Skip to content

A large study by researchers at the State University of NY, of 65,869 postmenopausal women found that those who have a history  of gum or periodontal disease also have an overall higher risk of cancer. The women with a history of periodontal disease also had an increased risk for several specific cancers: breast, esophageal, gallbladder, lung and melanoma cancers. This cancer and gum disease association occurred in both nonsmokers and smokers.

How is periodontal disease "promoting" cancer? How it occurs is still unclear, but one theory suggests the gum disease bacteria are in the saliva, which is swallowed, and so the bacteria get into the gut, esophagus, or lungs. Or bacteria from diseased gum tissues get into "systemic circulation" and so get to distant sites in the body.  One of the researchers pointed out that "Certain periodontal bacteria have been shown to promote inflammation even in tiny amounts, and these bacteria have been isolated from many organ systems and some cancers including esophageal cancers."

From Medscape: Gum Disease and Increased Link to Many Cancers

Brushing, flossing, and regular dental checkups appear to do much more than maintain a healthy smile. Now, a large prospective cohort study shows that postmenopausal women with a history of periodontal disease, including those who have never smoked, are at significantly increased overall risk for cancer as well as site-specific cancers, including lung, breast, esophageal, gallbladder, and melanoma skin cancers.

The study authors note that these results add to the growing body of evidence from smaller studies and studies in men that link periodontal disease to total cancer risk. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimate that 47% of adults 30 years of age and older in the United States have some form of periodontal disease, ranging from mild to severe. At age 65 years and older, however, 70% of adults have moderate to severe periodontal disease, according to the CDC.

The study involved almost 66,000 postmenopausal women in the United States, who were enrolled in the ongoing Women's Health Initiative Observational Study (WHI-OS). During a mean follow-up of 8.32 years, the team identified 7149 cancers and found that periodontal disease history was associated with a 14% increased total cancer risk. When analyses were limited to 34,097 never-smokers, there was also an increased risk for overall cancer.

An association between periodontal disease and site-specific cancers was observed in breast, lung, esophageal, gallbladder, and melanoma skin cancers. There was a borderline association with stomach cancer, the study authors report, and periodontal disease was not associated with cancers of the pancreas; liver; lower digestive tract organs; or lip, oral cavity, and pharynx combined. Similarly, there was no association with genitourinary and lymphoid and hematopoietic malignancies.

For the study, the investigators looked at periodontal disease information in 65,869 women aged 54 to 86 years at 40 US centers. Mean age was 68 years. Most women were non-Hispanic whites with some college education. All participants answered the question "Has a dentist or dental hygienist ever told you that you had periodontal or gum disease? (No/Yes)" between 1999 and 2003 on the annual Year-5 WHI-OS follow-up questionnaire. Cancer outcomes were documented through September 2013 with a maximum 15-year follow-up period.

 Women who reported a history of periodontal disease were also more likely to report a history of smoking, secondhand smoke exposure, alcohol use, hormone therapy (estrogen plus progestin), and a cancer diagnosis, the study authors report. At the same time, no significant differences were observed in body mass index, physical activity levels, or history of diabetes between women with periodontal disease and those without. [Original study.]

It's reassuring to see that there are positive things one can do to maintain brain health as one ages. With normal aging, the brain typically shrinks a little with each passing decade  - starting from about the age of 40. But one recent Australian study, which reviewed the results of many other studies, found that exercise slows down this shrinkage in humans, specifically in the left hippocampus. That is, that aerobic exercise had a significant positive effect on the volume of the left hippocampus. This matches the result of animal studies.

