People who regularly consume more coffee may have a lower proportion of total and visceral fat and, at the same time, greater muscle mass, according to the results of a new Finnish study. In men, higher coffee consumption was also found to be associated with characteristics of testosterone levels and more favorable indicators of glucose and insulin metabolism.
The study was published in the scientific journal European Journal of Nutrition. The researchers used data from the large-scale Northern Finland Birth Cohort 1966 project, whose participants have been followed since birth. The analysis included 2,264 people aged 46.
The participants were divided according to their habitual coffee consumption. Seventy people practically did not consume coffee, 296 drank one to two cups a day, 822 drank three to four cups, and another 1,076 participants drank five or more cups daily.
The researchers found an interesting pattern: body mass index did not differ significantly between the groups, but body composition did.
Participants who consumed more coffee had, on average, a lower percentage of body fat, lower total fat mass and a smaller area of visceral fat. At the same time, they had greater skeletal muscle mass. Differences in body composition were observed in both men and women.
“This study is interesting primarily because it demonstrates the limitations of the familiar BMI indicator. Two people may have practically the same body mass index but a completely different ratio of fat to muscle tissue. In the Finnish sample, it was body composition, rather than BMI, that was associated with the level of coffee consumption,” notes Sviatoslav Morozov-Leonov, Doctor of Biological Sciences and head of a division at the Experts Club analytical center.
The researchers separately studied hormonal indicators. In men, each additional cup of coffee per day was statistically associated with an increase in total testosterone of approximately 0.29 nmol/L and in bioavailable testosterone of approximately 0.08 nmol/L. The level of sex hormone-binding globulin — SHBG — also increased. These associations persisted after statistical adjustment for BMI, education, smoking, physical activity and alcohol consumption.
However, the hormonal results turned out to be considerably more complex than the phrase “coffee increases testosterone” might suggest.
Along with higher total and bioavailable testosterone, greater coffee consumption in men was associated with lower free testosterone and a lower free androgen index. In women, the researchers found no statistically significant association between the amount of coffee consumed and total or bioavailable testosterone. At the same time, women also had higher SHBG and lower free androgen indicators.
“Therefore, it would be incorrect to conclude from the study that five cups of coffee a day increase testosterone in men. The hormonal picture is much more complex: total testosterone increased, but free testosterone decreased at the same time. The authors themselves speak of a specific hormonal profile rather than a proven stimulating effect of coffee,” Morozov-Leonov emphasized.
Another interesting result is related to metabolism.
In men with higher coffee consumption, the researchers identified a more favorable profile of glucose and insulin indicators. In representatives of both sexes, coffee consumption was also inversely correlated with blood concentrations of branched-chain amino acids — BCAAs.
Elevated BCAA concentrations have been associated in a number of previous studies with insulin resistance and an increased risk of metabolic disorders. The authors of the Finnish study believe that the detected changes may help to better understand the association between coffee consumption and metabolic health observed in other studies.
At the same time, the scientists specifically warn that the results do not prove a cause-and-effect relationship.
The study was cross-sectional: coffee consumption, body composition, hormones and metabolic indicators were assessed essentially during the same period of time. Therefore, it is impossible to determine whether coffee led to the observed differences or whether people with a particular lifestyle and metabolic profile simply consumed coffee more often.
In addition, the participants self-reported the amount of coffee they consumed, while the group of people who did not consume coffee at all was small — only 70 people out of 2,264. The Finnish population is also relatively homogeneous, so the results cannot automatically be extrapolated to the populations of other countries.
“This is a good example of how nutrition studies should be read. An association between a product and a particular health indicator does not yet mean that the product is the cause of that effect. Practical recommendations require prospective studies and, most importantly, randomized controlled trials,” says Experts Club representative Morozov-Leonov.
The authors also do not recommend increasing coffee consumption on the basis of the results obtained. They point to the need for further research, including intervention studies in humans, which would make it possible to establish whether a causal relationship exists and which specific biologically active components of coffee may be responsible for the observed associations.
Coffee contains more than a thousand different compounds, so the potential mechanism of action remains uncertain. The researchers consider hormonal and metabolic changes to be one of the possible directions for further study of coffee’s effects on health.
