[HN Gopher] Drinking strong coffee before exercising increases f...
___________________________________________________________________
Drinking strong coffee before exercising increases fat-burning, new
study finds
Author : curmudgeon22
Score : 186 points
Date : 2021-03-28 17:14 UTC (5 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (canal.ugr.es)
(TXT) w3m dump (canal.ugr.es)
| amelius wrote:
| But coffee induces stomach acid reflux, which is definitely not
| what you want during exercise, so catch-22 here.
| gumby wrote:
| There was not a caffeine without exercise arm. Clearly sponsored
| by Big Exercise.
| pengaru wrote:
| This past year I've been doing a lot of heavy manual labor;
| excavating large areas using a pick axe and shovel, hauling it
| away in a wheel barrow. And moving large ~200lb granite boulders
| in a wheel barrow ~1/3rd a mile up a slight grade from a nearby
| mountain.
|
| At the same time I started drinking a strong pot of Earl Gray tea
| every morning to try get my butt in gear and outside in the dirt
| quicker. Normally I'm not a caffeine user. For the first week of
| this, my teeth would chatter and hands shake after finishing the
| pot of tea, it was very reminiscent of a cocaine bump. And it
| certainly worked well for motivating me to get busy.
|
| But something I learned was my endurance went to shit on the
| caffeine. I was super impatient and wanting to do everything as
| fast as possible, while doing fundamentally slow long-haul heavy-
| mode operations. It turned out I got less done with the caffeine
| than without. I'd quickly burn myself out inadvertently trying to
| move everything faster than they were ever going to move with
| just my manpower. It was like the stimulant tricked me into
| operating deep in the realm of diminishing returns where I'm
| putting in 200% effort for 10% faster movement, while making
| myself frustrated with how long it's taking.
|
| Now I don't think caffeine is particularly useful for anything
| physical that doesn't resemble a sprint, at least not for me. The
| psychological effects just increase the likelihood of burnout by
| mistreating an endurance task as a sprint.
| maxrev17 wrote:
| Be interested to see a percentage increase in fat burning (I.e.
| is it worth nailing a coffee or not if you are a big fat coder
| looking to shift a few pounds)
| bserge wrote:
| It's not. Just eat less of whatever you're eating.
| dbsmith83 wrote:
| There is a link to the study at the bottom
|
| > MFO, Fatmax and VO2max were significantly higher in the
| afternoon than in the morning (all P < 0.05). Compared to the
| placebo, caffeine increased mean MFO by 10.7% (0.28 +- 0.10 vs.
| 0.31 +- 0.09 g/min respectively, P < 0.001) in the morning, and
| by a mean 29.0% (0.31 +- 0.09 vs. 0.40 +- 0.10 g/min, P <
| 0.001) in the afternoon. Caffeine also increased mean Fatmax by
| 11.1% (36.9 +- 14.4 [placebo] vs. 41.0 +- 13.1%, P = 0.005) in
| the morning, and by 13.1% (42.0 +- 11.6 vs. 47.5 +- 10.8%, P =
| 0.008) in the afternoon.
| jonnycomputer wrote:
| From paper's abstract:
|
| >Compared to the placebo, caffeine increased mean MFO by 10.7%
|
| https://jissn.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12970-020-...
| kec wrote:
| Exercise is great for general fitness and can give you a slight
| edge in a calorie deficit but has little impact on weight loss
| in general. If you want to lose weight by far the easiest and
| most effective thing you can do is to get your diet under
| control.
| dbsmith83 wrote:
| I've lost significant weight twice (~20-25 lbs). Once was
| purely diet with very little exercise, and the other way was
| way more exercise, but less diet control.
|
| The first way made me feel tired and light-headed, and not
| that great overall. The second way (high exercise, a little
| diet control) took longer, but also makes me feel 10 years
| younger and pretty much as healthy as I've ever been.
| bloaf wrote:
| My personal experience is that establishing a good exercise
| routine helps with the diet a lot. If you're pushing
| yourself fitness-wise, you start to notice the impact diet
| (and sleep) has on your performance and select for foods
| that won't make you miserable during your workout.
| dbsmith83 wrote:
| Yeah, working out regularly makes me think twice about
| ever drinking enough to get even a minor hangover. Plus,
| a good exercise routine inspires a good diet because
| after all that time and energy working out, who wants to
| mess it up?
| cseleborg wrote:
| Thank you! Though anecdotal, it is super helpful to learn
| about your experience like this.
| watwut wrote:
| For whatever is worth, I had similar experience. The
| thing, calories deficit means you are passive, tired,
| irritable, have problem to focus. So you are less
| effective at work too. How bad the irritability is for
| others I understood only when someone else was dieting
| and turned into someone constantly angry.
|
| In addition, if you diet only, it is very easy to cause
| yourself annemia or other health issue. It happened to me
| and it actually affects life a lot. Most of sources talk
| about what you should not eat, but very little about how
| to recognize you are missing something or overdoing it.
| watwut wrote:
| However, exercise is very important ingredient if your goal
| is health rather then aesthetic.
| umanwizard wrote:
| It's probably important in either case.
| watwut wrote:
| Yes, especially if you have passive lifestyle. But it is
| not all that much how many calories you burn, but about
| what it does to your body in general.
| randlet wrote:
| > If you want to lose weight by far the easiest and most
| effective thing you can do is to get your diet under control.
|
| Easy is the wrong word. Getting your diet under control is
| the hardest part of losing weight. Most effective,
| absolutely. Simple, yes, easy, no.
| mmartinson wrote:
| I've always found exercise to be a motivator for getting
| diet under control. Periods of low exercise correlates with
| bad eating. Building back the routine makes shifting diet
| much easier.
| randlet wrote:
| Same! Periods of low exercise correlate with lower moods
| for me and lower moods mean less will power which makes
| keeping my diet in check tougher. The opposite is also
| true.
| Fricken wrote:
| When I'm getting regular exercise everything else just
| kind of falls in to place. My appetite works properly,
| and I move towards my healthy body weight eating whatever
| I feel like eating.
| bserge wrote:
| Sure, but if you exercise and don't control your diet,
| you'll end up still fat but with more muscle underneath.
| Which isn't exactly the goal.