The researchers pointed out that some studies found increases also in other parts of the human brain from exercise (e.g. in the white matter), but that they did not look at and review those studies. [See posts on research.] The good news is that positive effects were from exercise programs generally lasting less than 12 months. But it is unknown which type of exercise is best, or whether it is general "activity level and movement" that is most important. Bottom line: Get out there and move, move, move for brain health. And for cardiorespiratory fitness. It's all linked and it's all good. From Medical Xpress:

Exercise maintains brain size, new research finds

Aerobic exercise can improve memory function and maintain brain health as we age, a new Australian-led study has found. In a first of its kind international collaboration, researchers from Australia's National Institute of Complementary Medicine at Western Sydney University and the Division of Psychology and Mental Health at the University of Manchester in the UK examined the effects of aerobic exercise on a region of the brain called the hippocampus, which is critical for memory and other brain functions.

Brain health decreases with age, with the average brain shrinking by approximately five per cent per decade after the age of 40. Studies in mice and rats have consistently shown that physical exercise increases the size of the hippocampus but until now evidence in humans has been inconsistent.

The researchers systematically reviewed 14 clinical trials which examined the brain scans of 737 people before and after aerobic exercise programs or in control conditions. The participants included a mix of healthy adults, people with mild cognitive impairment such as Alzheimer's and people with a clinical diagnosis of mental illness including depression and schizophrenia. Ages ranged from 24 to 76 years with an average age of 66. The researchers examined effects of aerobic exercise, including stationary cycling, walking, and treadmill running. The length of the interventions ranged from three to 24 months with a range of 2-5 sessions per week.

Overall, the results – published in the journal NeuroImage– showed that, while exercise had no effect on total hippocampal volume, it did significantly increase the size of the left region of the hippocampus in humans.

"When you exercise you produce a chemical called brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF), which may help to prevent age-related decline by reducing the deterioration of the brain," Mr Firth said. "Our data showed that, rather than actually increasing the size of the hippocampus per se, the main 'brain benefits' are due to aerobic exercise slowing down the deterioration in brain size. In other words, exercise can be seen as a maintenance program for the brain.".... Interestingly, physical exercise is one of the very few 'proven' methods for maintaining brain size and functioning into older age.

A recent study looked at 2 specific antioxidant levels in a variety of mushroom species. Mushrooms are an excellent source of nutrients, such as riboflavin and other B vitamins, selenium, copper, potassium, dietary fiber, as well as high levels of antioxidants ergothioneine (ERGO) and glutathione (GSH). The study found the highest levels of these antioxidants in yellow oyster and porcini mushrooms.

Ergothioneine (ERGO), which is found throughout the human body, is a critical antioxidant that acts with other antioxidants to protect against oxidative stress in the mitochondria (in our cells). What foods are good sources of ERGO? Mushrooms have the highest levels, but other foods with high ERGO content include red beans, black beans, kidney beans, oat bran, liver, and king crab.

Glutathione (GSH) is produced by the body and found in every cell - thus the major antioxidant within cells. It also helps the liver remove chemicals (detoxification) of a wide range of toxins, drugs, pollutants, and carcinogens, and maintenance of immune functioning. Low GSH levels are associated with increased risks for cancer, cardiovascular diseases, arthritis and diabetes. So you want to maintain optimal tissue levels of GSH (through dietary intake) because it is so critical for maintaining health. What foods are good sources of GSH? Mushrooms, and many fresh (raw) fruits and vegetables, including asparagus, avocados, potatoes, spinach, squash, tomatoes. Also fresh, uncooked meats and dairy products (raw milk) and eggs. From Science Daily:

Mushrooms are full of antioxidants that may have antiaging potential

Mushrooms may contain unusually high amounts of two antioxidants that some scientists suggest could help fight aging and bolster health, according to a team of Penn State researchers. In a study, researchers found that mushrooms have high amounts of the ergothioneine and glutathione, both important antioxidants, said Robert Beelman, professor emeritus of food science and director of the Penn State Center for Plant and Mushroom Products for Health. He added that the researchers also found that the amounts the two compounds varied greatly between mushroom species.

Beelman said that when the body uses food to produce energy, it also causes oxidative stress because some free radicals are produced. Free radicals are oxygen atoms with unpaired electrons that cause damage to cells, proteins and even DNA as these highly reactive atoms travel through the body seeking to pair up with other electrons. Replenishing antioxidants in the body, then, may help protect against this oxidative stress.