“The most interesting result of the work is not the assertion that ‘the more coffee, the better.’ The study shows a much more complex relationship between habitual diet, body composition, hormones and metabolism. Testing these mechanisms in long-term and controlled studies should be the next stage,” Sviatoslav Morozov-Leonov summarized.
The study Associations of habitual coffee intake with testosterone and cardiometabolic markers: the Northern Finland Birth Cohort 1966 study. The analysis included 2,264 participants from the Northern Finland Birth Cohort 1966. The authors declared no conflict of interest.
According to Experts Club, consuming a small amount of concentrated tomato paste daily for three months may have a positive effect on certain measures of memory and attention in healthy middle-aged people, according to the results of a clinical study by Spanish researchers.
According to the New York Post, participants in the experiment consumed about 35 grams of concentrated tomato paste daily—roughly two tablespoons. The study was published in the scientific journal Antioxidants.
The randomized crossover study involved 47 healthy adults aged 40–55, 42 of whom completed the experiment. Participants went through two three-month periods: during one, they consumed concentrated tomato paste daily at a rate of 0.5 g per kilogram of body weight; during the other, they followed a diet low in lycopene. There was a one-month break between periods.
According to the results of neuropsychological tests, the participants’ selective attention scores improved after the period of tomato paste consumption. Concentration scores increased by an average of 7.2 points, and information processing speed scores increased by 8.3 points. Improvements in associative memory were also observed, particularly the ability to match faces with names.
The researchers also noted a trend toward increased levels of the brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF)—a protein involved in supporting neurons, neuroplasticity, and memory processes. However, this increase was on the borderline of statistical significance.
Functional MRI scans of some participants revealed changes in the connections between neural networks associated with attention and cognitive functions. The study authors suggest that tomato consumption may contribute to the functional reorganization of brain networks.
Scientists cite lycopene—a carotenoid antioxidant found in abundance in tomatoes and tomato products—as one possible factor behind this effect. Lycopene is capable of crossing the blood-brain barrier and possesses antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties. At the same time, the researchers emphasize that tomatoes contain many other biologically active substances, so it is currently impossible to determine whether the observed effect is linked exclusively to lycopene.
The authors also caution against overinterpreting the results. The study was small, lasted only a few months, and was conducted among healthy middle-aged adults. It does not prove that tomato paste prevents dementia or can be used to treat cognitive impairment.
Original study: PubMed – Tomato Intake Improves Cognitive Performance and Modulates Functional Brain Networks in Healthy Adults.
According to Experts.news, brisk walking and jogging may be among the most effective forms of physical activity for maintaining bone mineral density in people over 40, according to the results of a large meta-analysis published on September 9, 2026, in the scientific journal BMJ.
According to ScienceAlert, researchers analyzed 124 randomized clinical trials involving 18,429 participants aged 40 and older. The scientists compared various types of physical activity, including walking, running, strength training, aerobic exercise, yoga, and combined programs.
The primary outcome measure was bone mineral density in the lumbar spine, the femoral neck, and the hip joint. A decline in this measure with age is associated with an increased risk of osteoporosis and fractures.
Brisk walking and jogging showed the best results for bone density. For the lumbar spine, they resulted in an average improvement of approximately 0.013 g/cm² compared to the control group. A combination of aerobic and strength training demonstrated a similar result.
For the femoral neck, brisk walking or jogging was associated with an improvement of approximately 0.009 g/cm². A positive effect was also observed for so-called mind-body practices, which include, in particular, yoga and similar types of exercise.
The researchers also attempted to determine the optimal amount of physical activity. The analysis showed that a noticeable effect on bone tissue begins to appear at approximately 600 MET-minutes per week. This roughly corresponds to about two to three hours of brisk walking or jogging per week, although the exact duration depends on the intensity of the exercise.
The authors note that structured physical exercise can moderately but clinically significantly slow the age-related decline in bone mineral density in the lumbar spine, the femoral neck, and the hip joint.
