·

Is Coffee Healthy for You? New Research Reveals It Depends on Your Genetics

Published at 2024-08-27 18:54:01Viewed 217 times
Common article
Please reprint with source link

Researchers have found that genetics significantly influence coffee consumption, linking it to various health outcomes, including obesity and psychiatric conditions. The study highlights the complexity of genetic and environmental interactions in shaping coffee drinking habits and health impacts.

When it comes to your genetics, the answer is complicated.

Coffee drinking is a heritable habit, and one that carries a certain amount of genetic baggage.

Caffeinated coffee is a psychoactive substance, notes Sandra Sanchez-Roige, Ph.D., an associate professor in the University of California San Diego School of Medicine Department of Psychiatry. She is one of an international group of researchers who compared coffee consumption characteristics from a 23andMe database with an even larger set of records in the United Kingdom. She is the corresponding author of a study recently published in the journal Neuropsychopharmacology.

Hayley H. A. Thorpe, Ph.D., is the lead author on the paper. Thorpe, of the Department of Anatomy and Cell Biology, Schulich School of Medicine and Dentistry at Western University in Ontario, explained that the team collected genetic data as well as self-reported coffee-consumption numbers to assemble a genome-wide association study (GWAS). The idea was to make connections between the genes that were known to be associated with coffee consumption and the traits or conditions related to health.

“We used this data to identify regions on the genome associated with whether somebody is more or less likely to consume coffee,” Thorpe explained. “And then identify the genes and biology that could underlie coffee intake.”

Genetic Influences on Coffee Drinking

Abraham Palmer, Ph.D., is also a lead researcher on the paper and a professor in the UC San Diego School of Medicine Department of Psychiatry. He said that most people are surprised that there is a genetic influence on coffee consumption. “We had good reason to suspect from earlier papers that there were genes that influence how much coffee someone consumes,” he said. “And so, we weren’t surprised to find that in both of the cohorts we examined there was statistical evidence that this is a heritable trait. In other words, the particular gene variants that you inherit from your parents influence how much coffee you’re likely to consume.”

Sanchez-Roige said the genetic influence on coffee consumption was the first of two questions the researchers wanted to address.

“The second is something that coffee lovers are really keen on learning,” Sanchez-Roige said. “Is drinking coffee good or bad? Is it associated with positive health outcomes or not?”

The answer is not definitive. The group’s genome-wide association study of 130,153 U.S.-based 23andMe research participants was compared with a similar UK Biobank database of 334,649 Britons, revealing consistent positive genetic associations between coffee and harmful health outcomes such as obesity and substance use. A positive genetic association is a connection between a specific gene variant (the genotype) and a specific condition (the phenotype). Conversely, a negative genetic association is an apparent protective quality discouraging the development of a condition. The findings get more complicated when it comes to psychiatric conditions.

Challenges in Data Comparison and Cultural Differences

“Look at the genetics of anxiety, for instance, or bipolar and depression: In the 23andMe data set, they tend to be positively genetically correlated with coffee intake genetics,” Thorpe said. “But then, in the UK Biobank, you see the opposite pattern, where they’re negatively genetically correlated. This is not what we expected.”

She said there were other instances in which the 23andMe set didn’t align with the UK Biobank, but the greatest disagreement was in psychiatric conditions.

“It’s common to combine similar datasets in this field to increase study power. This information paints a fairly clear picture that combining these two datasets was really not a wise idea. And we didn’t end up doing that,” Thorpe said. She explained that melding the databases might mask effects, leading researchers toward incorrect conclusions — or even canceling each other out.

Sanchez-Roige says the researchers have some ideas about how the differences in results arose. To begin with, there was an apples-and-oranges aspect to the surveys. For instance, the 23andMe survey asked, “How many 5-ounce (cup-sized) servings of caffeinated coffee do you consume each day?” Compare it to the UK Biobank’s “How many cups of coffee do you drink each day? (Include decaffeinated coffee)”

Beyond serving size and the caffeinated/decaf divide, the surveys made no accommodations for the various ways coffee is served. “We know that in the U.K., they have generally higher preference for instant coffee, whereas ground coffee is more preferred in the U.S.,” Thorpe said.

“And then there’s the frappuccinos,” Sanchez-Roige added, citing the American trend of taking coffee loaded with sugary additives. Palmer mentioned other caffeinated drinks, especially in the context of the UK Biobank, tea, none of which were included in the GWAS, which addressed only coffee. Palmer added that the GWAS demonstrates the relationship between genotype and phenotype is more different than the relationship between coffee and tea.