According to the researchers, who report their findings in a recent issue of Food Chemistry, the amounts of ergothioneine and glutathione in mushrooms vary by species with the porcini species, a wild variety, containing the highest amount of the two compounds among the 13 species tested. The more common mushroom types, like the white button, had less of the antioxidants, but had higher amounts than most other foods, Beelman said....Mushrooms that are high in glutathione are also high in ergothioneine, for example. Cooking mushrooms does not seem to significantly affect the compounds, Beelman said.

"It's preliminary, but you can see that countries that have more ergothioneine in their diets, countries like France and Italy, also have lower incidents of neurodegenerative diseases, while people in countries like the United States, which has low amounts of ergothioneine in the diet, have a higher probability of diseases like Parkinson's Disease and Alzheimer's," said Beelman. "Now, whether that's just a correlation or causative, we don't know." [Original study.]

The following study looked at genes and longevity. Researchers from the University of Edinburgh analysed genetic information from more than 600,000 people along with records of their parents' lifespan.

They found that the following factors were correlated with longevity: not smoking or giving up smoking, a higher educational attainment, openness to new experiences, and good cholesterol levels. On the other hand, the following factors were correlated with reduced longevity ("were negatively correlated"): genetic susceptibility to coronary artery disease (CAD), smoking, lung cancer, diabetes, and higher body fat. For example, 1 year of education adds 11 months to expected lifespan, and gaining weight reduces life-span (lose 2 months for every 2.2 lbs extra weight), while losing extra weight increases it. From Science Daily:

Learning and staying in shape key to longer lifespan, study finds

People who are overweight cut their life expectancy by two months for every extra kilogramme [2.2 lbs.] of weight they carry, research suggests. A major study of the genes that underpin longevity has also found that education leads to a longer life, with almost a year added for each year spent studying beyond schoolOther key findings are that people who give up smoking, study for longer and are open to new experiences might expect to live longer.

Scientists at the University of Edinburgh analysed genetic information from more than 600,000 people alongside records of their parents' lifespan. Because people share half of their genetic information with each of their parents, the team were able to calculate the impact of various genes on life expectancy. Lifestyle choices are influenced to a certain extent by our DNA -- genes, for example, have been linked to increased alcohol consumption and addiction. The researchers were therefore able to work out which have the greatest influence on lifespan.

They found that cigarette smoking and traits associated with lung cancer had the greatest impact on shortening lifespan. For example, smoking a packet of cigarettes per day over a lifetime knocks an average of seven years off life expectancy, they calculated. But smokers who give up can eventually expect to live as long as somebody who has never smoked. Body fat and other factors linked to diabetes also have a negative influence on life expectancy.

The study also identified two new DNA differences that affect lifespan. The first -- in a gene that affects blood cholesterol levels -- reduces lifespan by around eight months. The second -- in a gene linked to the immune system -- adds around half a year to life expectancy. Data was drawn from 25 separate population studies from Europe, Australia and North America, including the UK Biobank -- a major study into the role of genetics and lifestyle in health and disease.  [Original study.]

A number of recent studies have suggested that as people age, the community of gut microbes (gut microbiota or gut microbiome) becomes less diverse than in younger people. And note that greater gut microbial diversity is generally viewed as healthy and good. However, now a study done in China finds a different result. The study examined the gut microbes of more than 1000 very healthy people, from ages 3 to over 100, and found that the gut microbial communities were very similar among very healthy people in their mid 30s to over 100 years in age.

Whether this is cause or effect is unknown. But the researchers speculate that the similarities in the gut microbiota among people from their 30s to 100+ is a consequence of an active healthy lifestyle and diet. And it suggests that somehow changing an elderly person's gut microbial community (if it's not "normal") to that of a 30-year-old might help promote health. From Science Daily:

'Ridiculously healthy' elderly have the same gut microbiome as healthy 30-year-olds

In one of the largest microbiota studies conducted in humans, researchers at Western University, Lawson Health Research Institute and Tianyi Health Science Institute in Zhenjiang, Jiangsu, China have shown a potential link between healthy aging and a healthy gut.

