Caffeine’s reputation as a stimulant is overblown

I saw this going viral:

People are overly inclined to overestimate the claimed physiological effects of caffeine. Its reputation as a stimulant is way overblown. As I discuss earlier, when people claim to feel a buzz or a ‘pick me up’ from a caffeinated drink, such as coffee, tea, or soda, it’s almost certainly from all the sugar and or fat added to it (calories), not the caffeine. This is a prime example of confusing correlation with causation. It’s also why sugar-free , zero calorie energy drinks are not nearly as effective or inert compared to their sugar-laden counterparts. I can personally attest this being the case.

My hunch is, at some point, the body or brain become habituated to the caffeine, whereas this does not occur with fatty or sugary food. The brain reliably and consistently registers food as a novelty experience, but quickly gets bored of caffeine. People can eat huge amounts of junk food in a single sitting, and still want more soon later.

If caffeine were an effective stimulant, there would be no huge market (legal and underground) for actual stimulants, such as amphetamines. Or cigarettes and other highly carcinogenic tobacco products. At Starbucks, everyone would just order the black coffee for the caffeine, instead of the calorie-dense sugary drinks. In reality, it’s the opposite: black coffee is among the least popular choices, and never promoted. So we can clearly see from people’s consumption choices that caffeine, in its own right, is not that effective.