| noobrunner wrote:
| I agree. Whenever I decide to lose weight, I've always
| found that turning both the knobs(diet & exercise) at the
| same time in the beginning is overwhelming and doesn't work
| for me. I have to get into a routine for one of the two
| first before focussing my attention on the other. Usually,
| it's exercise first. Wonder if other people have same
| exeperience
| Fricken wrote:
| Getting my diet under control is contingent on getting my
| appetite under control. It's mediated by my sleep levels,
| stress levels, how much exercise I'm getting, what types of
| calories I'm eating, what time I'm eating them, and my
| microbiome. It's so disingenuous to say "Just eat less". If
| it was that simple, there wouldn't be an obesity epidemic.
| bryanrasmussen wrote:
| it is of course good to get confirmation that taking a stimulant
| that is also a diuretic increases fat-burning - as I believe most
| people would suspect - but I don't think that confirmation is
| headline level good.
| softwaredoug wrote:
| I've always avoided caffeine before exercise because I've worried
| about overexerting myself and getting an injury from going all
| out. I wonder if there's research on this factor?
| bluedino wrote:
| Caffeine is the main ingredient in most pre-workout drinks
| klyrs wrote:
| The only reason I've found to avoid it is that 1 time in 10,
| coffee before a long ride means that I'll urgently need to pee
| every few miles -- way more often than I can find a legal place
| to do so.
| noobrunner wrote:
| haha, this has happened to me during a half marathon. It cost
| me 10-15 mins as there was a big line outside the toilet
| jniedrauer wrote:
| Anecdotal, but I find the exact opposite to be the case. The
| more alert and "strong" I feel during intense training, the
| less likely I am to let my form slip. When you're dog tired and
| slouching over, that's when the injuries happen.
| dbsmith83 wrote:
| I do too for the most part. It seems too risky and I am not a
| professional athlete, so there is no need to push it too hard.
|
| https://aaptiv.com/magazine/pre-workout-drinks "Are Pre-Workout
| Drinks Healthy or Harmful?" > The caffeine and creatine that
| most of these drinks contain can also have harmful effects on
| the body. "Excessive caffeine can increase your heart rate and
| blood pressure, causing cardiac issues," Woeckener notes.
| melolife wrote:
| This is the last thing I'd be worried about. It's coffee, not
| some kind of anabolic steroid/cocaine mixture.
|
| I know a lot of people who spend way too much time trying to
| optimize supplements and other tiny details instead of throwing
| down and getting on with your life.
|
| Edit: after reading other comments yours makes more sense, but
| I'd still be more worried about what's actually in a pre-work
| out beverage than over-exertion.
| notsuoh wrote:
| I'm objectively very high performing at aerobic exercise, since
| high school and have kept it up. I have seen quantitatively
| higher performance when taking 3-5 mg/kg of caffeine before
| exercise and regularly during. This includes anything high
| intensity aerobic, from swimming to running to cycling.
|
| This is the best collection of research I have seen on the
| topic and where I arrived at my 3-5 number above many years
| ago, perhaps it will be useful and seems to speak to the
| broader topic at hand: https://fellrnr.com/wiki/Caffeine
| TwoBit wrote:
| I haven't read this study, but I read about this from other
| studies 20 years ago.
| webmaven wrote:
| _> I haven 't read this study, but I read about this from other
| studies 20 years ago._
|
| A few years ago I saw an EMEA advertising campaign promoting
| Turkish coffee as a pre-exercise boost.
| mrfusion wrote:
| Follow up question. Does intense exercise metabolize caffeine
| faster?
|
| I usually can't sleep if I have caffeine after 2pm but if I drink
| it in the evening but before a big workout I don't notice any
| trouble sleeping.
| mean_gene_1976 wrote:
| Is this really a eureka moment? I mean this has been pretty
| obvious.
| jonnycomputer wrote:
| "15 caffeine-naive men" mean age 32 years.
|
| Now we know why the N is so low. /s
| beforeolives wrote:
| This has been known for a long time and it's fairly well studied.
| I suppose the more interesting part for them was studying the
| daily variation in fat burning.
| poundofshrimp wrote:
| > A total of 15 men (mean age, 32) participated in the research
|
| A sample size of 15. Seriously?
| jniedrauer wrote:
| We've known that caffeine increases aerobic capacity for half a
| century now. I don't see what new information this study is
| bringing to the table. If you take caffeine and your aerobic
| capacity increases, then you will either do more work, or perform
| at a lower percentage of your lactate threshold. In both cases,
| you metabolize more fat.
| baby wrote:
| Or can give you a heart attack no?
| PragmaticPulp wrote:
| > Subjects ingested 3 mg/kg of caffeine or a placebo at 8am and
| 5pm
|
| 3mg/kg is over 250mg of caffeine for an average weight man. Twice
| a day makes that 500mg.
|
| An 8.4oz can of Red Bull contains 80mg of caffeine. They were
| giving these people an amount of caffeine equivalent to 6 cans of
| Red Bull. Not a perfect comparison because Red Bull contains
| other ingredients, but that's still a lot of caffeine. For
| another point of reference, that's 2.5 shots of 5 hour energy
| (200mg caffeine per bottle).
|
| To top it off, the subjects were caffeine-naive, so they had no
| caffeine tolerance. They must have been feeling extremely
| energetic.
|
| No wonder they burned more fat. I'm not sure this is going to
| translate to your casual coffee drinker or someone with a high
| caffeine tolerance.
| lmilcin wrote:
| I am pretty sure that not sleeping at all also increases fat
| burning as body uses less energy when asleep
|
| The fat burning might be from reaction of organism that is not
| used to a lot of daily caffeine ingestion. For example, when I
| don't use caffeine for a long time my heart rate increases when
| I increase amount of coffee I drink. But then goes back after
| some time (presumably when my body gets accustomed to it
| again).
|
| Also, this kind of research must be read with a little bit of
| scientific background.
|
| It is easy to get an impression author wanted to establish
| causation, but in reality this research only shows correlation,
| and correlation does not prove causation.
| sjg007 wrote:
| Poor sleep is associated with weight gain.
| lmilcin wrote:
| See my other response to sibling comment.
|
| TLDR: weight gain is not from body using less energy but
| from your regulating machine being put out of balance.
