Researchers found that adults who consumed higher amounts of caffeinated coffee developed dementia at considerably lower rates than those who rarely or never drank it. The findings were based on follow-up periods extending as long as 43 years, offering a valuable look at how everyday drinking habits relate to brain health over time.

The strongest associations appeared among people who drank two to three cups of caffeinated coffee each day. Tea consumption was also linked to better cognitive outcomes, although the amount associated with the greatest benefit was somewhat lower.

Interestingly, decaffeinated coffee did not show the same benefits, raising questions about whether caffeine itself might help explain the connection.

Coffee Drinkers Showed Much Lower Dementia Rates

One of the most striking findings involved the difference in dementia rates between regular coffee drinkers and people who consumed little or no coffee.

Among U.S. adults who drank higher amounts of caffeinated coffee, researchers recorded 141 dementia cases annually for every 100,000 people. In comparison, the rate was 330 cases per 100,000 people each year among those who rarely or never drank caffeinated coffee.

Dementia is a general term for conditions that progressively interfere with memory, thinking, reasoning, and the ability to perform everyday activities. Alzheimer’s disease is its most common cause, although several other brain disorders can also lead to dementia.

While occasional forgetfulness can be a normal part of aging, dementia involves cognitive difficulties severe enough to disrupt daily life. Identifying lifestyle habits associated with lower dementia risk is therefore an important area of research, particularly as populations grow older.

The findings suggest that regular caffeinated coffee consumption may be one such habit. However, the results show an association rather than proving that coffee directly prevents dementia. Other differences between coffee drinkers and people who avoid coffee could also contribute to the observed results.

Coffee Was Also Linked to Better Cognitive Health

The potential benefits were not limited to diagnosed dementia. Participants who drank more caffeinated coffee were also less likely to report that their memory or thinking abilities had declined.

Researchers found that 7.8% of adults who consumed higher amounts of caffeinated coffee reported subjective cognitive decline, compared with 9.5% of those who rarely or never drank it.

Subjective cognitive decline refers to changes in memory or thinking that people notice themselves, even when those difficulties have not necessarily been confirmed by formal cognitive testing. Someone experiencing it might feel that remembering information, concentrating, or finding the right words has become more difficult.

Such complaints do not automatically indicate dementia. Nevertheless, they can provide useful information about how people perceive changes in their cognitive abilities as they grow older.

The lower percentage among caffeinated coffee drinkers adds to the evidence linking coffee consumption with healthier cognitive aging.

How Much Coffee Offers the Greatest Benefit?

The researchers also examined whether the amount of coffee consumed was related to the strength of the observed benefits.

Drinking two to three cups of caffeinated coffee per day was associated with the most favorable outcomes for dementia risk and cognitive functioning.

Notably, this association remained apparent regardless of participants’ genetic risk of developing dementia. In other words, the relationship between coffee consumption and brain health was observed even among people whose inherited characteristics might make them more vulnerable to the disease.

Genetic risk refers to the influence of inherited variations in DNA that can increase or decrease a person’s likelihood of developing certain conditions. Although genetics can play an important role in dementia, they are only one part of a much larger picture that includes age, general health, and lifestyle.

The results also suggest that drinking larger amounts of coffee is not necessarily better. Consumption beyond the range associated with the strongest benefits did not appear to provide additional protection.

Tea Drinkers May Benefit Too, but Decaf Was Different

Coffee was not the only beverage associated with better brain health. Researchers found that drinking tea was also linked to lower dementia risk and better cognitive functioning.

For tea, the strongest associations appeared among participants who consumed one to two cups per day. As with coffee, drinking more than this amount did not appear to produce further benefits.

However, the study did not distinguish between caffeinated and noncaffeinated tea. As a result, the findings cannot establish whether caffeine was responsible for the association observed among tea drinkers.

The results for coffee offered an additional clue. While regular caffeinated coffee was associated with lower dementia risk and better cognitive outcomes, decaffeinated coffee did not demonstrate the same benefits.

Caffeine is a naturally occurring stimulant found in coffee, tea, and several other plants. It acts on the central nervous system and is best known for temporarily increasing alertness and reducing feelings of tiredness.

Whether caffeine also contributes to better brain health over many years is a separate question. The difference between regular and decaffeinated coffee makes this possibility worth investigating, but it does not establish caffeine as the cause of the observed benefits.

Taken together, the findings suggest that moderate consumption of caffeinated coffee and tea may be associated with healthier brain aging. For coffee drinkers, two to three cups daily appeared to offer the strongest association, while one to two cups of tea showed the most favorable results among tea drinkers.

Although additional research is needed to determine whether these beverages directly influence dementia risk, the long-term findings offer encouraging news for people who already enjoy coffee or tea as part of their daily routine.

An international team led by Curtin University found fossilized red blood cells and chemical evidence of blood molecules in the remains of Aratasaurus museunacionali, a meat-eating theropod dinosaur discovered in northeastern Brazil. The findings, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, also include amino acids associated with collagen, an important structural protein found in bones and other connective tissues.

The discovery provides the first definitive chemical confirmation of molecules derived from hemoglobin inside fossilized dinosaur red blood cells. Earlier research had identified structures resembling blood cells in ancient fossils, but scientists had not conclusively demonstrated the presence of these particular molecular remains within them.

Ancient Dinosaur Blood Preserved Inside Fossilized Bones

When researchers examined the dinosaur’s limb bones, they identified numerous mineralized red blood cells inside vascular canals, the tiny passages that once contained blood vessels. Chemical analysis revealed preserved heme molecules, which are components of hemoglobin, the protein that allows red blood cells to transport oxygen.

Finding these molecules provided direct chemical evidence that the fossil contained remnants of ancient blood. It also demonstrated that some biological materials once thought too fragile to survive for millions of years can remain detectable under exceptional conditions.

The study was led by John Curtin Distinguished Professor Kliti Grice, founding director of Curtin University’s WA-Organic and Isotope Geochemistry Centre and an Australian Research Council Laureate Fellow.

“To detect intact heme-derived molecules in 115-million-year-old red blood cells is astonishing: this really is a landmark discovery,” Professor Grice said.

“It not only extends the known fossil record of blood, but also offers a direct molecular window into the physiology of long-extinct animals so we may better understand them and the world they lived in.”

How Dinosaur Blood Survived 115 Million Years

The extraordinary preservation appears to be connected to a mineral called hausmannite. This mineral helped stabilize the fossilized blood cells and preserve their molecular components (including amino acids of collagen) over an immense span of geological time.

In effect, the mineral created a natural time capsule that protected microscopic evidence of the dinosaur’s biology long after its death.

Researchers believe the conditions surrounding the dinosaur’s burial were also crucial. They suspect the animal was quickly covered by sediment in an environment with little oxygen and abundant microbial activity. These conditions may have helped preserve biological material that would ordinarily have broken down and disappeared.

The international research effort brought together scientists from Curtin University’s School of Earth and Planetary Sciences, the Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology, the Brazilian National Museum, the Regional University of Cariri, and Johns Hopkins University.

A Discovery That Challenges Fossil Preservation Limits

The findings challenge a longstanding assumption in paleontology that molecules associated with blood, particularly those derived from hemoglobin, could not remain preserved across such enormous periods of time.

Beyond confirming the survival of ancient blood components, the discovery raises the possibility that other fossils may contain molecular information that conventional examinations have overlooked.

“These findings challenge longstanding assumptions that certain biomolecules such as hemoglobin cannot survive deep time,” Professor Grice said.

“It opens exciting new avenues for molecular-level paleontology, allowing us to investigate the evolution of blood, metabolism and even activity levels in ancient animals.”

Such information could eventually help researchers better understand how extinct animals functioned, including aspects of their metabolism and physiology that are difficult to reconstruct from bones alone.

Implications for Ancient Life Beyond Earth

The significance of the discovery may extend well beyond dinosaurs. Understanding how fragile biological structures can survive for millions of years could also help scientists identify possible traces of ancient life in other extreme environments, including those beyond Earth.

Professor Martin Van Kranendonk, head of Curtin University’s School of Earth and Planetary Sciences, said the results are changing how researchers understand the preservation of molecular structures over vast timescales and under harsh conditions.

These insights could be valuable to astrobiology, a field that investigates the possibility of life elsewhere in the universe. If biological molecules or their chemical signatures can persist under the right conditions for more than 100 million years, scientists may need to reconsider where and how they look for evidence of ancient organisms.

“This study exemplifies how coordinated efforts across institutions, continents and scientific disciplines can unlock extraordinary insights into ancient life,” Professor Van Kranendonk said.

The research was supported by a 2021 Australian Research Council Laureate Fellowship awarded to Professor Grice.

The study, titled “Heme signatures in mineralized red blood cells within vascular canals of a 115- million-year-old dinosaur bone,” was published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

The findings, presented during a Hot Line session at ESC Congress 2026, also revealed a striking difference in how consistently patients took their medication. Those advised to use statins based on calcium buildup in their coronary arteries were substantially more likely to follow their treatment recommendations.

Although the results suggest that heart scans could help doctors make more targeted treatment decisions, the trial did not establish that the scan approach was as effective as conventional risk assessment. Researchers say additional studies are needed to determine whether it offers a better strategy for preventing cardiovascular disease.

Why Predicting Heart Disease Risk Remains a Challenge

Cardiovascular disease remains the world’s leading cause of illness and death. Much of this burden comes from atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), which develops when fatty deposits known as plaque accumulate inside arteries, restricting blood flow and increasing the risk of heart attacks and strokes. Coronary artery disease and ischemic stroke are two major forms of this condition.

Several common factors increase the likelihood of developing ASCVD, including smoking, diabetes, high blood pressure, and elevated cholesterol. Doctors use these factors to estimate a person’s cardiovascular risk and determine whether preventive medications are appropriate.

Statins are among the most widely used treatments for lowering that risk. These medications reduce cholesterol levels, particularly low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, often called LDL or bad cholesterol. They also help lower the likelihood of serious cardiovascular complications.

However, identifying which patients stand to benefit from statins remains a significant challenge. Some people who eventually experience a heart attack do not appear to be at particularly high risk under conventional screening methods.

“For far too many patients, the first symptom of ASCVD is a heart attack,” said Doctor Joseph B Muhlestein from the Intermountain Medical Center, Murray, USA, the Principal Investigator of the CorCal Outcomes trial. “Statins have been shown to be highly effective in the prevention of ASCVD; however, there is a major gap in risk assessment, statin initiation, and statin persistence.”

According to Muhlestein, many people who suffer their first heart attack, particularly younger adults, would not previously have been classified as having enough cardiovascular risk to justify statin treatment. This limitation has prompted researchers to investigate whether directly examining the arteries might provide more useful information.

Can Heart Calcium Scans Improve Statin Decisions?

The CorCal Outcomes trial investigated two different approaches for determining which patients should be advised to begin statin therapy before experiencing a cardiovascular event.

The first relied on the pooled cohort equations (PCE), a commonly used risk assessment tool that estimates cardiovascular risk using traditional factors such as age, cholesterol levels, blood pressure, and smoking status.

The second approach measured coronary artery calcium (CAC), which provides a more direct indication of plaque buildup in the arteries supplying the heart.

This measurement uses a computed tomography (CT) scan to detect calcium deposits in the coronary arteries. Calcium can accumulate within atherosclerotic plaque, making it a useful marker of underlying coronary artery disease, even in people who have not developed symptoms.

Unlike traditional risk calculators, which estimate the likelihood of future cardiovascular problems based on personal characteristics and health measurements, calcium scans provide evidence of disease already present in the coronary arteries.

Researchers wanted to determine whether using this information to guide statin recommendations could improve cardiovascular outcomes.

Nearly 5,800 Patients Put Both Methods to the Test

The trial enrolled 5,772 patients from the Canyons and Desert regions of Intermountain Health Care in the United States. Participants had no known history of ASCVD or diabetes and had not previously received statin therapy.

