Basically everyone who consumes caffeine is a chronic user. Everyone I know of drinks it daily, and skipping one day is very unpleasant until your brain gets used to lack of it again (a couple miserable days).
>Basically everyone who consumes caffeine is a chronic user. Everyone I know of drinks it daily
There goes HN with the health quackery again. Citation needed other than your opinion on you circle of acquaintances.
Drinking 300mg vs 50mg of caffeine a day are not the same, and lumping everyone under chronic just because you have a strong opinion on the topic is silly.
In this case they define chronic as someone who consumes over 200mg per day but the article and paper itself is very weak as they did not accurately measure subject's caffeine intake, they just went on subject's self reported data("I drank a coffee and a red bull") and built estimations on that which is weak science as there's not a fixed amount of cafeine in a cup of coffee but can vary wildly.
That doesn't prove everyone who drinks coffee is a chronic consumer. Caffeine doses are not binary, as in either you don't drink any coffee at all or are a chronic consumer otherwise.
What about those who consume it in small moderation?
Just because other people abuse it doesn't mean those who do not suffer the exact same negative effects in the same manner.
Of course studies will mostly focus on the cronic consumers as those will generally show the biggest symptoms and will be easier to study and draw conclusions versus the non coffee consumers, but that doesn't mean everyone is chronic consumer.
“Chronic” means “ongoing”, not “severe”. Given the details in the open access paper, I think this needs more study to find the threshold that matters, and also the highest number I found in this study with in browser search for “ mg” was 200 mg so arguing about 300 vs. 50 just seems silly.
>the highest number I found in this study with in browser search for “ mg” was 200 mg so arguing about 300 vs. 50 just seems silly.
200mg is not the highest number but the threshold they seem to define for chronic. There are definitely people who drink way more than 200mg as that's only about 2 cups of coffee. I assume heavy cafeine users go above 300mg.
If they are doing a red bull every day, caffeine might not be their primary health issue. And the glowing red eyes and increased physical strength might compensate for the potential brain plasticity issue.
There's a known widespread gene variant that changes caffeine metabolism pretty drastically, so that 300mg and 50mg can be pretty close to the same, if it is different people.
My personal experience im a daily drinker 2-3 cups, but can easily not drink for couple of days no problem. But i have high blood pressure my uneducated guess is that BP has a lot to do with how you handle non coffee days
I only occasionally drink coffee (or tea) and have found that 1-2 days of consecutive consumption are fine, but any more will trigger the withdrawal you mentioned. YMMV probably.
When I started drinking coffee, I drank it only at work. I started to have regular headaches on Sunday. It took me a while to connect the dots and understand I was regularly triggering two day withdrawal.
It WILL vary a lot. I do two weeks of "zero coffee" every year and never had any withdrawal symptoms, the rest of the year I drink a lot of coffee (4 big cups a day). Only sometimes I drink it to be more alert, typically I need it only to code. No coffee - no programming or any creative work for me. I try to mantain constant amount of caffeine in organism by sipping those 4 cups for whole day.
It could be a withdrawal symptom if their ability to work returns after the withdrawal period ends.
I've known people who are completely unproductive if they're not on Adderall, or on cannabis, I can't think of any reason there aren't people who are entirely useless without caffeine.
There goes HN with the health quackery again. Citation needed other than your opinion on you circle of acquaintances.
Drinking 300mg vs 50mg of caffeine a day are not the same, and lumping everyone under chronic just because you have a strong opinion on the topic is silly.
In this case they define chronic as someone who consumes over 200mg per day but the article and paper itself is very weak as they did not accurately measure subject's caffeine intake, they just went on subject's self reported data("I drank a coffee and a red bull") and built estimations on that which is weak science as there's not a fixed amount of cafeine in a cup of coffee but can vary wildly.