A major new study suggests that when you drink your coffee may be just as important as how much you drink it — and that an evening cup could erase many of coffee’s health benefits.
Research published in the prestigious European Heart Journal followed more than 40,000 participants over nearly two decades as part of the United States National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. The findings indicate that coffee consumption in the morning is associated with a significant reduction in the risk of death from heart disease, while drinking coffee later in the day appears to eliminate those advantages entirely.
According to the researchers, people who primarily drank coffee in the morning experienced an approximate 31 percent reduction in mortality from cardiovascular disease. By contrast, among those who consumed coffee in the afternoon or evening, the protective effect disappeared, leaving their risk levels similar to people who did not drink coffee at all.
The researchers emphasized that the difference was not related to the amount of caffeine consumed, but rather to the timing of coffee intake in relation to the body’s biological clock. Even though evening coffee drinkers consumed the same powerful antioxidants, their bodies did not translate those compounds into cardiovascular protection.
Surprisingly, the pattern held true across all types of coffee, including filter coffee, espresso, instant coffee, and even decaffeinated varieties. The scientists explained that late-day coffee consumption may disrupt the body’s internal circadian rhythm, interfering with metabolic processes that are meant to slow down during periods of rest. This physiological disruption appears to negate the beneficial effects of coffee’s active components.
The study concludes that coffee remains an important ally in reducing the risk of chronic disease, but only when consumed in harmony with the body’s natural rest cycle. To maximize heart health benefits, researchers recommend sticking to morning coffee and avoiding late-day consumption. A simple change in daily timing, they suggest, could determine whether coffee truly works in your favor.
The information provided in this Matzav.com report is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. It should not be considered a recommendation for treatment or disease prevention. For any medical concerns, consult a qualified healthcare professional.
{Matzav.com}
Israel’s governing coalition has set an aggressive deadline to pass the long-delayed conscription law within two weeks, as the chareidi parties race against time to finalize the bill’s wording amid mounting political and legal pressure. The coming days are expected to determine not only the fate of the legislation, but also the stability of the government and the passage of the state budget.
Leaders of the chareidi parties acknowledge that every day without an approved conscription law weakens their position. As a result, coalition partners have decided to dramatically accelerate the process. According to a first report, the coalition’s goal is to complete the bill’s third and final reading in the Knesset within just fourteen days, in an effort to end a prolonged saga that has become a direct threat to the government’s survival.
Within the chareidi factions, the end of the current week has been marked as a critical milestone. Lawmakers are hoping that by then, the final version of the bill will be ready. Drafting the legislation remains the most complex hurdle, as significant disagreements between the various sides have yet to be fully resolved despite heavy coalition pressure and stated goodwill.
Attention is now focused on the legal adviser to the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, Miri Frenkel-Shor, who is tasked with translating political understandings into binding legal language that can withstand scrutiny.
The coalition’s plan calls for a rapid legislative “blitz.” Once the draft is completed, a comprehensive discussion on the revised text is expected to take place as early as Sunday. If that stage proceeds smoothly, committee votes to advance the bill are scheduled to begin the following Tuesday. The coalition’s ultimate objective is to bring the law to a decisive vote in the Knesset plenum the following Monday, formally closing the issue.
However, the ambitious timetable hinges on a single decisive factor: whether the version prepared by Frenkel-Shor by the end of the week will be acceptable to the Gedolei Yisroel. The days ahead are expected to be especially tense, with far-reaching implications not only for the future of the conscription framework, but for the coalition as a whole and for the approval of the state budget waiting in the wings.
{Matzav.com}
President Donald Trump said Monday night that his administration is pursuing a $1 billion damages claim against Harvard University, intensifying a long-running dispute over federal funding and campus policies.
“We are now seeking One Billion Dollars in damages, and want nothing further to do, into the future, with Harvard University,” Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social.
The announcement comes as the administration continues to challenge a December court ruling that found it acted unlawfully when it cut off more than $2 billion in federal grants to Harvard, barring further attempts to halt the university’s research funding.
Harvard has been at the center of a broader effort by the Trump administration to use federal dollars as leverage to compel changes at colleges and universities nationwide, which Trump has argued are dominated by antisemitic sentiment and “radical left” thinking.
Trump previously said the White House had been nearing an agreement with Harvard that would have required the university to pay $500 million, following extended negotiations focused on institutional policies.
Administration officials have repeatedly accused Harvard and other elite schools of advancing what they describe as “woke” ideology while failing to adequately safeguard Jewish students during pro-Palestinian demonstrations, backing those claims with legal filings and demands for substantial financial settlements.
Earlier Monday, The New York Times reported that Trump had withdrawn a demand for a $200 million settlement payment from Harvard after lengthy talks between the sides.
Speaking to reporters last September, Trump said discussions were approaching a $500 million settlement, which would have included provisions for opening trade schools as part of the agreement.
“They wanted to do a convoluted job training concept, but it was turned down in that it was wholly inadequate and would not have been, in our opinion, successful,” Trump said in his post late Monday evening.
“It was merely a way of Harvard getting out of a large cash settlement of more than 500 Million Dollars, a number that should be much higher for the serious and heinous illegalities that they have committed,” he added, without identifying which laws he believes the university violated.
“This should be a Criminal, not Civil, event,” he added, without detailing the legal grounds for criminal charges or the specific actions he contends would justify them.
{Matzav.com}Nikki Haley criticized renewed diplomatic engagement with Iran on Monday, voicing opposition as Washington and Tehran move toward talks focused on Iran’s nuclear program.
In a message posted on social media, the former US ambassador to the United Nations argued that negotiations with Tehran are fundamentally flawed. “You can’t make a deal with a regime that lies about its nuclear production, oppresses its people, and spreads terror around the world. Iran can’t be trusted,” Haley wrote.
Her remarks came after reports indicated that US envoy Steve Witkoff and Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi are scheduled to meet Friday in Istanbul to explore the possibility of a nuclear agreement.
President Donald Trump has publicly urged Iran to come to terms with the United States over its nuclear activities, while also making clear that military action remains an option if diplomacy fails.
Addressing reporters on Monday, Trump spoke about the ongoing discussions and the US posture toward Iran, saying, “We have big ships heading to Iran right now. The biggest and the best. We have talks going on with Iran, we will see how it all works out.”
He added further comments emphasizing uncertainty about the administration’s next steps. “I can’t tell you what I’m going to do, because right now we have a tremendous force going there, just like we did in Venezuela – even bigger. And they’ll be there soon,” continued Trump.
Trump went on to express a preference for a diplomatic resolution while warning of consequences if negotiations collapse. “I’d like to see a deal negotiated. I don’t know that that’s going to happen. But if I knew, I wouldn’t tell you. I’d be very foolish if I were to tell you. But right now we’re talking to them. We’re talking to Iran. And if we could work something out, that’d be great. And if we can’t, probably bad things will happen.”
Haley’s position echoed comments made a day earlier by Senator Lindsey Graham, who also rejected the idea of striking a deal with Iran and suggested that lasting stability in the region would require the collapse of the current Iranian leadership.
Speaking in an interview with Fox News, Graham argued that removing Iran’s rulers would have a transformative effect on the region. “The biggest thing you could possibly do to the Middle East is take this regime down, and they’re as weak as they’ve ever been since 1979,” he said.
Graham concluded by directly urging presidential action, adding, “Mr. President, you can do it, I hope you will do it,” he added.
{Matzav.com}
