything from fizzy drinks and cold remedies to decaf coffee and chocolate .

When caffeine is consumed, it's rapidly absorbed by the body – reaching peak effects within two hours (though it may take up to nine hours to leave your body). It's also water and fat soluble, so it gets into all body tissues , which explains why caffeine can affect many different parts of the body.

It's recommended that adults consume no more than 400mg of caffeine a day (approximately four cups of coffee). More than this may lead to muscle tremors, nausea, headaches, pounding heart and even death (in extreme cases).

From RTÉ 2fm's Jennifer Zamparelli show, dietician Orla Walsh on the amount of caffeine our bodies can handle every day and Donncha O'Callaghan talks about giving up coffee for Lent

But even people who only consume a couple cups of coffee or tea daily may feel it still has adverse effects – such as irritability, difficulty falling asleep and feeling jittery. This is why a growing number of people are deciding to give up caffeine.

If you're thinking about giving up caffeine and are wondering what benefits it may have, here's what the research says:

Brain function

Caffeine withdrawal can cause headaches, fatigue and tiredness. This is because the body develops a tolerance to caffeine. Caffeine binds to a receptor in the brain used by adenosine . The binding of caffeine to these receptors causes the body to delay the onset of fatigue . But over time the brain cells produce more adenosine receptors to enable normal adenosine binding to happen.

So, when you stop consuming caffeine, there are excess adenosine receptors to bind to. This allows fatigue and tiredness to kick in as normal, with the person feeling more tired than before.

From RTÉ Brainstorm, the maths behind a perfect cup of coffee

Headaches happens as a result of the absence of caffeine. In the head and neck, caffeine causes the blood vessels to narrow, reducing blood flow to the brain. When you stop drinking caffeine, after approximately 24 hours it causes the blood vessels to return to normal , causing an increase in blood flow to the brain and triggering headaches. They may last up to 9 days on average.

And because caffeine binds to adenosine receptors (which also modulate pain) quitting caffeine may temporarily increase your perception and sensitivity to pain because there's more receptors available.

Caffeine really only affects sleep when consumed in the late afternoon and evenings. This is because caffeine delays the release of melatonin (a hormone which makes us tired) by 40 minutes . Caffeine also reduces the overall time you sleep and shortens the period of deep sleep .

From RTÉ Radio 1's Morning Ireland, do you know how much caffeine is in your energy drink

This can increase your tiredness the next day, leading to cycle of using caffeine to wake you up but having trouble sleeping later on as a result. When you stop caffeine, you may find your sleep improves. Some evidence suggests improvements are seen in as little as 12 hours .

Caffeine has also been linked to increased anxiety and panic attacks – and not just in those with a pre-disposition to mental health issues. Reducing or eliminating caffeine may improve your mood. This may partly be because it improves sleep. Sleep deprivation can exacerbate anxiety and other mood disorders .

But the adenosine receptors that caffeine bind to are also involved in the modulation of other neurotransmitters that have a role in stress , happiness and fear .

Cardiovascular health

Reducing or eliminating caffeine might also cure heartburn and indigestion. Caffeine induces acid secretion in the stomach and weakens the oesophageal sphincter, which controls reflux of stomach contents up the oesophagus – triggering heartburn and indigestion.

From RTÉ Radio 1's Drivetime, do you really need a coffee to start the day? With Dr Susan Kelleher from the School of Chemical Sciences at DCU

Quitting caffeine may also lower your blood pressure and reduce your heart rate – although other studies have shown little change . This is because if someone consumes caffeine daily for many years, their body adapts to the exposure – and it becomes the new norm with its stimulant effects on the nervous system, bowels and heart.

There also appears to be genetic component to caffeine tolerance and metabolism. This could mean some people are more affected by caffeine over others – though more research is needed on this link.

A brighter smile

Cutting out caffeine may improve the whiteness of your teeth – not because of caffeine directly, but because tea and coffee contain compounds including tannins that stain teeth .

Sugar in energy drinks can also cause damage to your teeth. Quitting may help protect them. Evidence also suggests caffeinated drinks may reduce the amount of saliva you produce, which normally protects our teeth from damage.

From RTÉ Radio 1's Today with Claire Byrne, all you need to know about coffee with Agnes Bouchier Hayes

You may also find that you have an increased sensitivity to the taste of sweet food and drinks after quitting, as caffeine interferes with the tasting of sweet substances .

Going to the loo less

Caffeine acts on the smooth muscle of the intestines, particularly in the colon, causing them to contract and trigger the urge to poo . Caffeine can also change the consistency of your poo – especially if you drink too much, as caffeine affects water absorption .