With the establishment of the China-Canada Institute, the researchers studied the gut bacteria in a cohort of more than 1,000 Chinese individuals in a variety of age-ranges from 3 to over 100 years-old who were self-selected to be extremely healthy with no known health issues and no family history of disease. The results showed a direct correlation between health and the microbes in the intestine. ....The study, published this month in the journal mSphere, showed that the overall microbiota composition of the healthy elderly group was similar to that of people decades younger, and that the gut microbiota differed little between individuals from the ages of 30 to over 100.

"The main conclusion is that if you are ridiculously healthy and 90 years old, your gut microbiota is not that different from a healthy 30 year old in the same population," said Greg Gloor, the principal investigator on the study and also a professor at Western's Schulich School of Medicine & Dentistry and Scientist at Lawson Health Research Institute. Whether this is cause or effect is unknown, but the study authors point out that it is the diversity of the gut microbiota that remained the same through their study group.

"This demonstrates that maintaining diversity of your gut as you age is a biomarker of healthy aging, just like low-cholesterol is a biomarker of a healthy circulatory system," Gloor said. The researchers suggest that resetting an elderly microbiota to that of a 30-year-old might help promote health. "By studying healthy people, we hope to know what we are striving for when people get sick," said Reid. [Original study.]

Centenarian in Bama County, China. Credit: National Geographic.

For years medicine has viewed cancer as a "malignant seed" and looked for ways to kill these seeds before they spread throughout the body (metastasis). This past week two provocative articles stresses that we should also look at the "environments" that the cancer cells grow in - that some environments in the person nourish and encourage the growth of cancer, while other environments suppress the growth of cancer and don't allow its spread.

This is a very different approach to cancer, but it also makes sense. Studies find that small cancers can just sit there harmlessly or regress on their own - even breast and prostate cancers, but it raises the questions: Why? Why do they regress or are suppressed in some people, but grow malignantly in others? What is different about those people and their bodies?

Researchers are starting to do research along these lines - that is, looking at the environment that cancer may or may not grow in. Yesterday's post discussed amazing research showing that cancer tumors are continuously shedding cancer cells in a person's body, but only in some people do they actually take root and grow. It's as if some people have environments that encourage growth of cancer, while other people have environments that do not.

Today's article, besides discussing the micro-environment in which cancer grows, also discusses the role of inflammation in cancer and how things causing inflammation (e.g., smoking, inactivity, poor diet) are also associated with cancer. So some micro-environments are good for cancer, and some are not. Some of the research I've posted in the past has tried to see if influencing the person's environment with "lots of exercise and activity"(here and here), or vitamin D levels in the body, or a person's diet somehow prevents or keeps cancer in check. From Nautilus:

The Problem with the Mutation-Centric View of Cancer

To better understand and treat cancer, physicians need to stop oversimplifying its causes. Cancer results not solely from genetic mutations but by adapting to and thriving in micro-environments in the body. That’s the point of view of James DeGregori, a professor in the Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Genetics at the University of Colorado School of Medicine.... In our conversation, DeGregori expanded on how a renewed focus on micro-environments and Darwinian evolutionary pressures can benefit cancer research.

How should we study the origins of cancer? My lab has been researching the origins of cancers for the last 15 to 17 years. We’re trying to understand cancer from an evolutionary viewpoint, understanding how it evolves. A lot of people think about cancer from an evolutionary viewpoint. But what sets us apart is that we’ve really come to understand cancer by the context these cells find themselves in.

What’s an example of such a context? While other people will think about aging as the time for mutations to cause advantageous events [for cancer] in cells, we see aging as a very different process. It’s not about the time you get mutations—you get many mutations when you’re young. It’s the tissue environment for the cells that changes dramatically as we age. Those new tissue environments basically stimulate the evolution. So the evolution isn’t a process that’s limited by the mutation so much as a process that is limited by micro-environment changes.