At the same time, the effect of exercise varied depending on the participants’ age and other characteristics. In middle-aged individuals with normal body weight, changes in bone density were more pronounced, whereas in older participants and those who were overweight, the results were weaker. The authors emphasize that these subgroup findings have limited validity and should not be used as ready-made individual recommendations without further research.
Separately, the researchers analyzed the risk of fractures. This analysis included 26 studies involving 11,132 participants. Some combined aerobic programs and mind-body exercises showed a potential reduction in fracture risk, but the evidence base here was less conclusive.
Experts also caution that an increase in bone mineral density does not always directly translate to a corresponding reduction in fracture risk. For example, brisk walking showed some of the best results for bone density, but no statistically significant reduction in the number of fractures was observed in this group.
The study authors rate the overall certainty of some of the results as low or moderate and emphasize that further research is needed to formulate precise recommendations regarding the type and “dose” of physical activity.
Original study: BMJ – Effect of exercise on bone health in middle-aged and older adults.
According to Experts.news, the number of words people speak in everyday life has decreased significantly over the past decade and a half, which could potentially affect social connections, psychological well-being, and communication at work, according to a study by psychologists at the University of Missouri–Kansas City and the University of Arizona.
According to the study, published in the scientific journal Perspectives on Psychological Science, between 2005 and 2019, the average number of words spoken per person decreased by approximately 338 words per day with each subsequent year of observation. As a result, the estimated decline over the entire period was about 28%.
The study is based on data from 2,197 people aged 10 to 94 who participated in 22 research projects conducted primarily in the United States, as well as in Mexico, Australia, and Europe. The assessment relied on periodic audio recordings of the participants’ natural daily lives, rather than their own recollections of how much they spoke.
In an earlier 2007 study using a similar methodology, the average person spoke about 15,959 words per day. In a later combined sample, this figure had dropped to about 12,792 words.
The researchers observed the most pronounced decline among young people. For participants under the age of 25, the number of words spoken decreased by approximately 451 words per day for each year, while for those over 25, it decreased by approximately 314 words. Thus, the rate of decline among young people was approximately 44% higher.
The authors did not identify a specific cause for this trend. The study period coincided with the rapid spread of smartphones, social media, messaging apps, email, and other forms of written digital communication; however, the researchers emphasize that the available data do not allow them to prove that technology itself was the cause of the decline in conversation.
The researchers also point out that texting does not necessarily fully replace the psychological and social functions of face-to-face conversation. Voice communication involves intonation, pauses, emotional cues, and immediate feedback, which are more difficult to convey through text.
The authors link this issue to a broader trend toward increasing social isolation. Previous studies show a consistent link between loneliness and a decline in various indicators of physical and mental health, although a reduction in the number of spoken words has not yet been proven to be the direct cause of such outcomes.
On September 10, Fast Company highlighted the potential implications of this trend for business. Talia Varly, a physician and corporate health specialist, notes that a decline in face-to-face conversations in the workplace potentially means fewer informal interactions among employees, fewer opportunities to discuss problems and voice dissent, and weaker bonds within teams.
In her view, small daily interactions are particularly important—a brief conversation with a colleague, discussing an idea outside a formal meeting, or a few minutes of casual conversation. Such interactions may seem insignificant on their own, but they are precisely what gradually build trust and social bonds within a team.
The rise of remote work and artificial intelligence may further alter the structure of communication. Digital tools allow for faster information exchange and the automation of some correspondence, but at the same time, they can reduce the number of situations in which people need to speak directly with one another.
At the same time, the researchers caution against the overly simplistic conclusion that people need only mechanically increase the number of words they speak. The quality of the conversation, the nature of the relationship, and the social context can be just as important as the duration of the interaction.
However, the study’s authors note that an additional 300 words per day may amount to only a few minutes of conversation—for example, a brief exchange with a neighbor or colleague, or a more detailed response to the common question, “How was your day?”
Thus, the observed decline in conversational activity may be one indicator of broader changes in how people maintain social connections in the age of digital communications. However, further research is needed to assess the long-term impact of this trend on health, loneliness, and productivity.
Regular consumption of very hot tea or coffee may increase the risk of developing squamous cell carcinoma of the esophagus by about three times, according to the Experts Club Information and Analytical Center, based on the results of a study by researchers at the University of Oxford published in the International Journal of Cancer.
