Skip to main content
We’ve found some simply delicious research reports.
Chocolate Lovers- Take Heart!
Denmark has created a large health study, with over 55,000 participants who have been tracked for over 13 years. Originally designed to identify cancer risk factors, it captured sufficiently rich and detailed information that it can be used to assess heart health benefits as well.
Research teams from Beth Israel Deaconess Hospital in Boston, and Aalborg University Hospital in Aalborg Denmark teamed up. Kim Overvad, PhD in Epidemiology at Aalborg University Hospital took the lead; Murray A. Mittleman, MD of Beth Israel and Elizabeth Mostofsky, ScD and a post-doc at Beth Israel also worked on it. The researchers were trying to determine if consumption of chocolate reduced the risk of atrial fibrillation. Atrial fibrillation is commonly called “afib” here in the U.S. It’s likely you’ve seen advertisements for medications to treat it. Afib is associated with a higher risk of stroke, dementia, heart failure, cognitive decline and, in general, worse mortality.

Research Conclusions
Relating the consumption of chocolate to those with afib, those who ate a one-ounce serving 1-3 times per month had a 10% lower risk of afib than those who consumed it less than once per month. Those who enjoyed chocolate once a week had a 17% lower risk, and those chocolate lovers who treated themselves 2-6 times a week reduced their risk of afib by 20%. (!) According to co-author Dr. Mostofsky, “Moderate consumption of cocoa and cocoa-containing foods may promote cardiovascular health due to their high content of flavanols, a sub group of polyphenols with vasodilatory, antioxidant and anti-inflammatory benefits.” The whole study is linked here.
There you are: treat yourself to an ounce of delicious dark chocolate containing 70% or higher cocoa. After all, it’s for your heart.
Coffee Too!
Some of the researchers who made me feel better about chocolate have also weighed in on coffee.  This time the team was Dr. Murray Mittleman, Elizabeth Mostofsky, ScD, Megan S. Rice, ScD, and Emily B. Levitan, ScD. The actual article title: Habitual Coffee Consumption and Risk of Heart Failure A Dose-Response Meta-Analysis. The press release had a friendlier headline: Moderate Coffee Consumption Offers Protection Against Heart Failure. Link to the study here.
It was another large study with 140,000 participants. Their conclusion generally matched some studies we’ve commented on before, with one difference-specificity on portion size (or, as they called it: dose. I like it. I’ve occasionally considered a coffee IV, or eating the freshly ground beans with a spoon.   And making a perfect pot of freshly-brewed coffee requires careful measurement of the amount of coffee i.e.-the dosage.) The study showed that the positive health benefits peaked at two eight-ounce cups a day.  (Note that 3-4 cups weren’t much different).  Dosing with, er, drinking two eight-ounce cups daily was associated with a 11% reduction in heart attacks. The only bad news from the study: if you drink more than 10 cups a day, your risk goes up to the level of non-coffee-drinkers. There it is addicts: don’t drink the whole pot.


Did You Know?
Did you know that we offer our own, freshly roasted small batch coffee? It’s roasted for us by the first boutique roaster in MA. And here is the dirty little secret of the coffee business: coffee begins to lose the richness of its taste within days of roasting: fresh roasted is simply better. That stuff on the grocer’s shelf? How long has it been there? And those little K-Cups-how old is that instant coffee? Please. Do us and yourself a favor – buy some fresh roasted. We only offer whole beans.  At home and our office, we grind them every morning.

At www.BigBrain.Place, we’re always trying to grow bigger brains.

Labels

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Reasons We Think America is On the Wrong Course

I was listening to the Michael Medved show yesterday. He does a nice job at talk radio. But he was worked up because the CBS News Poll showed that 72% of Americans surveyed think the U.S. is on the wrong track. (When I went to CBS' site, it looks to me like the number is 69%, but that's an insignicant difference). Medved's view is that income for the poorest citizens are rising (recent government data), unemployment is low, stock market is high, no cold war, so why so pessimistic? Here are my answers: Several of our young men and women are being killed every day in a war that we are getting sick of. The deficit is some unimaginable, staggering number that my generation is imposing on my children. Social Security is bankrupt and both Congress and the Administration (both previous and current, and both Republican and Democratic) are unwilling to face the issue. There are virulent infectious agents in hospitals that are resistent to essentially all antibiotics, and the drug co...
2 comments
Read more

Stimulus Plan

Mr. President: The House stimulus bill is awful. Dangerous. Counter-productive. It has a very high probability of making things worse!. Your man Rahm Emanuel is supposed to be a tough guy: turn him loose on the House Dems - they are selling you down the river. Some simple tests: the spending will improve long-term productivity; the spending will reduce our dependence on foreign oil, and the spending will happen fast; very, very fast. There may need to be some legislation to enable spending without years of environmental review. For example, spending on wind farms would improve long-run productivity and reduce dependence on foreign oil. But let's say the wind farm is a couple of miles offshore. You can't have environmental groups stopping the development to see if some fish will be harmed. This spending has to happen now. And, no tax cuts with the possible exception of AMT. People aren't going to spend any tax savings; they are going to pay their credit card bills or r...
10 comments
Read more

Romney/Thompson dream ticket?

The role of Fred Thompson in yesterday's SC primary is as murky as his next step. Did he divide the religious vote and thereby hand Huckabee a loss? Or would those votes, had he not been there, have gone elsewhere? My instinct is that more of those votes would have gone to Romney or McCain than to Huckabee. Fred comes across to me as the thinking person's conservative: thoughtful on positions, a sense of history, a Federalist, serious about the war on terror and prepared to take the long view on it. His addresses have content, not sound bites - which may, unfortunately, be a drawback in 2008. Mitt is quickly seizing the stage as the most knowledgeable in the field on economics, growth and job creation. With a war still consuming dozens of billions, it isn't clear that the race will be won on voters' views of candidates job creation prowess. However, he gives off as much energy as Fred seems to absorb - Mitt's electron shell could power Fred. So, Mitt may be drawi...
5 comments
Read more