Instead of just attacking the cancer, we should be altering the micro-environment to disfavor the cancer. What we’ve shown is that you could take the same oncogenic mutation and put it into young cells in a young environment and it’s not advantageous [for cancer]. It doesn’t cause expansions and it doesn’t cause the cancer. You make that same mutation in old tissue and it can be adaptive for cancer.

When we’re young, our tissues are relatively constant and well maintained. If you look at the tissues of a 20-year-old and a 35-year-old, or maybe even a 40-year-old, you wouldn’t notice much of a difference. It’s not like we age linearly. It’s only after 45 or 50 that we start to really go downhill. Then that downhill accelerates. As those changes happen, our tissues are no longer presenting that same environment to our cells. What I argue is that we evolve stem cells, or the cells that are continuously making our tissues, to be well adapted to the youthful environment and not to be well adapted to an aged environment.

I’ve been criticized as putting forward a straw man because, essentially, they don’t really talk about micro-environment. But to me that’s the whole point—there’s a major factor that should be considered, and I would say not just “should.” You can’t really model cancer without it and yet they’re not taking it into account. In other words, the difference between a smoker and a nonsmoker isn’t just that the smoker has more mutations. The difference is the smoker’s lung—and I’m sure you’ve seen pictures of the charred blackened lungs of a smoker—and that presents a completely different environment for cells with mutations.

How can your ideas change the way doctors treat cancer? Mostly we now target the cancer cells. That’s changing somewhat. Immune therapies are in some ways targeting the environment. It’s almost like a predator strategy. Instead of just attacking the cancer, we should be altering the micro-environment to disfavor the cancer. If you just attack the cancer, you immediately select for resistance, which is what they see in the clinic so often. You can get a person into remission, but it’s keeping them in remission that’s the hard part. Cancer that comes back is inevitably worse than the cancer you started with.

.... If we can understand what factor about a smoker’s lung, or an old person’s lung, leads to more cancer, then we could modulate that factor to basically prevent the cancers from occurring in the first place. If it’s inflammation, for all we know maybe there are even dietary interventions that will reduce inflammation in the lungs. All the things we know that are associated with cancer are also associated with increased inflammation. Everything we know that basically leads to longer, healthier lives, is known to modulate inflammation. Exercise reduces it. Good diet reduces it. Not smoking, not exposing yourself to too much sun.

 Cancer cells. Credit:Wikipedia, National Cancer Institute

Surprised...is how I felt after reading this study. According to the study, activity levels and exercise in mid-life are not linked to cognitive fitness and dementia later on in life. Instead, higher levels of physical activity and exercise has a beneficial effect on the brain in the short term (e.g., within 2 years or so). This finding of no long-term benefits, but only short-term benefits to the brain from exercise, is contrary to some other (cross-sectional) studies, but is supported by another recent study ("no evidence of a neuroprotective effect of physical activity").

The beauty of this study is that it followed 646 people for 30 years (from a median age of 46 years in 1978 and 77 years in 2008). The negative is that according to this study, physical exercise in mid-life does not seem to delay or prevent the onset of dementia and Alzheimer's later on in life. Eh... From Medical Xpress:

Physical activity in midlife not linked to cognitive fitness in later years, long-term study shows

A study led by Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health researchers that tracked activity levels of 646 adults over 30 years found that, contrary to previous research, exercise in mid-life was not linked to cognitive fitness in later yearsThe finding suggests that physical activity may not help maintain cognitive function, or help avoid or delay the onset of the debilitating conditions like dementia and Alzheimer's

The study, which appears online in the Journal of Alzheimer's Disease, did find that activity levels among study participants in the later years were associated with high cognitive function two years later. This supports earlier research findings that exercise may help to maintain cognitive fitness in the short term.