“Genetics influences lots of things. For instance, it influences how tall you might be,” he said. “And those kinds of things probably would play out very similarly, whether you lived in the U.S. or the U.K. But coffee is a decision that people make.”

Genetic and Environmental Interactions

Sanchez-Roige pointed out that coffee comes in a variety of forms, from instant to frappuccino, and is consumed amid cultural norms that differ from place to place. A person with a given genotype might end up having quite a different phenotype living in the U.K. versus the U.S.

“And that’s really what the data are telling us,” she said. “Because unlike height, where your behavior doesn’t really have much to do with it, your behavior and the choices you’re making in your environment play out in various ways. So the interaction between genotype and environment complicates the picture.”

The collaborators stressed the need for more investigation to unravel the relationships between genetics and the environment, focusing not only on coffee/caffeine intake but also other substance-use issues.

Reference: “Genome-wide association studies of coffee intake in UK/US participants of European ancestry uncover cohort-specific genetic associations” by Hayley H. A. Thorpe, Pierre Fontanillas, Benjamin K. Pham, John J. Meredith, Mariela V. Jennings, Natasia S. Courchesne-Krak, Laura Vilar-Ribó, Sevim B. Bianchi, Julian Mutz, 23andMe Research Team, Sarah L. Elson, Jibran Y. Khokhar, Abdel Abdellaoui, Lea K. Davis, Abraham A. Palmer and Sandra Sanchez-Roige, 11 June 2024, Neuropsychopharmacology.
DOI: 10.1038/s41386-024-01870-x

In addition to the researchers noted above, co-authors on the paper from UC San Diego are: Benjamin K. Pham, John J. Meredith, Mariela V. Jennings, Natasia S. Courchesne-Krak and Sevim B. Bianchi, all of the Department of Psychiatry. Other co-authors are Pierre Fontanillas, of 23andMe, Inc.; Laura Vilar-Ribó, of the Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Spain; Julian Mutz, of King’s College London, U.K.; Sarah L. Elson and Jibran Y. Khokhar, of the University of Guelph, Canada; Abdel Abdellaoui, of the University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Lea K. Davis, of Vanderbilt University Medical Center; and the 23andMe Research Team.

Mariela V. Jennings, Sevim B. Bianchi, and Sandra Sanchez-Roige are supported by funds from the California Tobacco-Related Disease Research Program (TRDRP; Grant Number T29KT0526 and T32IR5226). Sevim B. Bianchi and Abraham Palmer were also supported by P50DA037844. BKP, Julian Mutz, and Sandra Sanchez-Roige are supported by NIH/NIDA DP1DA054394. Hayley H. A .Thorpe is funded through a Natural Science and Engineering Research Council PGS-D scholarship and Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) Fellowship. Jibran Y. Khokhar is supported by a CIHR Canada Research Chair in Translational Neuropsychopharmacology. Lea K. Davis is supported by R01 MH113362. Natasia S. Courchesne-Krak is funded through an Interdisciplinary Research Fellowship in NeuroAIDs (Grant Number R25MH081482). Julian Mutz is funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Maudsley Biomedical Research Centre at South London Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust and King’s College London.

The datasets used for the PheWAS and LabWAS analyses described were obtained from Vanderbilt University Medical Center’s BioVU which is supported by numerous sources: institutional funding, private agencies, and federal grants. These include the NIH-funded Shared Instrumentation Grant S10RR025141; and CTSA grants UL1TR002243, UL1TR000445, and UL1RR024975. Genomic data are also supported by investigator-led projects that include U01HG004798, R01NS032830, RC2GM092618, P50GM115305, U01HG006378, U19HL065962, R01HD074711; and additional funding sources listed at https://victr.vumc.org/biovu-funding/. PheWAS and LabWAS analyses used CTSA (SD, Vanderbilt Resources). This project was supported by the National Center for Research Resources, Grant UL1 RR024975-01, and is now at the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, Grant 2 UL1 TR000445-06.

0 人喜欢

Comments

There is no comment, let's add the first one.