Reducing caffeine intake may cause a less frequent urge to poo – and the consistency of your stools may change.

Caffeine also acts as a mild diuretic, causing an increase in urine production . This is because caffeine binds the adenosine receptors in the kidney, which alters how sodium is exchanged, affecting water retention. There's also evidence caffeine is a bladder irritant , which can cause a more frequent urge to urinate. Quitting caffeine may decrease your daily toilet visits.

From RTÉ Brainstorm, will a latte levy stop us dumping 200 million coffee cups a year?

Moderate consumption

As with many things, it's about moderation. But if you're seriously considering removing caffeine from your diet, the best way to do so is gradually. Going "cold turkey" will bring on side effects such as headaches and tiredness which can last two to three weeks.

Follow the RTÉ Brainstorm WhatsApp channel for all our stories and updates

Adam Taylor is Professor and Director of the Clinical Anatomy Learning Centre at Lancaster University . This article was originally published by The Conversation .

The views expressed here are those of the author and do not represent or reflect the views of RTÉ

More stories on

share this!

July 9, 2024

This article has been reviewed according to Science X's editorial process and policies . Editors have highlighted the following attributes while ensuring the content's credibility:

fact-checked

peer-reviewed publication

trusted source

written by researcher(s)

How the genome diversity of major crops tells the story of their evolution

by Jean Christophe Glaszmann, Claire Billot and Claire Lanaud, The Conversation

On March 27, 2024, a study published in the journal Nature announced that the sugarcane genome had at last been cracked. This was a remarkable achievement because of the complexity of the sugarcane's genome. That of rice, the first crop genome to be sequenced, more than 20 years ago, was "simple": 12 chromosomes, two identical copies of each, for a total of 400 million base pairs (Mb) (nitrogen base pairs located on two complementary DNA strands).

Sugarcane is much more complex: the plant, a polyploid , contains more copies of each chromosome than conventional plants. It has 10 times more chromosomes to sequence than rice, each of them longer, for a genome that is 20 times the size. To crack the code, the CIRAD research team came up with the idea of using sorghum as a model, as it is a close cousin from the same family (Graminaceae or grasses) with far less redundancy in its genome.

But why bother studying the genome of crops and their different varieties? The diversity they contain in fact reveals the way in which they have evolved as farmers have selected them in different environments and for various purposes. For instance, rice has evolved through mutations and natural crosses between different forms that appeared around the Himalayas, which were selected each year during its domestication, which began as much as 10,000 years ago. This has resulted in a sufficient number of varieties to guarantee production in a vast range of environments.

Sugarcane, for its part, comes from the islands of Southeast Asia: it is the result of broader genetic mixing, incorporating several related species . This has enabled it to combine resistance to various diseases and incomparable vegetative vigor, making it the plant that is most efficient at producing biomass. It is so tolerant of genetic mixing that all sorts of hybrids can be produced, even intergeneric ones, combining different botanical species.

Understanding how plants have adapted in the past serves to plan and speed up future crop adaptations.

Forty years of plant genome research

This is what prompted CIRAD to set up a tropical species genome analysis laboratory as long ago as 1986. The laboratory later became the Grand plateau technique régional de génotypage (regional genotyping platform). Its teams produced the first genetic maps and then, thanks to the national genotyping structure, notably the Génoscope , and to various international collaborations, they made the news in the 2010s by placing several tropical plants among the leading biological models, for instance cocoa , banana and citrus .

The list has grown longer in recent years, with arabica coffee , vanilla , and, of course, sugarcane . Progress is currently being made on coconut, rubber, oil palm, yam, groundnut and sorghum, along with fonio, extending the genome range to indigenous plants.

For plants whose varieties intercross easily, this makes it possible to pinpoint sequences associated with important agronomic characters—in the field or as regards processing and consumption. The next step is to favor them in the mixes that breeders—creators of new varieties—make before sorting progenies under growing conditions.

For other species, mixing takes longer, and is more random. It is sometimes punctuated by unlikely, almost miraculous combinations. The scientists have been able to highlight surprise hybridizations that attentive humans had managed to identify: dessert bananas, plantain bananas, oranges, lemons, grapefruit, calamondin and arabica coffee.

Cocoa, disseminated more than 5,000 years ago

To take cocoa as an example, it proved possible to study its genome diversity based on modern genomes and ancient DNA found in shards of pre-Columbian pottery .

