Categories
Change Password!
Reset Password!
Moderate consumption of sugar-sweetened and unsweetened coffee was linked with a reduction in death risk.
As per the outcomes of a large prospective cohort study, sugar-sweetened and unsweetened coffee when consumed moderately may reduce the risk of death. Dan Liu et al. aimed to assess the connection between the intake of artificially sweetened, sugar-sweetened, and sugarless coffee with cause-specific and all-cause fatality. The data was retrieved from UK Biobank.
Overall, 171 616 subjects with a mean age of 55.6 years free from cancer or cardiovascular disease (CVD) at baseline were recruited. The baseline dietary, lifestyle, and demographic data from UK Biobank were utilized. Self-reporting of dietary intake of artificially sweetened, sugar-sweetened, and unsweetened coffee was done. The CVD-related, cancer-related, and all-cause mortality was evaluated.
Notably, 3177 deaths were documented during a median follow-up of 7 years. The cox models with penalized splines depicted U-shaped links of artificially sweetened coffee, sugar-sweetened coffee, and unsweetened coffee with death rates. In contrast to the nonconsumers, the consumers of unsweetened coffee showed a reduced risk for all-cause mortality following modification in the clinical, sociodemographic, and lifestyle factors. Table 1 shows hazard ratios for reduced risk of all-cause mortality in consumers of unsweetened coffee and sugar-sweetened coffee.
The relationship between mortality and artificially sweetened coffee showed less consistency. The link of coffee drinking with fatality from CVD and cancer was highly persistent with that with all-cause mortality. The U-shaped relations were also seen for decaffeinated, ground, and instant coffee. Hence, a moderate intake of sugar-sweetened and sugarless coffee may be valuable for minimizing death risk.
Annals of Internal Medicine
Association of Sugar-Sweetened, Artificially Sweetened, and Unsweetened Coffee Consumption With All-Cause and Cause-Specific Mortality, A Large Prospective Cohort Study
Dan Liu et al.
Comments (0)