"Coffee in moderation is good for you, caffeine or not."
As I pointed out in another post a few days ago we consume many plant products that contain chemicals and toxins that are harmful some of which are very toxic yet we do not remove them from our food.
Plants especially make these dangerous toxins to deter or kill insects that eat them, I went on to point out that caffeine is one of the most innocuous of these toxins and that some common ones are considerably worse.
In a response to a poster who quoted the negative effects of different amounts of caffeine from Wiki (1-1.5g and >5g respectively) I then listed a comparative scaling with a toxin found in the common vegetable spinach, specifically oxalic acid. To quote:
"…If you scaled up oxalic acid daily doses in the same ratio as for the caffeine example then in the first instance the person would almost undoubtedly have kidney stones. In the second example the person would be dead. Right, at that dose Popeye's spinach meal would almost certainly have killed him.
At least the 'caffeinated' person, whilst off his head, would likely be still alive."
The reason why we remove caffeine from coffee is twofold, the first is that it's comparatively easy to do so when compared with toxins found in other foodstuffs (for instance, to remove mercury in fish would be inordinately difficult); the second is that caffeine has noticeable psychotropic effects that manifest shortly after consumption and that they are obvious worries some people to a considerable extent while others enjoy those effects—and many even depend on them to start their day.
Thus, as with alcohol, caffeine has both strong emotive and sociological aspects to it. It's why caffeine features high in popular culture, everyone knows of and talks about its effects.
On the other hand, despite the fact that it's dangerous and that its toxic effects are dire and insidious, oxalic acid is hardly ever mentioned in popular culture specifically because its effects are not as immediately obvious as those of caffeine. As they take a much longer time to manifest than those of caffeine, it's much harder to draw a connection between them and their cause.
Moreover, it's rather ironic that the popular cartoon character Popeye came to prominence because of a principal property of oxalic acid, its extreme bitterness. Oxalic acid's bitterness contributes to the taste of spinach and kids find it strong and overpowering because of their immature palates. So Popeye making fun of kids who don't eat spinach seemed a good strategy to get them to eat it (I've no idea whether the strategy worked as I liked spinach from when I was first introduced to it).
In small doses oxalic acid can be consumed reasonably frequently without harm as it's in many of our common vegetables, although that's not necessarily so with all vegetables such as spinach, rhubarb and beetroot which contain it in much larger amounts. Consumption of these vegetables in large amounts or even eating them frequently can lead to adverse effects such kidney stones. Also, the acid's oxalate metabolites are very insoluble and form crystals that can actually damage the kidneys.
(I have a two-kilo container of oxalic acid which I use to remove rust from tools and to bleach stains from wood and it's very conspicuously labeled 'Poison' in big letters.)
You say caffeine is not good for you, which implies it's dangerous. As I've shown I reckon the evidence supports my position that it's not as dangerous as many other toxins that we encounter in our food, like it or not we have to consume them to stay alive.
Chemical technology has given many the choice whether or not to consume caffeine but I'd venture it does not give them the right to criticize or single it out over and above the many other toxic molecules we unavoidably encounter on a daily basis.
To do so is not only counterproductive but also it's not in the best interests of others, it also shows that one is misinformed.
_
BTW, the solubility of caffeine in benzene is poor when compared to other better alternatives, it's another good reason not to use it for the extraction process.
Moreover, nothing I've said above applies to benzine, it's a nasty, dangerous compound to be avoided. That said, it's a curious phenomenon why so many useful compounds contain benzene rings many of which aren't toxic—even life depends on the benzene ring. Nevertheless, others based on the ring are so dangerous that they leave benzene's toxicity for dead.
As I pointed out in another post a few days ago we consume many plant products that contain chemicals and toxins that are harmful some of which are very toxic yet we do not remove them from our food.
Plants especially make these dangerous toxins to deter or kill insects that eat them, I went on to point out that caffeine is one of the most innocuous of these toxins and that some common ones are considerably worse.
In a response to a poster who quoted the negative effects of different amounts of caffeine from Wiki (1-1.5g and >5g respectively) I then listed a comparative scaling with a toxin found in the common vegetable spinach, specifically oxalic acid. To quote:
"…If you scaled up oxalic acid daily doses in the same ratio as for the caffeine example then in the first instance the person would almost undoubtedly have kidney stones. In the second example the person would be dead. Right, at that dose Popeye's spinach meal would almost certainly have killed him.
At least the 'caffeinated' person, whilst off his head, would likely be still alive."
The reason why we remove caffeine from coffee is twofold, the first is that it's comparatively easy to do so when compared with toxins found in other foodstuffs (for instance, to remove mercury in fish would be inordinately difficult); the second is that caffeine has noticeable psychotropic effects that manifest shortly after consumption and that they are obvious worries some people to a considerable extent while others enjoy those effects—and many even depend on them to start their day.
Thus, as with alcohol, caffeine has both strong emotive and sociological aspects to it. It's why caffeine features high in popular culture, everyone knows of and talks about its effects.
On the other hand, despite the fact that it's dangerous and that its toxic effects are dire and insidious, oxalic acid is hardly ever mentioned in popular culture specifically because its effects are not as immediately obvious as those of caffeine. As they take a much longer time to manifest than those of caffeine, it's much harder to draw a connection between them and their cause.
Moreover, it's rather ironic that the popular cartoon character Popeye came to prominence because of a principal property of oxalic acid, its extreme bitterness. Oxalic acid's bitterness contributes to the taste of spinach and kids find it strong and overpowering because of their immature palates. So Popeye making fun of kids who don't eat spinach seemed a good strategy to get them to eat it (I've no idea whether the strategy worked as I liked spinach from when I was first introduced to it).
In small doses oxalic acid can be consumed reasonably frequently without harm as it's in many of our common vegetables, although that's not necessarily so with all vegetables such as spinach, rhubarb and beetroot which contain it in much larger amounts. Consumption of these vegetables in large amounts or even eating them frequently can lead to adverse effects such kidney stones. Also, the acid's oxalate metabolites are very insoluble and form crystals that can actually damage the kidneys.
(I have a two-kilo container of oxalic acid which I use to remove rust from tools and to bleach stains from wood and it's very conspicuously labeled 'Poison' in big letters.)
You say caffeine is not good for you, which implies it's dangerous. As I've shown I reckon the evidence supports my position that it's not as dangerous as many other toxins that we encounter in our food, like it or not we have to consume them to stay alive.
Chemical technology has given many the choice whether or not to consume caffeine but I'd venture it does not give them the right to criticize or single it out over and above the many other toxic molecules we unavoidably encounter on a daily basis.
To do so is not only counterproductive but also it's not in the best interests of others, it also shows that one is misinformed.
_
BTW, the solubility of caffeine in benzene is poor when compared to other better alternatives, it's another good reason not to use it for the extraction process.
Moreover, nothing I've said above applies to benzine, it's a nasty, dangerous compound to be avoided. That said, it's a curious phenomenon why so many useful compounds contain benzene rings many of which aren't toxic—even life depends on the benzene ring. Nevertheless, others based on the ring are so dangerous that they leave benzene's toxicity for dead.