h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

This link explains it:

http://www.aolnews.com/surge-desk/article/coffee-and-good-genes-could-provide-parkinsons-prevention/19657482?icid=main%7Ccompaq-desktop%7Cdl1%7Csec3_lnk3%7C174904

Caffeine activates a Parkinson's-preventing gene for the people who have that gene. The gene is carried by one person in four.

Isn't science wonderful?

Good job I like

I wonder, does chicory carry any of the benefits of coffee? I've always liked chicory it its various forms too.

I applaud this information, and will be sure to shove it down the throat of every killjoy I know.

Hi Paulh,

Wonderful news for those with Parkinson. I wish they woulod work on the other genetically transferred illnesses. That would be awonderufl. At the moment I am working at trying to identify foods which may or may not afflict certain types of genetic illnesses.

ARe you going to watch the Commonwealth Games in India? I suppose not. I think they are going to be fascinating particularly because they are going to be held in the Jawar4halal Nehru Stadium in Delhi I think it is.

The very first biography I ever read after leaving school and was at University was the life of Jawarhalal Nehru, I* believe that he had just been released from prison where he haed been...at least I think \I remember that. I must go and look it u[ on ~Wikipedia.

Have a good day my friend.


Christiane


Sunday 3.X.2010 7.10 GMT

There are conflicting studies on the relationship between coffe drinking and bladder cancer:

First, a link to studies about coffee's protective properties:

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=coffee-reduces-risk-of-bl

Now, a link to studies that find coffee increasing the risk:

http://www.foodnavigator.com/Science-Nutrition/Coffee-habit-in-men-linked-to-bladder-cancer

Finally, a link that tries to weigh the conflicting studies:

http://www.diagnose-me.com/cond/C367935.html

You might note, under "Symptoms--environment: Using chlorinated water," that even chlorination can be a risk factor. Another study, very recent, finds cause for concern if you swim in chlorinated pools
(which I do, three times a week). In my own case, I have a father who had bladder cancer ("bladder cancer may be hereditary"), but who also smoked for twenty years and has been drinking coffee for at least sixty years, though not in heavy amounts.

Genetically, I could be a very mixed bag. Smoking is linked to 50% of all bladder cancer cases among men, heavy coffee-drinking to about 17%. Taking it up a notch, the amount of ceffee necessary to avoid Parkinson's (4 cups a day) is exactly the same amount that might increase risk of bladder cancer.

I use bottled springwater that is not chlorinated, *but* I swim more than 40 minutes per session, three days a week. I try not to drink the water in the pool. Is this enough to protect me at least a little bit?

Science can be and exciting, but right now I'm confused .

I have seen all this kind of thing before, paulh!

For every study that says something is good for you, there is another saying that it is bad for you!

Who do you believe????



GT

Thanks for that.

I believe that the genetic side of these disorders is far from being cleared up. Until then, we're left with the possibility that genetic causes were at work in the studies that implicated coffee in bladder cancer, as well as those that absolved it.

The threshold for both benefit and harm seems to be four cups of caffeinated coffee a day. I drink about two cups. Maybe I'll be all right. My father had his bladder removed when he was 79, and is still cancer-free at 90. He stopped smoking completely when I was 12, so even the secondhand smoke issue is not likely to be much of a problem for me (I did not take up smoking at all, and tried to stay clear of those who did, good manners permitting).

I'm not going to stop smoking. I'm not going to stop swimming. I will ask my doctor if I need to be screened regularly for bladder cancer, and hope that this will work as a preventative. No one else in the family has ever had bladder cancer, despite quite a few relatives who have lived long enough to show signs of it if it had been present.

I just feel that conflicting studies, while exasperating, may well lead eventually to a better understanding of what is really at work. I just try to be patient and enjoy each day, and celebrate the good things that can be enjoyed now.

Sorry, I did not mean "I'm not going to stop smoking," since I am not smoking anyway. What I meant was that I won't stop drinking coffee.

I must be getting confused.

did you know? that 8 out of 10 people who stopped breathing died from itand they've been told its a bad habit

I love that! Not the dying part, but the idea that breathing was bad habit.

1/4

Studies are just series of medical statistics, and you know what they say about statistics...they can be made to support any argument.

On the other hand, nice to have another excuse for drinking coffee.

The biggest issue in these medical studies is that they rely heavily on data mining, which has some major drawbacks. Nevertheless, if you can find out what methods they used, you can usually figure out where the weak spots are, and act accordingly.

There is something called the "Law of Large Numbers," which basically cautions about giving too much credibility to studies that used small samples. The larger the sample, the more you can trust it, other things being equal.

Unfortunately, there are a few current examples of researchers who fudged their results, or claimed to run experiments that they didn't actually run. They just made up figures, which is very bad science!

is definitely good for many things - but too much of a good thing, well, you know

and is probably very bad for a lot of people who can't stand it for some reasons or others

what it all boils down to is: it's a question of balance

- isn't everything?

Well, yes, mostly.

Maybe there can be too much balance. Schrodinger's cat is half dead and half alive, a perfect balance. But this is an absurdity. If you're alive, you can continue living. If you're dead, you can continue being dead, but you can't resume being alive. (If someone resuscitates you during the small window of opportunity for resuscitation, then it can be argued that you weren't really dead. But once you're beyond resuscitation, you won't return to the state of life.)

Being balanced evenly between life and death is absurd. If something upsets the balance, you will be all dead or all alive. That cat has a hard future.

That is also a thought experiment.

Whereas a cup of is a cup of .

Unless it's a ...

being alive is actually a bit out of balance, paulh

we only live for so long, you see, most of the time we are dead, which - if you look at it that way - appears to be our normal state

Is that why the Irish say, 'You're a long time dead'?

not only the irish , but regardles of nationality it makes a lot of sense. carpe diem is another way of putting it