This new investigation is an analysis of data on the tea- and coffee-drinking habits of nearly 1m adults in Britain. Those who said they preferred their beverages “hot” or “very hot” rather than “warm”, it found, had an increased risk of subsequently developing a type of oesophageal cancer that is called squamous-cell carcinoma.
> How hot is too hot? At the time IARC reviewed the scientific evidence, the available data suggested that the cancer risk goes up at drinks temperatures above 65°C. The new British study did not record drinks’ temperatures. Rather, it was up to participants to judge what drink temperature was warm, hot or very hot. Other investigations have found that the typical temperature of hot drinks in Britain and America is around 60°C. The study participants who said they drank their brew “warm” were, therefore, probably sipping it cooler than that. The takeaway message is, though, that the less hot your drink is, the better, says Gill Reeves from Oxford University, one of the study’s authors.
I once scalded my mouth on hot cocoa that had been (over) heated in a microwave.
Now, I carefully measure temperatures with a thermometer and have learned that 160F is a perfect pouring temperature, assuming it will be poured into a room temperature ceramic mug where it quickly cools into the 150F range. This temperature is pleasant for sipping and probably about the range where most people enjoy their coffee.
In some ways I wish that sample size and delta were manditory parts of these sorts of headlines.
Like "In a study of 900,000 people, those that drank their coffee were 5% more likely to develop esophageal cancer".
At very least it'd stop BS like "In a 10 rat study, peppermint oil cured cancer in 10% of the rats" or "Peppermint oil could cure cancer!" as a lot of scientific reporters would phrase it.
I understand that this is research worth doing, but for the love of god, they need to improve the messaging of this to the general public because, as it currently stands, it's outright hysterical.
I agree. Sensationalizing "is correlated with increased risk of cancer" to "could cause cancer" undermines the legitimacy of the inquiry and findings and just generally makes everyone dumb.
I'm annoyed I had to go googling around for the baseline rate. At 5 per 100,000 cases of this cancer, does even a 10X increase in risk matter versus having your beverage the way you like? Maybe cut the cream and sugar first.
As someone who got top grades in science classes, and a follower of science news for decades, I’ve never heard of temperature being a risk factor for cancer.
That said, it does make sense. Heat can cause damage to cells just like many chemicals can. I just don’t think many people connected the dots.
Katakana (the above character set representing syllables) is used for words of foreign origin, which this pastry is.
In turn it stems from French « langue de chat ».
"The evidence from human studies is based on observational data (which cannot prove that the link with cancer is causal). But experimental studies in animals point in the same direction."
Same applies to anything too hot, no matter if green tea, or anything else. It's stressing your cells, and over time they'll lose their shiny new shine. Considering how breakdown caused by fever begins at over 42°C, cautious conduct would be avoiding anything over 33 to 37°C. It's that simple.
22 comments
[ 0.33 ms ] story [ 4.3 ms ] threadHeadline seems somewhat spurious...
65C translates to ~150F.
Now, I carefully measure temperatures with a thermometer and have learned that 160F is a perfect pouring temperature, assuming it will be poured into a room temperature ceramic mug where it quickly cools into the 150F range. This temperature is pleasant for sipping and probably about the range where most people enjoy their coffee.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ijc.70654
Like "In a study of 900,000 people, those that drank their coffee were 5% more likely to develop esophageal cancer".
At very least it'd stop BS like "In a 10 rat study, peppermint oil cured cancer in 10% of the rats" or "Peppermint oil could cure cancer!" as a lot of scientific reporters would phrase it.
I know very hot beverages are group 2A probable carcinogen: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IARC_group_2A
I'm annoyed I had to go googling around for the baseline rate. At 5 per 100,000 cases of this cancer, does even a 10X increase in risk matter versus having your beverage the way you like? Maybe cut the cream and sugar first.
Anecdata, but my wife's grandmother famously liked her coffee pretty much scalding, and we did indeed lose her to esophageal cancer.
That said, it does make sense. Heat can cause damage to cells just like many chemicals can. I just don’t think many people connected the dots.
I assumed that was what gave my dad throat cancer because he was always gulping down hot coffee but the cause was something else in the end.
https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%8C%AB%E8%88%8C
https://forum.wordreference.com/threads/lengua-de-gato.32275... (Spanish discussion)
But why does Japan write different "cat's tongue" (the body part) than "cat's tongue" (the pastry)?
in mice strikes again