The parade of stories about coffee preventing this or that disease continues. We wish there was more skepticism applied to these kinds of studies. And we wish such stories would remind readers that correlation does not equal causation.
New research shows that daily cups of coffee can reduce risk of Parkinson’s disease, liver cancer, gallstones, and type 2 diabetes.
Weak story on a weak, tiny, short-term manufacturer-funded study suggesting weight loss from a supplement containing unroasted coffee bean extract. The LA Times also covered it.
Not much different or better than its HealthDay competition on a story for which the newsworthiness is questionable.
Your morning coffee may have some unexpected perks. A new study reports it might even help you live longer. But not everybody is convinced, and already controversy is brewing.
Drinking five cups of coffee a day could help women live longer.
Drinking up to six cups of coffee a day may lower the overall odds of dying prematurely, mainly because it cuts the risk of dying from heart disease, a study released today suggests.
Better than the WebMD story on the same study because CNN discussed potential harms and had several sources. But this is one instance where the 4-star score based on our 10 criteria seems too high. When you get the basics wrong, you got the story wrong.
The headline and the first sentence are simply wrong: the story reports on a type of study that cannot prove that coffer lowers risk. Since such a study can’t establish causation, such causal language is inappropriate.
We get a buzz from stories like this – not a good one. Maybe it’s from more than 35 years of seeing stories like this regarding Alzheimer’s disease. But it’s an example of why people get turned off to "on again/off again" health/medical/science news coverage.
There are multiple ways to search our reviews. You may search by keyword, news source or review rating.