There is no known treatment or cure for Alzheimer's or dementia, syndromes that involves declining memory, confusion and eventually limited ability to perform daily tasks. To date, there are no preventive measures, such as physical exercise, brain games or a diet regimen, that have been proven to help delay or altogether prevent its onset. The researchers undertook the study because of a growing consensus that physical activity levels helps prevent Alzheimer's, however much of the evidence for this thinking is based on cross-sectional studies that compare responses from one group of participants with another at a given point in time or within a very short duration, typically several years..... That's where longitudinal studies, which look at the same group of participants over a long time, are more helpful.

The researchers used data from the Johns Hopkins Precursors study.... The researchers used responses from 1978 through 2008 from 646 participants (598 men, 48 women) to calculate so-called metabolic equivalents, which quantify physical activity levels. Participants were also asked whether they regularly exercise to a sweat. The team administered cognitive tests in 2008, and, using participants' medical records, scored for dementia through 2011. The researchers identified 28, or 4.5 percent of the cohort, to have Alzheimer's.

No physical activity measure in mid-life was associated with late-life cognitive fitness or onset of dementia. The study confirmed findings of other cross-sectional studies, that higher levels of physical activity and exercise measured close in time to the cognitive testing were associated with better cognitive functioning. The authors also looked at whether patterns of change in physical activity levels over the life span were associated with cognitive health and found no relationships.

The idea that exercise might play a role in preventing or limiting Alzheimer's makes sense, the researchers say, because physical activity, at least in mouse models, has shown less accumulation of B-amyloid plaques, which are thought to play a role in dementia, including Alzheimer's. In addition, physical activity improves blood flow to the brain, which is linked to better cognitive performance. This may explain why studies find that exercise may contribute to cognitive fitness in the short term.

 Another reason exercise is good for you: A large study found that men who exercise after a diagnosis of prostate cancer (but which is not metastatic) had a lower risk of dying from prostate cancer - as compared to those men who don't exercise.

So get out there and do something that gets you moving - and yes, walking is an exercise (Note: 1 mile = 20 minutes of walking, thus 3 miles = 1 hour). In this study the average age at diagnosis was 71, but studies find that exercise has numerous benefits at all ages. Some doctors even think of exercise as "anticancer therapy" (here, here). Also, exercise has anti-inflammatory benefits, and current thinking is that chronic inflammation is linked to cancer.

The American Cancer Society in its cancer prevention guidelines recommends that adults should be physically active, and get at least 150 minutes of moderate physical activity or 75 minutes of vigorous intensity activity each week (or a combination of these), preferably spread throughout the week.

From Medscape: Exercise Linked to Lower Mortality With Early Prostate Cancer

Men with nonmetastatic prostate cancer may have longer survival the more they exercise, a recent study suggests. For these men, regular moderate or vigorous physical activity was associated with 31 percent to 37 percent lower likelihood of death during the study, compared to more modest amounts of exercise. “This confirms and expands on previous work that shows an inverse association between recreational physical activity after diagnosis and risk of prostate cancer-specific mortality,” said lead study author Ying Wang of the American Cancer Society in Atlanta, Georgia, in email to Reuters Health.

Wang and colleagues pulled data from a large, long-term study group established by the American Cancer Society in 1992, focusing on 7,000 men who were diagnosed with prostate cancer between 1992 and 2011. The average age at cancer diagnosis was 71, and there were 2,700 deaths through 2012, including 450 due to prostate cancer and 750 due to heart disease. The average time from diagnosis to death was about eight years for those who died from cancer and 10 years for those who died from other causes.

Men who were more active before diagnosis were more likely to have lower-risk cancer tumors and a history of prostate screenings. They were also leaner, more likely to be nonsmokers and vitamin users and they ate more fish. Both before and after diagnosis, walking accounted for 73 percent of the physical activity that men did, followed by 10 percent for cycling and 5 percent for aerobic exercise, according to the report online now in European Urology.

Based on exercise levels before diagnosis, moderate to vigorous exercise, including walking, was linked to lower risk of death from prostate cancer, but only for men with lower-risk tumors. But after the diagnosis, the same levels of exercise were linked to lower risk of death from prostate cancer for all men, although the apparent benefit of walking was no longer statistically meaningful. [Original study.]

