Coffee Cup Size Leads to Caffeine Confusion

"One cup" sounds small but can exceed health recommendations for caffeine intake

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Health-related headlines often cite coffee as either a caffeinated curse or cure-all, with lines such as ‘x cups of coffee a day could lower or raise your risk of disease y’. But a new study into the caffeine and caffeoylquinic acid (CQA) content of various European coffees has again shown the huge variety in what ‘a cup of coffee’ means chemically, and how easy it can be for pregnant women to exceed the recommended 200mg of caffeine a day.

In a non-funded project – ‘curiosity driven research,’ is how group leader, Alan Crozier from the University of Glasgow, UK, describes it – the team measured the caffeine-to-CQA ratio in over 100 espressos. This expanded their previous study on coffees in Scotland. Crozier says a co-worker’s home town in Italy yielded the most consistent cups of coffee of the project. What with this, and research group member Iziar Ludwig’s trips back to Spain, there was no shortage of brews to analyse.

Results showed that the caffeine-to-CQA ratio in espressos ranged from 0.7–11, depending on the preparation conditions. With serving volumes from 13–104ml, it’s no wonder that Crozier says ‘cup of coffee is an exceedingly variable unit. To estimate health benefits using cups may be very difficult,’ – and inadvisable in epidemiological studies.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


But what are CQAs? Beans contain various (poly)phenols, including 3-, 4- and 5-O-caffeoylquinic acids, the main phenolic compounds in coffee. Epidemiological studies have suggested the link between the lower risk of type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, and endometrial and hepatocellular cancer in habitual coffee consumers might be due to the presence of CQAs in coffee. They sound like super-compounds, but that’s a big ‘might’, and research continues.

Whilst the biological effects of CQAs are uncertain, one thing we do know about them is they are more sensitive to roasting than caffeine. The bean or blend also affects the caffeine-to-CQA ratio. Arabica and Robusta are the most common bean types and the latter contains twice as much caffeine as the former.

Tim Bond of the UK Tea Advisory panel suggests that ‘where preparation method can significantly impact composition, more information could be provided at the point of sale to allow consumers to make informed decisions.’

Nutrition and metabolism expert Kevin Croft of the University of Western Australia agrees: ‘Future research to provide more accurate estimates of coffee intake and biomarkers of key coffee constituents will provide more reliable assessment of links between coffee intake and disease risk.’

This article is reproduced with permission from Chemistry World. The article was first published on July 20, 2014.  

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe