No Storm In A Cup

Food research is addictive, but also disorienting. Often common sense is a better guide 

Now, another toast to coffee by a study of 130,000 people that suggests that two to three cups a day can protect the brain as it ages, and lower risk of dementia. Square that with a 10-year study published last year of nearly 10,000 women aged 65+ that found that drinking coffee daily could be linked to lower bone mineral density, potentially increasing the risk of osteoporosis. So, was old Bill’s real question, then, to drink or not to drink coffee?

As difficult as it is to keep up with the endless stream of food-based research that swings the pendulum from good to bad and back again on whatever food intake is under the microscope, it is way more stressful to be none the wiser about nutrition despite so much research and funding. That, too much of nothing does any good isn’t food research but common sense and lived reality. Yet reading about food research is wildly addictive, and spawns industry – oils to spices & nuts, the full organic range, and herbal concoctions minus gin. Food research has defined kitchen shelves, stocked fridges, lined pockets, minted boutique businesses.

Perhaps nothing has been more polarising for our collective cholesterol – good, bad and everything in-between — than ghee. If in 2026, experts are inclined to see god in ghee, it was devil incarnate mere years ago. If one study said it raises LDL tut-tut, another found it helps metabolism; problematic for gallbladder, but supports gut lining. Close behind ghee is eggs – high protein or bad cholesterol? And soy: hormonal interference or cancer prevention? Artificial sweeteners have as many studies as lobbies for and against. What are we to do? Arguably, we choose to follow research that suits our palate, and ignore those that kill the vibe. For now, let’s go with coffee’s got cause.