弦圈热门内容

Linus Kramer之拓扑群notes:Locally Compact Groups and Lie Groups

本notes顾名思义是关于局部紧致群和李群的,开篇先从最基本的拓扑群开始讲起,我当初就是靠这些内容补充拓扑群相关的基础的。为啥没有进一步往下学这个notes,一来是我不需要,二来是这个notes是残缺的,只写到第二章就没有了😅,即只有下图中画圈的部分。目前这本notes在网上已经绝迹,我今天倒是找到另一份残缺版,不过标题改成了Locally Compact Groups,内容倒是比之前的残缺版多一些。既然是属于稀缺资源,因此本notes除了学习价值以外,还有一定的收藏价值,因此我在此将该notes的两个版本都分享给有需要的人。PS:作者不再提供附件下载。

Charles Rezk拓扑学notes:Compactly Generated Spaces

本notes主要讲的是拓扑学中$k$-spaces与$k$-Hausdorff space的相关概念,之所以保存这份notes是因为我当初学习高阶范畴的时候,刚好需要用到这些概念。比如说,无穷范畴的定义就需要用到他们:A topological category is a category which is enriched over $\mathcal{C}\mathcal{G}$, the category of compactly generated (and weakly Hausdorff) topological spaces. The category of topological categories will be denoted by $\mathcal{C}at_{top}$.而抛开它与无穷范畴的联系,仅仅考虑它在拓扑学本身的意义,我觉得这也是本拓扑学方面有趣的notes,不仅是因为有趣的概念如$k$-空间、$k$-豪斯多夫空间,还有紧致生成的空间,还包括一些有趣的结论。总之,对高阶范畴、或者更深入的拓扑学感兴趣的人,可以看看。PS:作者不再提供附件下载。

陈省身微分几何经典教材《微分几何讲义》

一说到陈省身经典的微分几何教材《微分几何讲义》,就勾起我很多回忆。这本书是我初三时期入门微分几何的教材,虽然相比于Loring W Tu微分几何经典入门教材:An Introduction to Manifolds的教材没那么好理解,但是却比王幼宁的《微分几何讲义》更加的友好。我当时真的挺喜欢陈省身的教材的,虽然以我如今的水平看,当时的我并没有真正的看懂这本书,但这是我微分几何的启蒙书。我人生中看的第一本微分几何的书是王幼宁的《微分几何讲义》,但是我虽然很有兴趣,但却没能读下去,因为开篇就直接看不懂。而陈省身的《微分几何讲义》至少我能读下去,不至于开篇就直接来那么难的东西,我也是靠这本教材知道了很多微分几何的重要概念。我到高一还在看陈省身这本教材,直到后来高二为了读懂Jürgen Jost黎曼几何与几何分析教材:Riemannian Geometry and Geometric Analysis,我不得不看自己当时嫌弃的Loring W Tu的An Introduction to Manifolds,才打开了新世界,原来还是这么好看的微分几何入门教材,Loring W Tu的书确实比陈 ...

初中生如何自学数学?

知乎提问:我想这样子自学数学?纯兴趣爱好。我想从高中数学开始自学,用教材帮这本教辅书自学。然后学完高中后整理一下初等数学的知识。是不是就可以开始自学高数了?现在我打开高数好多证明题和不等式都不会做。然后把高等数学,数学分析,线性代数,高等代数,概率论与数理统计,复变函数与积分变换,实分析,复分析,泛函分析,抽象代数,代数几何,长微分方程,偏微分方程,微分几何都学完。大致就是这样的人生规划,初等数学学透了是不是就可以理解学习高等数学了?我的回答:我觉得按部就班的按顺序学习没多大意思,我初三的时候是先把导数、积分这些高中最难但却是微积分最基本的概念“学懂”,然后才学别的比较基础的概念如集合。原因无它,就是因为当时这些更感兴趣。因此与其纠结于把什么学透了再来理解什么,不如换成先尝试理解什么,理解不了再来理解什么。我初三的时候除了学会了导数、积分、加速度这些高中数学、物理的概念,但也没太过深入。顶多再学了个正余弦定理拿来应付中考。我从初中开始养成的习惯就是,对什么感兴趣就直接学它,学不懂再看其他的,因此我初中的时候还直接学了范畴的定义(只是看懂了表面的定义)。直到初三升高一的假期,我才买了高中 ...