The researchers analyzed data from 977,282 adult residents of the United Kingdom from two large projects — the Million Women Study and UK Biobank. The average follow-up period was 14.2 years in the first group and 11.1 years in the second. During this time, 2,348 cases of esophageal cancer were identified, including 1,045 cases of squamous cell carcinoma and 1,303 cases of adenocarcinoma.
Participants themselves indicated the temperature at which they preferred to drink tea and coffee — warm, hot or very hot.
Compared with those who preferred warm drinks, people who regularly drank them “very hot” had a 3.17 times higher risk of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. For the “hot” category, the risk was also elevated, although to a lesser extent. The scientists found no association between beverage temperature and the risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma.
The number of drinks was a separate factor. Among people who consumed six or more cups of hot tea or coffee per day, the risk of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma was approximately 71% higher than among those who drank fewer than six cups, even after taking preferred beverage temperature into account.
At the same time, the study does not mean that coffee or tea themselves are carcinogens. The authors consider repeated thermal damage to the lining of the esophagus to be the most likely mechanism.
The World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer classified the consumption of beverages above 65°C as “probably carcinogenic to humans” — Group 2A — back in 2016. This refers specifically to the high temperature, not to the composition of the beverage.
The Oxford researchers note that approximately 13–17% of participants in the two British cohorts preferred their beverages “very hot,” while around 43–44% consumed six or more hot drinks daily.
According to the authors’ calculations, around 14% of cases of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma in the United Kingdom could potentially be prevented if people who prefer very hot drinks reduced the temperature at least to the “hot” category.
At the same time, the results should be interpreted cautiously. The study is observational and shows a statistical association rather than proving a direct cause-and-effect relationship. In addition, beverage temperature was determined on the basis of participants’ self-assessment rather than measured with a thermometer.
The authors also emphasize that the absolute risk of the disease remains relatively low. Among nearly 1 million participants, 1,045 cases of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma were recorded over more than a decade of follow-up. Therefore, a threefold increase in relative risk does not mean that the disease will develop in every third person who regularly drinks very hot tea or coffee.
The most practical conclusion of the study is simple: there is no need to give up coffee or tea, but the drinks should be allowed to cool slightly before consumption.
The main proven risk factors for esophageal squamous cell carcinoma also include smoking and alcohol consumption. The International Agency for Research on Cancer emphasizes that these remain among the main causes of the disease in many countries.
Regular egg consumption may be associated with a lower risk of developing Alzheimer’s disease, according to the Experts Club information and analysis center, based on the results of a large-scale U.S. study published in the scientific journal *The Journal of Nutrition*.
Researchers at Loma Linda University analyzed data from 39,498 participants in the long-term Adventist Health Study-2 and matched them with Medicare medical data. The average follow-up period was 15.3 years. During this time, Alzheimer’s disease was diagnosed in 2,858 participants.
The scientists divided the participants according to the frequency of egg consumption — from completely or almost completely avoiding them to consuming them five or more times a week. After accounting for demographic factors, lifestyle, other dietary components, and comorbidities, it was found that people who consumed eggs had a statistically lower risk of Alzheimer’s disease.
Compared with people who never or practically never ate eggs, the risk of developing the disease was approximately 17% lower when eggs were consumed 1–3 times a month, 17% lower when consumed once a week, 20% lower when consumed 2–4 times a week, and 27% lower when consumed five or more times a week.
An additional analysis showed that completely avoiding eggs was associated with an approximately 22% increase in the risk of Alzheimer’s disease compared with consuming about 10 grams of eggs per day.
The authors of the study note that eggs are a source of important nutrients necessary for normal brain function. In their opinion, the findings point to a possible neuroprotective effect of the nutrients contained in eggs when they are consumed as part of a balanced diet.
At the same time, the study is observational and shows a statistical association rather than proving that egg consumption itself directly prevents Alzheimer’s disease. In addition, the authors emphasize that the findings were obtained from a sample of Adventist Health Study-2 participants, who are generally characterized by greater attention to a healthy lifestyle.
Source — study in the PubMed database (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42002260/).