Cocoa originated in the Amazon, and was disseminated by humans very early on, probably more than 5000 years ago, as far as the Pacific Coast and central America. Many mixes occurred between populations of very distant genetic origins, which allowed cocoa to adapt to those new environments.

For chocolate fans, that mixing has also enabled the development of new aroma properties, such as those currently found in beans produced by the Criollo and Nacional varieties.

Bananas and citrus, the fruits of hybridization

As far as bananas are concerned, genomics results suggested that their domestication began in the New Guinea region, based on hybrids between the banksii, schizocarpa and possibly zebrina groups of the species Musa acuminata.

Those first cultivars were then transported to different regions of Southeast Asia and hybridized with other local sub-species of the genus Musa, resulting in their diversification and in the different types of varieties we now know, which involve up to seven ancestral contributors .

As for citrus species, their genome diversity shows that most of the species grown in modern times result from four founding species. For instance, limes (Citrus latifolia) are the result of natural hybridization between the Mediterranean lemon and the key lime, and involve four ancestral species.

Genomics has shed light on the way in which reproductive cells (gametes) are produced in these complex genomic contexts, and can help to pave the way for breeding disease-resistant rootstocks .

Adapting coffee

Lastly, arabica coffee is also the result of one of these unlikely cases of hybridization . It fused the genomes of two different species (Coffea canephora and C. eugenioides), but this only ever happened once.

This new cross occurred some 500,000 years ago in Ethiopia and the Arabs chose it to produce coffee as of the 14th century or thereabouts. It brought many properties as a result of the diversity within each plant, but all the plants derived from it are almost identical.

From then on, to continue its adaptation, seeking out other rare events that could broaden that diversity through introgression from other sources, became the priority. Attention is now focusing on localized forms in Ethiopia and Yemen.

Precious resources for genetic improvement

All these unlikely events specific to each crop were very beneficial, but are difficult to reproduce. It will not be possible to explore variants in order to create and maintain the diversity required for adaptation until we understand all the details. Certain forms, some of them extremely rare, are the only sources of characters that could be crucially important in future.

CIRAD, in collaboration with INRAE and IRD and in association with international research networks and private structures, conserves and maintains genetic resource collections, in the form of seeds, freeze-dried cells or whole plants, in Montpellier , Corsica , Guadeloupe , French Guiana and Réunion .

These activities are costly, but represent an investment that is essential for the future. By mobilizing the available diversity, in close association with other players—from farmers to research centers—we are preparing the varieties of tomorrow.

Genomic diversity, a key factor in future action, has become a global issue. If we know how to reveal what certain sequences have to offer in terms of biological potential, we can steer their transmission to progenies. It may even be possible to rewrite them by means of genome editing, to transmit desirable biological attributes to existing varieties without having to resort to crossing.

Provided the biotechnical knowledge exists, this genetic improvement method appears limitless , notably by facilitating mixing. As a result, issues surrounding societal choices and intellectual property are now emerging in a knowledge field that is currently a subject for great debate .

Disseminating knowledge

First and foremost, this exploration of genome diversity is in response to an environmental challenge, climate change, which necessitates speeding up operations to adapt plants to specific contexts—different growing zones—, both contrasting and fast-changing, in close interaction with producers.

However, it also addresses a societal issue: it is essential to guarantee access to information, to enable everyone to take it on board, adapt their crops and continue to feed themselves in a sustainable way. We are therefore working to broaden access to data and analysis tools, by means of bioinformatics platforms housing dedicated genome databases for each plant. And we are helping to build fairer skillsets by providing training in functional and comparative genomics tools and how to use them, for junior scientists in France and at our partners in the global South.

Journal information: Nature

Provided by The Conversation

Explore further

Feedback to editors

Saturday Citations: The first Goldilocks black hole; Toxoplasma gondii metabolism; pumping at the speed of muscle

5 hours ago

Scientists demonstrate chemical reservoir computation using the formose reaction

6 hours ago

SpaceX rocket accident leaves company's Starlink satellites in wrong orbit

10 hours ago

New class of organic nanoparticles shows promise for diverse applications

Jul 12, 2024

2023 Rolling Hills Estates landslide likely began the winter before

How climate patterns contribute to coral bleaching in the Great Barrier Reef

Research team develops light-activated compounds to treat neuropathic pain

Complex impact of large wildfires on ozone layer dynamics unveiled

Scientists find new way global air churn makes particles

Hatcheries can boost wild salmon numbers but reduce diversity, research shows

Relevant physicsforums posts, new and interesting publications relevant to the origin of life, medical tape cut off blood flow to fetus.