|
| Body on caffeine will still use more calories, but your
| brain on poor sleep will make worse choices and you will
| eat more just to offset unhappiness.
| umanwizard wrote:
| I wonder if that's because sleepiness is associated with
| poor impulse control. I know when I'm super tired I tend to
| eat whatever I want the next day.
| readme wrote:
| it's because sleep regulates the hormones that control
| your appetite
|
| if you mean poor control of your body's natural drive to
| eat which is imperative to our survival, then sure
|
| very few people can consistently control this "impulse"
| -- the best way to control it is to get adequate sleep
| and regulate your hormones
| DoreenMichele wrote:
| One means to keep functioning while sleep deprived is to
| eat more. I don't think it's really _poor impulse
| control_ per se. It 's a coping mechanism, sort of like
| the body shunting waste gas through the kidneys at high
| altitude because you can't offload them all via breathing
| out and they have to go somewhere, but that's not really
| the optimal way to do that and it has knock on effects
| because urinating to remove them also drags salt and
| other stuff with it, thus the need to drink more and get
| more electrolytes at altitude. (Edit: implicitly, weight
| gain us the equivalent knock on effect for eating more
| while sleep deprived.)
| luxuryballs wrote:
| That and you may be having an extra meal whereas you
| otherwise would have been asleep.
| toyg wrote:
| There is that and there is the "enforced fasting
| interval" that sleep is.
| moron4hire wrote:
| The first meal after sleeping through the night is called
| "break-fast", after all.
| sjg007 wrote:
| The sleep deprived body directs calories to fat storage.
| dijit wrote:
| > I am pretty sure that not sleeping at all also increases
| fat burning as body uses less energy when asleep
|
| From the admittedly little I know about biology and sleep
| science; I thought it was universally accepted that poor
| sleep harms your metabolism and thus would make fat-burning
| less likely.
| lmilcin wrote:
| No, it is not "universally accepted".
|
| It is actually opposite. Most organisms under stress
| _increase_ their energy consumption.
|
| A good proxy for energy consumption by your body is your
| heart rate. Heart rate is linked to the amount of blood
| distributed through your body and amount of blood is amount
| of oxygen that is needed by your cells for metabolism.
|
| And amount of oxygen used by cells is almost equal to the
| amount of energy produced (excluding those rare anaerobic
| regimes).
|
| Heart rate is always lowest at night during sleep.
|
| What you probably meant is that a person who has poor sleep
| will have a statistical tendency to eat more, for many
| reasons. One it is more difficult to exercise willpower
| when you are not rested well. It might also be more
| difficult to accurately judge whether what you feel is
| hunger.
|
| To accurately compare energy use by body you would have to
| externally limit amount of calories ingested to same level
| and figure out how much CO2 you emit or how much weight you
| lost.
|
| Otherwise you are measuring your regulating machine -- ie.
| your brain, hormones, etc. and that is whole other set of
| problems.
|
| Eating makes us feel better and if you are on poor sleep
| you might eat just to offset it.
| dijit wrote:
| I'm quite sure you're mistaken as studied animals
| (usually rodents) do not behave the same as humans; and
| ultimately if our metabolic system becomes unbalanced
| then our body is suffering and will certainly attempt to
| overcompensate or risk damaging itself.
|
| It matters very little if we burn fat faster, though I
| doubt it; it matters what the outcome is. In this case it
| does appear that people get fatter.
|
| > More than two dozen epidemiological studies from around
| the globe looking at sleep deprivation and BMI in humans
| have shown association between decreased obesity and an
| increase in sleep duration.
|
| > Data regarding impact of sleep deprivation on weight
| loss is conflicting in animals and humans. Sleep
| deprivation in rodent models causes weight loss despite
| hyperphagia [63-68]. These differences in rodents and
| humans may be explained by increased brown fat in rodents
| (rarely present in adult humans), which is metabolically
| more active and has been shown to increase thermogenesis
| and total energy expenditure [67]. In conclusion,
| epidemiological data is suggestive of weight gain with
| sleep deprivation though a few studies have also noted
| weight gain with prolonged sleep. Based on data on sleep
| duration and weight, sleep hygiene counseling could form
| an important tool in management of obesity.
|
| https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2929498/
| matwood wrote:
| You left out the next part of your first quote:
|
| > More than two dozen epidemiological studies from around
| the globe looking at sleep deprivation and BMI in humans
| have shown association between decreased obesity and an
| increase in sleep duration. _These studies however do not
| establish a causal relationship._
|
| The paper also mentions and agrees with who you were
| responding to:
|
| > In summary, energy expenditure is reduced during sleep.
| Sleep deprivation appears to increase energy expenditure.
|
| And finally in the conclusion:
|
| > Paradoxically a similar U-shaped relation is also noted
| in several studies looking at the relationship between
| sleep and weight, with both short and long sleep leading
| to weight gain.
|
| I may have missed it, but it doesn't appear a causal
| relationship was ever formed between metabolic
| dysregluation from sleep issues and weight gain. And
| since both less and more sleep were associated with
| weight gain, is sleep or the lack thereof just another
| symptom of stress and depression? Both of which often
| cause people to eat more.
| satellite2 wrote:
| I don't see how this contradicts GP points.
|
| The first point is that lack of sleep is associated with
| increased metabolism (increased energy expenditure at
| rest).
|
| The second point is that the apparent link between weight
| gain and sleep deprivation could be explained by
| involontary caloric intake increase.
| arcticbull wrote:
| A lack of sleep leads to higher levels of cortisol and
| insulin, and decreases insulin sensitivity. This in turn
| physically prevents you from burning stored fat and leads
| to blood sugar being converted into fat for longer-term
| storage.
|
| [1] https://www.sleepfoundation.org/physical-health/sleep-
| and-bl...
| ApolloFortyNine wrote:
| It's odd they didn't speak of caffeine itself as a supplement,
| and instead mentioned coffee.
|
| Caffeine is a pretty common ingredient in any pre-workout, and
| you can get 200mg pills online cheaply.
| thinkingemote wrote:
| Not that odd if you consider science writing should appeal to
| as many as possible. The study itself used these workout
| pills you mention which were made from green coffee beans:
|
| https://jissn.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12970-020-.
| ..
| raverbashing wrote:
| Yeah one can is my limit (let's say, for a 4h period). I can't
| imagine what would feel taking the equivalent of taking that
| amount all at once. Probably the usual effects (headache and
| severe dizziness)
|
| That being said, caffeine is a good pre-workout.
| perrylaj wrote:
| Seems like a lot when put in terms of Redbull, but isn't really
| in the context of athletes and performance. 5mg/kg is a common
| number as a pre-event dose for endurance athletes, and science
| seems to be mixed on ideal due to large individual variation in
| tolerance, response, and metabolics[1]. There are many
| 'thermogenic' fat loss supplements that have 150mg+ per dose
| taken multiple times a day.
|
| Cyclists I know commonly take 400mg before a race to training
| session, and often top up over the course of the event if it's
| more than a couple hours. So I don't think the numbers reported
| are high, unless casual coffee is your basis comparison. But in
| the context of caffeine for fat loss, where supplements have
| high amounts, the numbers seem in line with common use.
|
| 1. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5752738/
| PragmaticPulp wrote:
| The subjects were caffeine-naive non-athletes. They had zero
| caffeine tolerance.
|
| 500mg is a huge amount for a caffeine-naive person, no matter
| how you look at it. No one goes from drinking zero caffeine
| to 6 Red Bulls per day without experiencing abnormally high
| stimulation.
| BurningFrog wrote:
| I'm not sure you two are disagreeing?
| SkyPuncher wrote:
| > Seems like a lot when put in terms of Redbull,
|
| Redbull doesn't actually have that much caffeine. A
| typically, 8oz cup of coffee has more caffeine than a
| redbull.
|
| In fact, most "energy drinks" don't have that much caffeine.
| They have other ingredients that also provide energy.
| schappim wrote:
| In the industry the other ingredients are called "pixie
| dust".
|
| The heavy lifting is done by the caffeine.
| qeternity wrote:
| And anyone without a shockingly low caffeine tolerance
| also knows that one of the main ingredients in energy
| drinks is marketing.
|
| Red Bull does nothing to most people that a cup of black
| coffee wouldn't do. But the placebo effect is a helluva
| drug.
| bluedino wrote:
| 240mg is pretty common for the canned energy drinks
| carbocation wrote:
| Extrapolating from your comment, I guess we'd kind of want a
| blocked design that is placebo-vs-caffeine and exercise-vs-
| none.
|
| That would tell us whether there is just an additive effect of
| high-dose caffeine and exercise, or if somehow the caffeine is
| interactive with exercise (i.e., has a bigger effect in the
| exercise group than in the rest group).
| sinsterizme wrote:
| A tall (smallest size) pyke roast from Starbucks is 235 mg of
| caffeine. A venti (what I normally get) is 410 mg.
| dragonwriter wrote:
| The smallest size at Starbucks is "short", it's just not
| listed on the menu.
| noobrunner wrote:
| Haha, I just learned this recently. It's on the menu in
| their app. I always order short now when I am in a mood for
| "unhealthy" drink
| erickhill wrote:
| If they truly had no caffeine tolerance, iirc back when I first
| started ingesting more than I was used to it would make me a
| bit sick to my stomach.
| bosswipe wrote:
| mg/kg is a really weird unit to use without saying how many kg
| were consumed.
| carbocation wrote:
| It's usually a unit of mg consumed per kg of body weight.
| (Hopefully 0 kg of which are being consumed.)
| detaro wrote:
| When used in contexts like this, it's mg of substance per
| kilogram of body weight. (with the assumption that the effect
| on metabolism etc somewhat scales with body weight, at least
| for people that are otherwise similar)
| bosswipe wrote:
| Oh. Thank you that makes more sense.
| watwut wrote:
| Yet another question is, whether or is even healthy. It might
| just be that not burning that fat more quickly can be healthier
| then drinking so much coffein.
| Godel_unicode wrote:
| A grande (16oz) drip coffee from starbucks is over 300mg of
| caffeine. The problem with Red Bull is the sugar.
| thinkingemote wrote:
| How about sugar free energy drinks?
| bserge wrote:
| Just use caffeine pills.
| snarfy wrote:
| 3mg/kg for an average weight man is about 3 cups of coffee.
| hombre_fatal wrote:
| Almost seems like you're trying to sensationalize it by
| changing it to Red Bull, something that's actually pretty low
| in caffeine once you put marketing aside.
|
| How about comparing it to Starbucks' regular hot coffee sizes?
|
| - Short - 180 mg
|
| - Tall - 260 mg
|
| - Grande - 330 mg
|
| - Venti - 415 mg
|
| Is drinking a 12oz Tall at Starbucks really dropping your jaw?
| coderintherye wrote:
| That's a fair point, Starbucks coffee has more caffeine than
| an average cup of coffee. I'm sure many people (including
| myself) are not aware of that.
|
| https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/five-myths-about-
| caf...
| arcticbull wrote:
| The amount of caffeine in a coffee depends on its
| extraction method, the grind, and to a lesser extent on
| roast. An espresso actually has much less caffeine than a
| cup of drip (60mg vs 200mg). Generally the longer you leave
| the beans exposed to water the more caffeine comes out, up
| to about 400 minutes when making cold brew. [1]
|
| I doubt Starbucks is deviously out to over-caffeinate its
| customers (although if they were, they've got my vote!) but
| rather the difference is attributable to variations in
| their brewing process.
|
| There's a limit to the amount of caffeine that can possibly
| come out of a bean, and so I would say that unless there's
| evidence they're spiking the brew, that Starbucks coffee is
| roughly the definition of an "average cup of coffee"
|
| A Venti is 590mL and 415mg of caffeine, 700mg/L of coffee.
| Based on the chart in [1] that would be roughly speaking
| the midpoint of roast kind at the 150 minute mark making
| cold brew, 10g/100mL of coffee beans (Figure 1). Or
| approximately a dark roast, coarse grind hot brew (Figure
| 3).
|
| [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5740146/
| leetrout wrote:
| I get so tired of people equating espresso with high
| amounts of caffeine. I don't know where that
| originated... maybe because of the high temp / pressure
| extraction and the oils making it so much richer?
| Godel_unicode wrote:
| Well it is much higher caffeine/volume, it's just that
| you (typically) drink a much lower volume of it.
| dfee wrote:
| A Starbucks Espresso shot has 75mg at 1oz.
|
| A Starbucks dark roast (short size) has 130mg at 8oz -
| that is 16.25mg/oz.
|
| That means the espresso has 4.6x the caffeine per volume.
| I'd say those people you're tired of have something worth
| listening to.
|
| https://globalassets.starbucks.com/assets/94fbcc2ab1e2435
| 985...
| leetrout wrote:
| But look who I was responding to: people think a single
| shot of espresso had more caffeine than a cup of coffee
| and that is not true.
|
| Starbucks drinks typically have 2 shots (such as a grande
| mocha) which gonna be around the same amount of caffeine
| as a cup of coffee
| httpsterio wrote:
| there's also an approximate 30% difference in caffeine
| between Arabica beans and robusta beans, the latter
| having more caffeine.
|
| Starbucks use Arabica, typically Italian or French
| espresso based drinks ha e been made with robusta or an
| Arabica robusta blend.
|
| Starbucks coffee is not higher in caffeine compared to
| other cafes, it can actually be lower. The only sig
| ificant difference is portion sizes, like you mentioned.
| SkyPuncher wrote:
| A "cup" of coffee is officially 8oz and typically between
| 80 and 100mg.
|
| Starbucks coffee doesn't really have a higher ratio of
| caffeine, just more volume than the official
| measurements.
|
| That being said, I don't know anybody that drink 8oz cups
| of coffee.
| beforeolives wrote:
| I think the point is that there is a difference between a
| cup of filter coffee and an espresso drink (Americano,
| latte, cappuccino etc) with the same volume. The first
| one is well... coffee, the latter contains only a shot or
| two of espresso and the rest of the volume in the cup is
| hot water/milk.
| gabrielsroka wrote:
| I make coffee at home every day. I rarely go to places
| like Starbucks. I just measured my cup and it's 8 oz. I
| have one cup every morning.
| js2 wrote:
| Coffee "cups" are measured in units of 6 oz:
|
| https://www.triplebarcoffee.com/blog/how-many-ounces-are-
| in-...
| scrozart wrote:
| Thanks for digging these up. I agree OP would have to try to
| avoid first looking at coffee.
| JUNGLEISMASSIVE wrote:
| Coffee is a lot more than caffeine, though. It contains a
| whole family of monoamine oxidase inhibitors, which have a
| host of effects on the nervous system.
|
| That said, Red Bull very likely contains several types of
| flavonoids that also act as MAO-B inhibitors.
|
| Coffee, on the other hand, contains both MAO-A and MAO-B
| inhibitors mainly from the Harmala alkaloid family. Some of
| the compounds are neurotoxic.
| arcticbull wrote:
| It seems like caffeine alone is an MAOI [1] and that decaf
| may not have the same effect [2] - very cool, thank you for
| sharing! I know there's a lot more in coffee too, so I'm
| looking forward to learning more.
|
| [edit] Found this [3] which I assume is what you were
| talking about? Which I assume is the reason studies show it
| can act as an antidepressant [4]. Fascinating!
|
| [1] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23850513/
|
| [2] https://www.jwatch.org/fw108796/2014/05/06/severe-
| hypertensi...
|
| [3] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16139309/
|
| [4]
| https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/313988#possible-
| ri...
| seaman1921 wrote:
| Yes drinking two 12oz Talls at Starbucks every day is not
| good for your sleep.
|
| Nespresso capsules have 60g for reference.
| sokoloff wrote:
| Do you mean mg rather than g?
| halfmatthalfcat wrote:
| Source? I drink a fair amount of coffee every morning (not
| any after 10am) and never had any sleep issues. The half
| life for caffeine is somewhere around 6 hours, no?
| nwienert wrote:
| Closer to 10 or 12 for many, it has a high variance in
| humans.
| csa wrote:
| Anecdata, but one tall (actually, even one short) at 8am
| will typically postpone the time I fall asleep by 4 hours
| and will typically reduce my sleep by an equal amount
| (i.e., I wake up at the same time despite falling asleep
| later).
|
| I've run some experiments on myself, and this lasts for
| days at a time with one tall in the morning. If I keep at
| it for several days, I will crash early one evening, but
| still only sleep for 4 hours. It's a nightmare for
| someone who typically sleeps 8 hours a night -- I just
| feel fog-brained all the time. That said, workouts are
| super easy.
|
| If I had a tall in the morning _and_ evening on a regular
| basis, ugh... I can't even imagine. I did this once for
| extra energy during a sports tournament (we won), but I
| basically had to drink myself to sleep each night.
|
| Multiple doctors have told me that caffeine sensitivity
| varies from person to person, but I am on the unusually
| sensitive side.
| PragmaticPulp wrote:
| > Is drinking a 12oz Tall at Starbucks really dropping your
| jaw?
|
| Yes, absolutely. But I rarely consume caffeine so my
| experience is very different than yours.
|
| The study used caffeine-naive individuals. That is, people
| without any caffeine experience or tolerance.
|
| If you give two tall Starbucks coffees to a caffeine naive
| person, it will definitely cause some notable effects.
|
| Frequent coffee drinkers tend to underestimate the impact of
| their caffeine tolerance. A seasoned coffee drinker consuming
| two of the strongest coffees on the market day after day is a
| different story than caffeine-naive individuals skipping
| straight to excessive doses of caffeine without any
| tolerance.
| hombre_fatal wrote:
| Still, not too many people are drinking 6x Red Bulls at
| once, the scenario you brought up as an example. Meanwhile
| swathes of the world are pulling into Starbucks daily, many
| for their first time.
|
| It's also not two 12oz coffees, it's one at 8am and another
| at 5pm. It just kinda seems like everything you write here
| is trying to cause a reaction and it feels manipulative.
|
| You write all this just to reveal your actual point:
|
| > If you give two tall Starbucks coffees to a caffeine
| naive person, it will definitely cause some notable
| effects.
|
| Well, sure. We can all agree on that. And one of the
| notable effects is increased fat oxidation. Notice how
| uninteresting this observation is by itself. No need to
| dress it up as something more.
| have_faith wrote:
| It drops my jaw that anyone drinks that regularly.
| arcticbull wrote:
| Well, this massive million drinker meta-analysis of coffee
| consumption (high levels, 5 cups a day) shows it
| significantly improves cardiovascular health. [1]
|
| > A nonlinear association between coffee consumption and
| CVD risk was observed in this meta-analysis. Moderate
| coffee consumption was inversely significantly associated
| with CVD risk, with the lowest CVD risk at 3 to 5 cups per
| day, and heavy coffee consumption was not associated with
| elevated CVD risk.
|
| [1] https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/full/10.1161/circulatio
| naha....
| jorvi wrote:
| There is also a breadth of studies that show consumption
| is bad - I wouldn't cheer just yet.
| nwienert wrote:
| What does it do to every other disease? Doesn't say much
| if it looks at a single factor outcome.
| toxik wrote:
| Suffice to say, if there were meaningful risks from
| drinking normal amounts of coffee, it would be known by
| now. Its main drawback is that it makes people nervous
| and jittery if taken in excess.
| ThrowawayP wrote:
| One of the other major ones is that it can aggravate
| stomach problems like gastritis since both coffee (even
| decaf) and caffeine are said to stimulate stomach acid
| production.
| themolecularman wrote:
| Interestingly I've heard about a strong relationship between
| heart attacks and consumption of energy drinks like
| Monster/Red-Bull.
|
| I used to drink a lot of Red Bull and stopped as a result. But
| I sometimes think one of the reasons I haven't put on weight
| despite my lifestyle is because of my caffeine habits.
| SkyPuncher wrote:
| Most energy drinks include other energy additives, which I
| think is where the dangers come from.
|
| I can no longer drink red bull because it gives me really bad
| heart palpitations. Meanwhile, I can pretty much drink coffee
| all day without issue.
| retrac wrote:
| Caffeine, at least in large doses, is somewhat stressful on
| the heart by itself. It increases respiration and blood
| pressure and heart rate. A strong cup of coffee can give me
| minor palpitations.
| krtkush wrote:
| I was diagnosed with high BP very early in my life (23-24
| yo). The doctor said it is okay to have everything in
| moderation but asked me to not touch energy drinks.
| SkyMarshal wrote:
| Back in the late 00's I discovered Redbull really helped me
| overcome after-lunch food-coma. I'd drink one right after
| lunch to help me get back to work and focus for the rest of
| the day.
|
| After about 6 months of this, one day I was sitting at my
| desk having just finished my afternoon Redbull, and felt my
| heart skip a beat, literally. Like a little mini-heart
| attack. Scared the shit out of me, and I quit Redbull cold
| turkey that day.
|
| At the time I was really into cycling, riding about 100 miles
| per week (50 on the weekend plus daily bike commute). I was
| in tip-top shape, with no family history of heart problems,
| and an otherwise normal, low-sugar, whole food diet.
|
| Never experienced that since, and I wouldn't be surprised if
| there are studies that find a link between super-high
| caffeine energy drinks and heart or other health problems.
| dbsmith83 wrote:
| Ah, this is called an ectopic heart-beat (usually
| harmless). Back when I drank too much coffee and didn't
| sleep in my last year of college, I got a few of these. Now
| I'm a one-cup-a-day kind of guy, and it hasn't happened
| much anymore.
| dbsmith83 wrote:
| The article title is misleading since the participants didn't
| actually drink coffee. I know, they said they ingested caffeine
| 'equivalent to', but it's a little misleading. There are other
| compounds in coffee which could increase or decrease the effects
| of just caffeine so it's best to not just assume it would be the
| same.
| jokoon wrote:
| anti depressants also makes you quite sensitive to caffeine
| dhimes wrote:
| I no longer give much attention to nutrition or sports
| performance studies that test a handful of people for a few
| weeks. It's simply not enough people, not a long enough study,
| and probably not controlled enough. My guess is that there are or
| will be (a) study(ies) with pretty much the opposite outcome.
|
| Years ago "studies showed" that caffeine had an anabolic effect
| that aided muscle growth. Now it seems that the opposite is
| "thought" to be true. [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28177708/]
| goostavos wrote:
| >probably not controlled enough
|
| This is the most frustrating part of any exercise science
| related literature. There are just so many studies that have
| absolutely preposterous designs. There is no shortage of papers
| drawing sweeping generalizations while using a sample size of
| 10 untrained individuals, over the course of 3 weeks, and with
| no regulation of diet. Then there's the general meaninglessness
| of "volitional failure" as a measurement -- Gah! It's
| maddening!
| oatmale wrote:
| Kind of old news at this point right? It's been touted as a "life
| hack" for at least a decade. I remember reading about this in the
| four hour body book. That was published in 2010. It was also
| based on prior studies.
| fc373745 wrote:
| Alright, caffiene = vasoconstriction and exercise means high bpm.
|
| Wouldn't this be a recipe for cardiac arrest?
| JeremyNT wrote:
| Regardless of this study's merits this makes some intuitive
| sense, since caffeine is a stimulant and a moderately performance
| enhancing drug. In my marathon training I consume caffeinated
| food as a quick "pick me up" after the first 90 minutes or so of
| exertion.
|
| If you are able to run faster... well guess what... you'll also
| consume more calories!
| dbsmith83 wrote:
| This from the study was very interesting to me:
|
| > In athletes, it is known that endurance performance is poorer
| early in the morning and late at night compared with the
| afternoon [6], and that MFO and Fatmax are higher in the
| afternoon compared to the morning whether in non-athlete male
| students [7], in untrained normal-weight and obese individuals
| [8], or in endurance-trained athletes [9]. The difference has
| been explained by the higher body temperature, the enhanced
| neural activation and contractile properties of the skeletal
| muscle, and the higher plasma catecholamine concentrations found
| in response to exercise in the afternoon compared to the morning
| and evening [10, 11].
|
| So it seems like regardless of if you had caffeine or not, it is
| better to work out in the afternoon vs. in the morning
| bArray wrote:
| I believe this is the paper:
| https://jissn.biomedcentral.com/track/pdf/10.1186/s12970-020...
|
| Seems as though we're talking about MFO (maximal fat oxidization)
| of 10.7% in the morning and 29% in the afternoon. Interestingly
| you see an increase in VO2max as well - which I believe is
| essentially blood oxygen.
|
| A few things I'll point out though:
|
| 1. This is just 15 men, aged 32 +/- 7 years. Doesn't quite seem
| like enough people to definitively draw a conclusion.
|
| 2. They are described as 'caffeine-naive' (which I assume means
| they do not normally consume caffeine) - so it's unclear if this
| effect would be the same to somebody who already regularly drinks
| caffeine.
| fabatka wrote:
| ... in mice.
| ve55 wrote:
| My favorite thing about 'study finds' articles on HN is that I
| get to read the comments and see people instantly tell me why the
| article (or sometimes paper as well) is terrible.
|
| I mean this _sincerely_ too, since it 's a very low-effort and
| quick way to find what is often some pretty critical flaws in the
| presented conclusions.
| chiefalchemist wrote:
| Perhaps. But in this case, 15 ppl is not a "study".
| Furthermore, this had no control group.
|
| This is not the type of information we come to HN for.
| kevinyun wrote:
| I appreciate this on the S1 filing threads where you can get
| some deep anecdotal insights on companies that you would have
| otherwise never been able to find through research.
| pizza wrote:
| Wait a little longer and you'll almost surely get comments
| pointing out why the top comments are bad as well lol :)
| SkyMarshal wrote:
| Same. Also, even studies without obvious flaws need to be
| reproduced with same results multiple times before we can start
| accepting the conclusion. A single study is at best suggestive.
| poundofshrimp wrote:
| If they approached me, I would have been a happy 16th
| participant.
| valleyjo wrote:
| >15 men participated in the study
|
| This is no where near the number of participants that would be
| needed to make such a broad claim
| [deleted]
| waynecochran wrote:
| As soon as a saw N = 15 then I realized this is pathetic
| empirical evidence. How does this even get published?
| seaman1921 wrote:
| well as long as you have a heading..
|
| Experiments have been conducted this way since forever - just
| 3 days ago I was reading richard feynman's book where he
| talks about this issue as well - basically the people who try
| to run experiment properly take longer and are pushed away
| and never get published or cited, whereas the poorly
| conducted experiments which show results aligned with what
| would make headlines get all the attention.
|
| This is why I take any studies, experiments, trials results
| with a big grain of salt.
| benmaraschino wrote:
| Counterpoint: the investigators used a crossover design, where
| each participant acts as their own control. Since within-
| subject variation <<< between-subject variation, this makes the
| effective sample size much, much higher than it would seem at
| first. In terms of efficiency, their design's potentially
| equivalent to a vanilla parallel-arm trial with close to 100
| subjects (or more) in each arm. So, you definitely can obtain
| solid evidence from N=15 (or less), if your study is carefully
| designed.
|
| Sample size is only a very small part of the overall
| methodological picture--design matters too.
| airhead969 wrote:
| Caffeine is performance-enhancing, raises metabolism
| (temporarily), and suppresses hunger.
|
| Unfortunately, it's readily-apparent that you can never outrun
| your fork, so forget about "burning calories" through cardio. The
| goal of fitness to lose weight ought to be weightlifting to gain
| as much muscle mass as possible to raise one's BMR. Passive
| metabolism is about the only way to do it without enrolling in
| BUD/S. In general, gymrattery and endless treadmill running are
| wasted effort.
|
| https://youtu.be/mTABw0EyIWY
| qeternity wrote:
| The additional fat loss due to increased lean muscle mass is
| minimal, comparatively. All of these things like "afterburn"
| effect (EPOC), etc are all to give people the illusion that
| there are easier ways to lose weight than eating less.
|
| I'm not a keto maximalist, do whatever works for you. But most
| people looking to lose weight would do wonderfully on 1,250
| calories per day of high protein, medium fat, with the odd day
| of fasting and plenty of water and coffee. Refeed every couple
| of weeks to keep leptin in check.
| dhimes wrote:
| I agree.
|
| From what I understand, a pound of muscle burns 6 Cals/day
| (that's kCals, but in the US we just use Cals capitalized). A
| pound of fats burns 2-3 Cals/day. A 25 year old amateur non-
| drug- enhanced male can put on maybe 10 lbs of muscle in a
| year with a oot of hard work.
|
| So the idea of putting on muscle to increase metabolism in
| order to get lean won't pay off for most of us.
| qeternity wrote:
| Precisely. I'm a big lifter, who used to be pretty chunky.
| I did a full recomp years ago and it definitely wasn't the
| added muscle/increased BMR that let me cut. It was my diet.
|
| Muscle makes you look good with clothes on. Diet makes you
| look good with clothes off.
| SkyPuncher wrote:
| From the study:
|
| > This began with the same warm-up protocol, followed by
| increments of 50 W every minute until self-reported exhaustion
|
| Am I wrong to think that this is simply "caffeine gives you
| energy to push yourself harder"? They controlled calorie intake,
| so simple CICO would suggest a longer exercise period needs to
| dig into fat reserves.
|
| Based on my personal anecdote, drinking caffeine before athletic
| activities gives me the energy to more consistently work at the
| edge of my physical limits. When I'm sleepy, I just don't care to
| push myself as hard.
| thinkingemote wrote:
| I suppose you would need to ask, scientifically, what do you
| mean by "give you energy". Do you mean purely a kind of
| psychological energy, a will, motivation?
| dbsmith83 wrote:
| There's many things at play with caffeine. You have increased
| heart rate and bp, increased concentration/focus, appetite
| suppression, etc.. I don't think you can point to one effect
| and say 'this is the one that makes the difference' in a cause
| and effect kind of way. They are all too related. I personally
| don't think it matters in this study. You would need another
| study to pinpoint factors down even more I suppose.
| raarts wrote:
| If my calculations are correct taking a strong cup of coffee
| (very strong actually), will burn 6 grams more fat per sustained
| hour of training.
|
| And still we don't know if total energy output was the same,
| because coffee can be a stimulant so may drive you to work
| harder.
| rubyn00bie wrote:
| This is not surprising to anyone who has ever walked into a GNC,
| or other health food store... is it even news? They've been
| selling shit like "redline" for many years to do exactly this.
|
| Power fat burner: caffeine + blood thinner. That's most of what
| things like redline do. Is it going to work if you don't
| exercise? Nope, but it sure as hell does help if you are
| exercising.
|
| I'd really only recommend it to people focused on losing a lot of
| weight. If you're trying to lose 10lbs it'll never make a
| difference. If you're trying to lose 100lbs though, then yeah,
| 6-12 months worth of slightly increased metabolic rate will probs
| have a net positive affect.
| robbintt wrote:
| What is the blood thinner for?
|
| Edit: found this ingredient list but not sure if it is the same
| formulation or what I am looking for:
| https://www.heb.com/product-detail/vpx-redline-xtreme-triple...
| nullify88 wrote:
| Blood thinners reduce blood viscosity increasing flow.
| Aspirin is commonly used together with ephedrine and caffeine
| to form an ECA stack.
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECA_stack
| bserge wrote:
| Can't buy ephedrine anymore. Or pseudoephedrine, which was
| shit anyway. They've been replaced with synephrine and
| other stuff, which is just bad.
| cheezerman wrote:
| Ephedrine is still available over the counter, in the US,
| at least.
| bserge wrote:
| And no amount of exercising will ever be better than just...
| eating less. The only surefire way to lose weight fast. People
| hate this one simple trick.
| rubyn00bie wrote:
| I 100% agree with you. I probably should have called out the
| "probably net benefit" is at most an extra 2-5% weight loss
| over an entire year with eating correctly and exercising
| making up 95%+ any potential weight loss.
|
| When I lost a bunch of weight, I counted the calories of
| everything I ate for about a year (and still more or less do
| 15+ years later; calorie content of foods is generally the
| same). After a few weeks/months, you pretty much memorize the
| calories of what you're likely to eat regularly. It makes the
| cost benefit analysis a lot easier, "the next X I eat is 300
| calories, is that 300 calories going to provide me the
| satisfaction the first did?" Personally, I found the answer
| is almost always no, and when it's not, you generally feel
| good about it.
| halfmatthalfcat wrote:
| Don't even need to particularly eat less. Calories
| in/calories out. As long as you're in a caloric deficit, you
| will lose weight. Now what your body is actually burning to
| lose that weight is a different story.
| retrac wrote:
| Amphetamine and methamphetamine are actually approved as
| treatments for morbid obesity by the FDA in America. AMP is
| actually still used in some cases today, though much more
| sparingly than historically. The side-effects and potential
| dependency make their use often very problematic. Still,
| between increasing the base metabolic rate and energy levels,
| and suppressing appetite, they do work.
|
| While caffeine has a very different mechanism of action, it
| does appear to indirectly work on the same dopamine-adenosine
| system. So it's not too surprising it'd work much the same way
| for weight loss. And fortunately caffeine seems to be mostly
| self-limiting in its compulsiveness.
| nodamage wrote:
| > This is not surprising to anyone who has ever walked into a
| GNC, or other health food store... is it even news?
|
| I mean, these places sell a lot of "supplements" that may or
| may not actually do what is claimed on the label. A triple-
| blinded trial showing that caffeine does actually increase fat
| oxidation is absolutely newsworthy, IMO.
| wk_end wrote:
| GNCs and other health food stores sell lots of snake oil. I
| wouldn't be surprised if lots of the stuff on the shelves, or
| stuff in the stuff on the shelves, does very little, if
| anything, for fat burning/muscle building.
| stefanmichael wrote:
| If you ever want a very real anxiety attack drink half of a
| redline without any caffeine tolerance. If you want to die,
| drink an entire redline.
|
| I tried it once in college and it blew my mind that something
| like that was available off the shelf.
| matwood wrote:
| I came here to write this same comment, and I _have_ a
| caffeine tolerance. Redline is the pot candy bar of caffeine.
| It 's a tiny bottle and if you don't read the side that says
| drink 1/2 or less too start, you can end up in a pretty bad
| state.
|
| But it's still nothing compared to Ripped Fuel in the 90s. In
| college I could take a couple of those, lift hard for 2
| hours, shower and then party all night like it was no big
| deal.
|
| https://www.livestrong.com/article/32157-ripped-fuel-work/
|
| > Thermogenic dietary supplements, more commonly known as
| weight-loss supplements, were classically made up of
| ephedrine, caffeine and aspirin, known as the ECA stack
| (ephedrine, caffeine and aspirin).
| pdimitar wrote:
| If I drink a full cup of good coffee before exercise I'll likely
| die of heart attack. My heart is starting to literally ache after
| I get 3 normal gulps of coffee and wait for 15 minutes.
|
| Other anti-oxidizing drinks like green tea do help a lot though.
|
| It really depends on the person. I was a former coffee addict and
| even though I mostly have quit coffee for full 10 years now I
| still can't get back to regularly consuming it. It's either half
| a cup once two weeks or a very shitty 2-3 days after.
| bserge wrote:
| Interesting. I had a similar experience, but recently I started
| taking levothyroxine and now coffee works exactly as it did
| 10-15 years ago.
|
| You should check your thyroid gland/thyroxine/TSH level
| sometime.
| pdimitar wrote:
| Yep, one of my 5 thyroid hormones is having high values so I
| am definitely going to the doctors soon.
|
| Whether I am epically stupid for not having done it 10 years
| ago is... entirely another matter.
| amelius wrote:
| > My heart is starting to literally ache after I get 3 normal
| gulps of coffee and wait for 15 minutes.
|
| Are you sure it isn't heartburn? It happens to a lot of people
| who drink coffee (and hasn't anything to do with the heart).
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heartburn
| Felger wrote:
| Did you have to stop coffee because of those heart like
| symptoms ?
| pdimitar wrote:
| I have never seen a doctor about it. By the time I stopped
| coffee I already had some slight arrhythmia so I was quite
| scared and never pursued any more detailed info.
|
| But yes, I stopped and got better almost instantly.
| jmmcd wrote:
| I think a doctor would recommend to see a doctor, here.
| whereis wrote:
| caffeine, aspirin, and ephedra - while ephedra is banned, this
| combo has been long known for fat burning properties. it is
| unsuprising that strong coffee also works.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-03-28 23:01 UTC)