11 comments

  • eiriklv a minute ago

    High SHBG and lower free hormones isn't a good thing usually. Starving and anorexia (as an example) can make your SHBG levels skyrocket, resulting in low free hormone levels.

  • zetazzed 9 minutes ago

    I'm a good target market for pro-coffee writing, but this is just an observational study of a drinks habit. No one in the general public should have any interest in studies of this kind.

    Maybe if you're deep in working in this research space it could help generate hypotheses for more meaningful research? But "we cross sectionally compared two groups with different behaviors and found they were different" is not really a result.

  • moojacob 12 minutes ago

    Maybe because the other way to get Caffine is in drinks full of corn syrup.

      nemomarx a few seconds ago

      You can get corn syrup free monsters everywhere. Or those 5 hour ones, or Celsius or whatever.

      The reason to prefer coffee is that it tastes less aggressive than those I think

      llm_nerd 7 minutes ago

      The study links it to better metabolic health. Did you assume it meant worse?

        bjt 3 minutes ago

        I think they're saying that coffee is a healthier habit than soda.

  • plastic-enjoyer 11 minutes ago

    So, that's why I am horns all the time

      rzzzt a few seconds ago

      "Higher coffee consumption was linked to a more favourable glucose–insulin profile, higher concentrations of total and bioavailable testosterone, and increased levels of sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG). At the same time, free testosterone and the free androgen index were modestly lower. In women, hormonal associations were more limited and were primarily characterised by higher SHBG and lower measures of free androgens."

      - Total testosterone = free + bound to albumin + bound to SHBG

      - Bioavailable testosterone = free + bound to albumin

      - Free = free (not bound to any protein)

      ...aaaand now I got a mild headache. Is this good or bad? Is this why the title says "links" and not "promotes" or "inhibits" or any other word with a concrete negative or positive connotation?

  • andai 7 minutes ago

    Title sounds terrible, but the effects are positive from what I understood?

      thih9 3 minutes ago

      Not effects, just observations, as the article also states.

  • thih9 6 minutes ago

    Obligatory reminder about correlation != causation, as indicated in the article itself:

    > However, as this was an observational study, the findings demonstrate associations rather than cause-and-effect relationships.

    More: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_cau...