 Once again several studies found health benefits associated with drinking coffee daily - this time "reduced risk of death" in 2 studies, and in one study a reduced risk of gallbladder cancer.

Just keep in mind that the studies found associations, but did not establish that drinking coffee caused X (reduced risk of death) - so perhaps coffee drinkers differ in some still unknown way from non-coffee drinkers. But...so many studies are piling up showing an association with health benefits that it looks likely that it is actually the coffee causing the benefits. Both decaffeinated and regular coffee seem beneficial, and it doesn't matter how it is prepared (e.g., espresso, drip, cappuccino). (Earlier posts about coffee - here, here, here)

In the one study higher consumption of coffee was associated with a lower risk of death from heart disease, cancer, stroke, diabetes, and kidney disease in African Americans, Japanese Americans, Latinos, and whites. People who consumed a cup of coffee a day (decaffeinated or regular) were 12 percent less likely to die compared to those who didn't drink coffee, and those who drank two to three cups a day had an 18 percent reduced chance of death.

The conclusion of the other study of over half million adults in 10 European countries was similar: coffee drinking was associated with lower risk for death from "all causes", especially from circulatory diseases and diseases related to the digestive tract. This association held up among all the countries. The highest levels of consumption  group (3 cups or more of coffee per day)  had the lowest risk of death - as compared to those drinking none or less than 1 cup of coffee per day. However, the one negative result from drinking more than 3 cups of coffee daily was an increase in risk for ovarian cancer mortality in women (but only when compared to coffee non-drinkers).

From STAT News: Drink coffee? It won’t hurt you, and may reduce your risk of an early death

Good news, coffee drinkers: A couple of massive new studies that looked at hundreds of thousands of people for about 16 years finds that a few cups of coffee a day won’t hurt you and could lower your risk of dying prematurely. The studies reinforce previous findings that drinking an 8-ounce cup of joe (or three) won’t hurt you, but the authors of the new works and other experts say caveats abound.

Murphy told STAT his is the largest study on coffee and mortality to date. In the study, researchers with the WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer and Imperial College London tracked 521,000 adults from 10 European countries who self-reported their coffee consumption over an average of 16 years.... In investigating more than 40,000 deaths from this group, the team found that participants who fell into the highest 25 percent of coffee consumers had a lower risk of death due to any cause compared to non-coffee drinkers. They saw a reduced risk of early death by diseases related to the digestive and circulatory systems. The researchers also discovered a link between higher coffee consumption and lower risk of early death by lung cancer in men. And they also looked at suicide — completed suicides were lower for coffee drinkers, but only in men. [Original study.]

In a second study of 180,000 people tracked for an average of 16 years, University of Southern California investigators found drinking one to six cups of coffee per week led to a decreased risk of early death. The study was focused on non-white populations, andtheir findings proved consistent for coffee drinkers across racial and ethnic groups. One of the USC study’s senior authors, V. Wendy Setiawan... said coffee consumption may be linked a lower risk of early death for people with heart disease, cancer, chronic lower respiratory disease, stroke, and kidney disease.Drink one cup per day, and the risk of dying early from those diseases decreases by 12 percent, she said. [Original study.]

This 2016 study is from Medscape: Coffee Consumption and Risk of Gallbladder Cancer in a Prospective Study

Evidence indicates that coffee consumption may reduce the risk of gallstone diseasewhich is strongly associated with increased risk of gallbladder cancer. The association between coffee consumption and gallbladder cancer incidence was examined in a prospective cohort study of 72,680 Swedish adults (aged 45 − 83 years) who were free of cancer and reported their coffee consumption at baseline.....  In conclusion, coffee consumption was observed to be associated with a reduced risk of gallbladder cancer. A potential protective association between coffee consumption and risk of gallbladder cancer may be mediated via reduced gallstone formation or through other mechanisms such as reduction of oxidative damage and inflammation and regulation of DNA repair, phase II enzymatic activity, apoptosis, angiogenesis, and metastasis.

