OET Reading C10

People who drink three to four cups of coffee a day are more likely to see health benefits than problems, experiencing lower risks of premature death and heart disease than those who abstain, scientists have said. The research also found coffee consumption was linked to lower risks of type-2 diabetes, dementia, and several cancers, including prostate, skin and liver cancer. The greatest benefit was seen for liver conditions such as cirrhosis of the liver. The largest reduction in relative risk of premature death is seen in people consuming three cups a day, compared with non-coffee drinkers. Drinking more than three cups a day was not linked to harm, but the beneficial effects were less pronounced.

15.5 In the first paragraph, what do we learn about drinking coffee?

1. Having more than four cups a day can be harmful.
2. It is healthier than scientists had previously believed.
3. No remarkable beneficial effects are found if four or more cups a day is consumed.
4. People who drink coffee comparatively live longer than those who drink tea.

15.2 According to scientists, people who drink three to four cups of coffee a day:

1. Do not have any health hazards.
2. Do not have any health benefits.
3. Have longer life expectancy than those who do not drink.
4. Are free from health problems.

To better understand its effects on health, Robin Poole, a public health specialist at Britain’s University of Southampton, led a research team in a review of 201 studies based on observational research and 17 studies based on clinical trials across all countries and all settings. “Coffee drinking appears safe within usual patterns of consumption,” Poole’s team concluded in their research, published recently in the British Medical Journal.

16.2 Robin Poole’s conclusions:

1. were not based on evidence.
2. did not involve sufficient research.
3. were drawn upon select geographical areas.
4. are backed by ample credibility.

16.3 According to the second paragraph:

1. When consumed outside the routine pattern, coffee does more harm than good.
2. For best health benefits, high pattern coffee should be consumed.
3. It is advisable to consume the same brand of coffee.
4. Changing the amount or time of consumption will not produce noticeable health benefits.

In a linked editorial, Professor Eliseo Guallar from the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in Maryland wrote that coffee is safe, but holds the cake. He argued that the latest study showed that “coffee consumption seems generally safe, but added: “Coffee is often consumed with products rich in refined sugars and unhealthy fats, and these may independently contribute to adverse health outcomes. “Does coffee prevent chronic disease and reduce mortality? We simply do not know. Should doctors recommend drinking coffee to prevent disease? Should people start drinking coffee for health reasons? The answer to both questions is ‘no.’ Poole’s team noted that because their review included mainly observational data, no firm conclusions could be drawn about cause and effect. But they said their findings support other recent reviews and studies of coffee intake.

17. What concern does Professor Eliseo Guallar have about coffee consumption?

1. No clear conclusions can be made about the benefits of drinking coffee.
2. There may be health risks attributable to products taken with coffee.
3. Not enough doctors are recommending coffee’s health benefits.
4. There haven’t been enough studies conducted about coffee.

Italian coffee scientist Dr Luciano Navarini seems to agree. “I believe that coffee can be a dietary bad guy only if it is consumed in high doses, when caffeine is present,” he said. “But as far as I know, healthy adult coffee drinkers (they) normally keep to a fixed number of cups (they), and they exceed that amount only in very special situations, when it is necessary to stay alert for some reason. Scientific literature indicates that moderate coffee consumption seems to be a good habit rather than a dangerous vice.” Navarini works for Italian coffee giant Illycaffe, so perhaps he may be expected to say that. Increasingly however, independent as well as industry-aligned scientists are crowding into coffee research.

18.5 Dr Luciano Navarini’s views could be considered controversial because he:

1. agrees with Eliseo Guallar.
2. is employed by a coffee producer.
3. thinks that coffee is good for health.
4. suggests people drink more coffee when tired.

18.4 In the fourth paragraph, the word ‘they’ refers to:

1. observational data.
2. people drinking coffee.
3. recent reviews.
4. Poole’s team.

Professor Elvira Gonzalez de Mejia of Illinois University is one of the world’s leading experts on coffee and health. In a 2014 overview of the subject, she stated that available data supported “the view that habitual coffee consumption has several health benefits, including lower risks of Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s disease, a favourable effect on liver function, a possible role in weight loss and a decreased risk of developing certain cancers’’.

She added that the evidence for coffee in managing type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease was “largely reassuring’’ and that consumption of two to four cups a day “is not associated with adverse effects.

19.4 The phrase “largely reassuring’’ in the fourth paragraph expresses the idea that:

1. There is an important link between some diseases and regular coffee consumption.
2. Drinking coffee appeared beneficial for certain types of diseases.
3. There are no negative effects associated with drinking coffee.
4. routinely drinking coffee makes people feel better.

Professor de Mejia also stressed the need for further research. “More consistent human studies are needed,” she said. “Standardised coffee samples must be prepared and tested in human studies. The reproducibility of such studies will certainly help answer questions about coffee consumption. She also sounded a note of caution regarding possible outcomes of the barrage of ongoing research into the therapeutic potential of coffee’s myriad components. Isolating individual compounds and fashioning them into health products – as is currently happening in the medical marijuana industry, for instance – could lead to problems. ‘’It is better to recommend ‘whole foods’ rather than isolated compounds’’ she said. “There is always the risk of using mega-doses of individual compounds, which may bring some risks’’.

20.5 What does Elvira Gonzalez de Mejia suggest about ongoing research?

1. Separating coffee’s components for its potential healing benefits can be harmful.
2. There are too many studies taking place, which is causing problems in the industry.
3. It’s better to have coffee as a whole food in itself, but to avoid drinking too much.
4. There are similarities between research into coffee and medical marijuana.

Dr Simon Drew, of the Florey Department of Neuroscience and Mental Health at the University of Melbourne, takes a different view. Recently he worked with Navarini and others on a study into how roasting coffee beans changed their antioxidant structures. “Willow bark was used as an analgesic for millennia before scientists finally extracted salicin from it, a discovery that led to aspirin,” he said.

“Likewise, something beneficial may be hiding within your daily brew’’. Drew’s research is not aimed directly at investigating health claims made for coffee. Instead, he and Navarini set out to map exactly how antioxidant types and levels were affected by various roasting, storage and brewing techniques.

21. In the sixth paragraph, Dr Simon Drew indicates that coffee:

1. may contain components that can be used medicinally.
2. could contain similar properties to those found in aspirin.
3. is beneficial for people who suffer from headaches.
4. produces antioxidants when the beans are roasted.

The results may assist other scientists trying to understand how coffee-derived antioxidants behave in the body. Like de Mejia, Drew is cautiously optimistic about coffee’s health potential, but is reserving judgement until more evidence comes to light. “In terms of antioxidant intake alone, the jury is probably still out” he said. “But there’s much we don’t know about other potential benefits. Coffee is a melting pot of chemical compounds and the roasting process leads to many new ones.

22. The writer uses Dr Drew’s comments in the final paragraph to express the idea that:

1. There currently isn’t enough optimism about coffee.
2. brewing coffee doesn’t produce enough beneficial chemicals.
3. Roasting coffee produces too many chemical compounds.
4. further research into coffee still needs to be done.