Their average age was 64, and women accounted for 51% of the study population.

Eligible participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to one of two groups. One group received statin treatment guidance based on traditional cardiovascular risk scores, while the other received recommendations based on coronary calcium scan results.

Both patients and their physicians were informed of the treatment recommendations generated by the study protocol. However, the final decision about whether to start taking statins remained with the patients and their doctors.

The researchers then tracked major cardiovascular events (MACE; all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, and arterial revascularization).

This combined outcome included death from any cause, heart attacks, strokes, and procedures to restore blood flow through narrowed or blocked arteries.

Heart Scans Led to Far Fewer Statin Recommendations

After an average follow-up of 4.2 years, researchers found that major cardiovascular events occurred at exactly the same observed rate in both groups.

A total of 2.7% of patients in each group experienced one of the events included in the study’s primary outcome. The estimated relative risk over time was also nearly identical (hazard ratio 0.99; 95% confidence interval 0.71 to 1.38; p=0.045 for noninferiority).

However, this similarity did not establish that the two strategies were equally effective. The study failed to meet its predetermined statistical requirement for demonstrating that the calcium scan approach was not meaningfully worse than conventional risk assessment.

A notable difference emerged in how frequently patients were advised to begin taking statins.

Participants evaluated using traditional risk scores received recommendations to start statin therapy more than three times as often as those whose decisions were guided by coronary calcium measurements.

Despite this substantial difference in treatment recommendations, both groups experienced the same observed rate of major cardiovascular events during the follow-up period.

A Surprising Difference in Statin Adherence

Perhaps the most intriguing finding involved whether patients actually followed their prescribed treatment.

Among those advised to take statins, patients whose recommendations were based on calcium scans were much more likely to adhere to their medication regimen than those assessed using traditional cardiovascular risk factors.

The difference was substantial (62% vs. 23%).

In other words, patients recommended statins based on visible evidence of calcium buildup in their arteries were approximately 2.7 times as likely to follow their medication regimen.

One possible explanation is that seeing evidence of disease in their own arteries makes patients more motivated to take preventive medication. However, the trial did not establish why adherence differed so dramatically between the groups.

The findings raise the possibility that coronary calcium scans could influence not only which patients receive statin recommendations, but also whether those patients consistently take the medications.

What the Findings Mean for Heart Disease Prevention

Despite these potentially important differences, the researchers emphasized that the study could not establish whether calcium scan-guided treatment provides cardiovascular protection comparable to traditional risk assessment.

One important limitation was that fewer participants experienced major cardiovascular events than the investigators had anticipated. With fewer events to analyze, the trial had less statistical power to determine whether a meaningful difference existed between the two approaches.

“The power of the study to detect a difference was reduced by the lower-than-expected event rates and we did not demonstrate noninferiority between the groups,” said Doctor Muhlestein, who concluded: “The study did provide important hypothesis-generating insights into the efficiency of statin initiation and adherence when decisions are based on CAC scoring. Taken together, our data could be used to plan an additional well-powered randomized trial comparing CAC with current risk factor-based algorithms.”

The findings may help researchers design future trials capable of determining whether coronary calcium scans can improve the efficiency of statin prescribing without compromising cardiovascular protection.

Current European recommendations already recognize a potential role for these measurements. The 2025 Focused Update of the 2019 ESC/EAS Guidelines for the management of dyslipidemias recommends considering increased coronary calcium scores, when available, as an additional factor in cardiovascular risk assessment.

This guidance applies particularly to people at moderate cardiovascular risk or those whose estimated risk falls near the threshold at which preventive medication would normally be recommended.

For these individuals, evidence of calcium buildup may help doctors make more informed decisions when the need for statin therapy is uncertain.

The CorCal Outcomes findings add to the discussion by suggesting that heart scans may also influence how faithfully patients follow treatment. Whether that advantage translates into better long-term cardiovascular outcomes remains an important question for future research.