Caffeine Gender Bias

gotta love it! expat, maybe coming to wu before coffe is better for you dear. 😉

Obviously this is not a Stud y. 😜

that's the place expat, come back when you aren't so sharp so i can keep up with ya. 😉

I wish the news articles would give a little more specific info... The way it's written, though, ("Half of the pairs were given decaf coffee, while the other half received cups containing a large shot of caffeine.") it sounds like the caffeinated pairs might've been getting more caffeine than is normally in a cup of coffee, and I think there've already been studies saying that too much caffeine can have a negative effect on performance.

More importantly, I'm not sure if they have enough numbers to conclude anything more than further research needs to be done to conclude something.

i'll agree with the further research needs to be done part js. But, if as you say, the caffeine group got excess caffeine then shouldn't the women have done worse than the men? After all women are generally smaller than men thus the caffeine would be at a higher dose for them. i think there may be some merit to this study.

I guess I'm not arguing that there's a difference so much as I'm saying that you can't make the claims that the article is trying to make using 64 people (I'm guessing that's the number of total people, although it's worded somewhat ambiguously). Since half didn't receive caffeine, you're comparing 16 people on each side, meaning there's a lot of leeway for variables not being tested affecting the result.

For example, there could be a difference in tolerance such that men peak at a lower concentration of caffeine than women (not the only time when men would tend to peak sooner...) The men might've drunk faster in general, or might have metabolized the caffeine differently because of their recent diet.

To me, it's more whether these questions were even raised or not that would give me an idea as to whether the science is sound despite the small sample size, and thus whether it's worth giving weight to the claims mentioned in the article. I must admit I'm usually disappointed in science news articles because they leave out the important information needed to judge the reliability of the claim and require us to trust the reporter, even though there is rarely a follow-up if further studies show the relationship is more complicated because it doesn't make as good a story anymore.

Sorry, I forgot my rant tags... ^_^

DF, the study was done in the UK and they have absolutely no idea of what filtered coffee is supposed to taste like. They brew a pot, pour a few drops into the bottom of a cup then fill it with milk! After that dousing even Starbucks would be palatable!

I know there is a very expensive coffee that it eaten and then excreted by a certain animal .. not my cup of tea or coffee.

For me the Greeks and Turks make a seriously fine cup of joe. It's thick, rich,smooth as silk, and, if you're hardy enough you can chew the grounds after savoring the top part.

BTW, French, Italians, and Spaniards should not be allowed near a bean!

It hugely amuses me to hear Americans discussing what coffee should be like. For a depressingly large number of them, coffee should be like beer - flavor-free. Personally, I drink one of the hispanic coffees (decaf - doctor's orders), but with a deal more in the basket than the instructions say.