23 hours ago

Is meat broth really nutritious?

Jul 10, 2024

Havana Syndrome

Innovative ideas and technologies to help folks with disabilities.

Jul 7, 2024

COVID Virus Lives Longer with Higher CO2 In the Air

More from Biology and Medical

Related Stories

New buzz about coffee genes: A more complete genome sequence of world's most popular variety

Jan 24, 2024

From crop to cup: A new genetic map could make your morning coffee more climate resilient

Feb 17, 2024

Newly sequenced genome reveals coffee's prehistoric origin story, and its future under climate change

Apr 15, 2024

Scientists find common genes defending coffee plants against devastating disease

Apr 21, 2024

Your morning coffee may be more than a half million years old

Apr 20, 2024

New genomic tools for three modern cotton varieties could guide future breeding efforts

May 30, 2024

Recommended for you

New geological dating techniques place first European hominids in Iberian Peninsula 1.3 million years ago

Insight into one of life's earliest ancestors revealed in new study

Evolutionary biologists investigate how plant cold specialists can adapt to the environment

Study of colorful crayfish challenges theories of bright coloration as adapted phenotype

'A history of contact': Geneticists are rewriting the narrative of Neanderthals and other ancient humans

Jul 11, 2024

Introducing co-cultures: When co-habiting animal species share culture

Let us know if there is a problem with our content.

Use this form if you have come across a typo, inaccuracy or would like to send an edit request for the content on this page. For general inquiries, please use our contact form . For general feedback, use the public comments section below (please adhere to guidelines ).

Please select the most appropriate category to facilitate processing of your request

Thank you for taking time to provide your feedback to the editors.

Your feedback is important to us. However, we do not guarantee individual replies due to the high volume of messages.

E-mail the story

Your email address is used only to let the recipient know who sent the email. Neither your address nor the recipient's address will be used for any other purpose. The information you enter will appear in your e-mail message and is not retained by Phys.org in any form.

Newsletter sign up

Get weekly and/or daily updates delivered to your inbox. You can unsubscribe at any time and we'll never share your details to third parties.

More information Privacy policy

Donate and enjoy an ad-free experience

We keep our content available to everyone. Consider supporting Science X's mission by getting a premium account.

E-mail newsletter

• Today's news
• Reviews and deals
• Climate change
• 2024 election
• Fall allergies
• Health news
• Mental health
• Sexual health
• Family health
• So mini ways
• Unapologetically
• Buying guides

Entertainment

• How to Watch
• My Portfolio
• Latest News
• Stock Market
• Biden Economy
• Stocks: Most Actives
• Stocks: Gainers
• Stocks: Losers
• Trending Tickers
• World Indices
• US Treasury Bonds
• Top Mutual Funds
• Highest Open Interest
• Highest Implied Volatility
• Stock Comparison
• Advanced Charts
• Currency Converter
• Basic Materials
• Communication Services
• Consumer Cyclical
• Consumer Defensive
• Financial Services
• Industrials
• Real Estate
• Mutual Funds
• Credit Cards
• Balance Transfer Cards
• Cash-back Cards
• Rewards Cards
• Travel Cards
• Credit Card Offers
• Best Free Checking
• Student Loans
• Personal Loans
• Car Insurance
• Mortgage Refinancing
• Mortgage Calculator
• Morning Brief
• Market Domination
• Market Domination Overtime
• Asking for a Trend
• Opening Bid
• Stocks in Translation
• Lead This Way
• Good Buy or Goodbye?
• Financial Freestyle
• Fantasy football
• Pro Pick 'Em
• College Pick 'Em
• Fantasy baseball
• Fantasy hockey
• Fantasy basketball
• Download the app
• Daily fantasy
• Scores and schedules
• GameChannel
• World Baseball Classic
• Premier League
• CONCACAF League
• Champions League
• Motorsports
• Horse racing
• Newsletters

New on Yahoo

• Privacy Dashboard

Yahoo Finance

Coffee prices will keep rising into 2025, roaster lavazza says.

(Bloomberg) -- Coffee prices will keep rising until the middle of 2025 due to supply shortages in key growers, with European consumers set to pay even more for their caffeine hit as new deforestation regulations kick in.