  Lately more and more research has been finding health benefits with frequent consumption of extra virgin olive oil (EVOO). It is also a basic part of the popular Mediterranean diet - which emphasizes fresh fruits and vegetables, nuts, legumes (beans), whole grains, some fish, and extra virgin olive oil. Now a study conducted by investigators at Temple University in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, suggests that the olive oil in the Mediterranean diet probably promotes healthy brain aging. The researchers said: "Our study is the first demonstration that EVOO can beneficially affect memory, amyloid plaques, and tau pathology, the hallmark lesions in the brain of Alzheimer's patients."

But... note that they are taking findings from their study done on mice and hypothesizing that this is what is also going on in humans.  Their study used specially bred mice (and only 22 in total) - one group which received extra virgin olive oil in their food (starting at 6 months of age), and the other not. The researchers found that after a few months of this diet that there were differences between the 2 groups when tested at 12 months (which is also when they were euthanized). Note that mice are short lived and after 6 months they are considered "mature adults".

The researchgers now plan to test varying daily doses of EVOO on humans soon - this way they can see what the minimal dosage is for beneficial effects (if any), and if there is a maximal dosage where there are negative health effects. In the meantime, enjoy olive oil in your diet - looks like it will benefit your health in a number of ways (herehere, and here). From Medscape:

Olive Oil Key Ingredient in Alzheimer's Prevention?

Extra-virgin olive oil (EVOO) appears to protect memory and learning ability and reduces the formation of beta amyloid (Aβ) plaques and neurofibrillary tangles in the brain — the classic hallmarks of Alzheimer's disease (AD) — new animal research shows. The study, conducted by investigators at Temple University in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, suggests that it is the olive oil component of the Mediterranean diet that likely promotes healthy brain aging.... "And results are important enough to absolutely encourage people to consume greater amounts of EVOO. Given that it's been consumed for at least 2000 years, I do not anticipate any side effects," he added.

For the study, the investigators tested the potentially beneficial effects of EVOO on triple transgenic mice. These mice are specifically bred to develop key pathologic features of AD (Alzheimer's disese), including amyloid plaques and neurofibrillary tangles. The animals were divided into two groups. One group received EVOO-enriched chow, and the other received regular chow without EVOO. The olive oil was introduced into the diet when the mice were 6 months of age, before they began to develop symptoms of AD..... The mice were subjected to the same behavioral tests at both 9 and 12 months of age, after which they were euthanized and their brains were examined for the presence of key pathologic features of AD.

The researchers confirmed that mice fed the EVOO-enriched diet performed significantly better at both 9 and 12 months on tests designed to assess working memory, spatial memory, and learning abilities compared with mice fed regular chow. The researchers also found a statistically significant reduction in the amount of Aβ peptides deposited in the brains of the EVOO-treated animals compared with controls. There was also a significant reduction in the phosphorylated forms of tau in mice fed the EVOO-enriched chow compared to controls, although olive oil had no effect on total tau levels in the same region of the brain.

The investigators also examined whether the improvements in cognitive performance and brain pathology that were observed in EVOO-treated mice might be the result of an improvement in synaptic integrity. Once again, they found greater preservation in the integrity of the synapses between neurons in EVOO-fed mice compared with controls....  Furthermore, there was a dramatic increase in nerve cell autophagy activation in brain cells from the EVOO-fed animals compared with controls. Dr Pratico explained that autophagy is a mechanism by which cells digest proteins that are produced in excess or that are abnormal. In this particular animal model, autophagy digests and gets rid of both amyloid plaques and phosphorylated tau.

"Thanks to the autophagy activation, memory and synaptic integrity were preserved, and the pathological effects in animals otherwise destined to develop Alzheimer's disease were significantly reduced. This is a very important discovery, since we suspect that a reduction in autophagy marks the beginning of Alzheimer's disease."