点集拓扑求救

以及有没有推荐的点集拓扑教材

我翻译了Wiki、nLab、Stack Project的部分条目,以及一些教材中的定义,全放到了数学百科中

一两个月前,网站浏览人数比较少的时候,我也比较空闲,因此花了一些时间翻译了国外Wiki、nLab、Stack Project的部分条目,同时,我还将一些教材中的定义以及少部分自己写的英文notes中的定义翻译成了中文。然后我将这些翻译好的内容全都放进了数学百科中。现在因为新建了好几个子圈子,我也陆续将这些词条分门别类放进了不同的子圈。我之所以会翻译这些东西,一来是因为中文互联网的数学资源属实是过于稀缺了,每个学数学的人想要更好的发展都离不开英语这一关。但是总有人对数学感兴趣却英语不好,这也意味着有一部分人会欣赏不了英文的一些美妙的数学。二是因为词条是可以插入到文章里的,这会方便看文章的人快速查看相关术语的意思,所以在弦圈里多放些词条不仅有利于网站内容更丰富,而且能让学习交流变得更加顺畅。下面我整理一下我具体翻译了哪些词条,其实也不是很多。主要问题是翻译数学内容本身并不耗时间,真正耗时间的是输入Latex代码😅,即便我写数学好几年了,Latex也早就熟练运用,但我还是感觉在写数学的过程中Latex的输入占用了过多时间。层预层局部赋环空间赋环空间概形凸秩$p$-可除群函数向量向量空间反同态 ...

语奥中的数字谜研究(一) 基础数词

语奥中的数字谜中有许多技巧,如果纯靠推理难度很大。系列文章将介绍数字谜技巧,每篇文章都无限期更新。第一篇文章,让我们走进基础数词。基础数词,顾名思义,就是一个语系中各个语言基本相同的数词。基础数词的特点就是稳定性,以至于可以帮助我们快速确定题目中一至几个单词的意思。以下举一些常见语系的例子来说明基础数词的作用。1、尼日尔(大西洋)-刚果 语系  $(a)ta=3$例题:2023 IOL T5  $taanre=3$$1.be ŋ jaaga=20 \rightarrow bee-x=20*x$$2.taanre=3 \Rightarrow ŋ kwuu \; x=80*x $$3.baa-y=y+5$$4.kampwoo=400 \Rightarrow kampwɔhii \; z=400*z$2、汉藏语系 $sam=3$$nga=5$例题:2024 APLO T5 $as ɣm=3$$pungu=5$

失业、分配不平衡和结构性转变:人还能否“卷”过AI

白果/文 人类对AI,尤其是AI冲击社会就业与收入分配的担忧,其实由来已久。20世纪70年代至今,我们至少经历过三波AI发展的大潮。当一轮轮潮水退去,人们发现人工智能似乎并没有想象的那么厉害,不禁有了更自信乐观的理由。然而,这一轮AI的发展速度和能力似乎不可同日而语。ChatGPT(Generative Pre-Trained Transformer)及各种生成式AI工具的出现,使人类可以用自然语言的方式给计算机发出指令,这在很大程度上打破了某些专业壁垒。虽然当前AI生成内容在准确度、独创性上还有待提高,但替代人工、降本增效的能力显而易见。那么,此轮AI发展将冲击哪些职业,又是否会如乐观者期待的那样,带来大量新的工作?在尝试回答这两个备受关注的问题之外,笔者也试图分析AI带来的社会结构性转变,以及为了应对这些转变,个体和社会应作出怎样的努力。我们看到,目前AI工具的发展,可能会导致技术性失业、收入分配结构的恶化尤其是“极化”效应,加剧各种社会问题。而要想让技术进步更好地实现普惠价值,我们需对现有制度进行深入反思,尝试对社会系统进行革新和再设计。归根结底,技术的社会价值实现和进步方向最终 ...

叔本华:人类是一步一步地迈向死亡的存在物

丹麦哲学家齐克果(Sren Kierkegaard)说:「什么是诗人?一个不快乐的人:他把深层的痛苦埋在心里;但他的唇舌是如此形塑,以致从中经过的叹息和哀嚎,都成了动人的乐章。」诗人好像真的是比较不快乐。在一个诗人选择自杀后,我们一般都对之予以同情和理解,彷彿诗人们自我了结生命是可以谅解的。种种的思绪,不禁令人想起德国哲学家叔本华(Arthur Schopenhauer)对艺术和自杀的一些想法。叔本华向来以所谓悲观主义哲学闻名,不少没读过他的人也大概知道这点。所谓悲观主义,是一种以负面的角度去理解价值的方案。而所谓负面,又有几个面向。首先,叔本华说,人类是一步一步地迈向死亡的存在物,从这个存在特质去看,人类的存在目标和目的也就指向着死亡。「假如存在的目标是死亡,那为什么不能现在就死?」一位诗人或许正在如此提问。还不能马上就死。正因为人是「步向死亡」的存有者,人的存在处境便是动态的──就于现在的每一刻。因此,「现在」便有了独特的价值。就如他在《作为意志和表象的世界》(The World as Will and Representation)第一册中解释:真正的存在就只在现在。现在一直往过 ...