Most Read from Bloomberg

Saudis Warned G-7 Over Russia Seizures With Debt Sale Threat

Hurricane Beryl Makes a Mockery of Texas Climate Deniers

Microsoft Orders China Staff to Use iPhones for Work and Drop Android

The End of the Cheap Money Era Catches Up to Chelsea FC’s Owner

Asia’s Richest Banker Gets Caught in Adani-Hindenburg Crossfire

Expectations of another production shortfall in Vietnam, the world’s top producer of robusta, is fueling a surge in prices for the bean variety used in blends and espressos, Giuseppe Lavazza, chairman of coffee roaster Luigi Lavazza SpA, said in an interview.

This year’s poor harvest has seen roasters pay as much as $1,000 above futures prices for Vietnam’s beans, he added.

“We’ve never seen something like that in the history of our industry,” Lavazza said. “And what is very special is the long lasting effect of this.”

The futures for the variety have surged about 60% this year, touching a fresh high of $4,667 per ton on Tuesday. Concerns about the next harvest are adding to supply fears after hot and dry weather in parts of Vietnam damaged coffee trees earlier this year.

Brazil’s top growing regions have also faced the brunt of harsh weather, pushing up arabica prices. On Tuesday, futures were trading at a two-year high. Forecasts there have been lowered as some farmers pick smaller-than-usual beans following droughts in late 2023 that hurt crop development.

The higher prices, combined with rising shipping costs due to disruptions in the Suez Canal and a stronger dollar, have seen the Italian roaster’s costs jump more than €800 million ($865 million) in the last two years, Lavazza added.

With the European Union Deforestation Regulation or EUDR kicking in by the end of the year “a lot of players are buying coffee a little bit earlier,” Lavazza said, looking to bypass the requirement to prove their supply chains aren’t linked to land that was deforested after 2020.

“No doubt that the coffee that European roasters are going to buy will cost much more,” he added. “Companies in the coffee industry are facing very strong headwinds.”

Most Read from Bloomberg Businessweek

At SpaceX, Elon Musk’s Own Brand of Cancel Culture Is Thriving

Psychedelics Are Now Legal in Australia—With a Catch

How to Invest During a High Interest Rate Era

The Rich Investor Club Is Getting Crowded

Family Offices of the Ultra-Rich Shed Privacy With Activist Bets

©2024 Bloomberg L.P.

University in China brews up a caffeine hit with country’s first coffee science major

• Yunnan Agricultural University is now accepting students into its new undergraduate degree in coffee science and engineering

Applicants should have “solid basic knowledge of natural sciences, and basic theories and skills in the field of coffee science and engineering”, according to the university.

A course outline on the university website said the major would cover such subjects as coffee flavour chemistry, processing, quality and safety testing, factory design and environmental protection, world coffee trade, engineering principles, and nutrition and health.

It was the “the first major in the country to offer undergraduate coffee professional talent training”, the university said.

China is the 13th largest coffee producer in the world, though it accounts for only 1.1 per cent of global production, or around 1.8 million 60kg (132lb) bags of coffee a year, according to the US Department of Agriculture.

Around 98 per cent of that coffee is grown in Yunnan province, Chinese-language news site Science Times reported last week.

In 2022, Yunnan had a total of 84,600 hectares (209,000 acres) under cultivation for coffee, and its annual output of 114,000 tonnes of raw coffee beans was valued at 41.8 billion yuan (US$5.7 billion), according to state news agency Xinhua.

“Why was the world’s first coffee major not born in these [southern] places? One of the biggest reasons is that research and development is separated from planting,” Yang said.

Liao Xiugui, a boutique coffee farmer in Yunnan, said the biggest drawback for farmers hoping to expand production was a lack of talent and technology, according to Science Times.

“Only through the professional intervention of education in colleges and universities and the continuous strengthening of the quality training of new coffee farmers can their planting, management, harvesting, processing [and other aspects improve],” Liao said.

While an undergraduate degree in coffee science is something new, China is not the only country offering specialised coffee-related higher education.

In Switzerland, the Zurich University of Applied Sciences offers a certificate of advanced studies in coffee excellence which incorporates the science of coffee into its curriculum.

In the United States, the University of California, Davis opened the country’s first coffee research centre in May. The institution already offered elective courses in coffee, although it does not have a dedicated coffee major.

William Ristenpart, a professor of chemical engineering at UC Davis and the founding director of the UC Davis Coffee Centre, said in a university video that despite coffee being “extraordinarily complex”, it had not been the subject of a lot of academic research.

Ristenpart said that in the past decade or so, researchers had begun thinking about chemical engineering in the context of coffee, which is what they hoped to study at UC Davis.

Meanwhile, Yang said, Yunnan Agricultural University hoped to open up the coffee science and engineering programme to global internships and exchanges.