Tea is the second most dangerous and worst drink of all (after carbonated drinks); although it is full of antioxidants, it is a bad drink that causes constipation and acid reflux and thereby problems in the rest of the body.
Original statement
وتاني اخطر مشروب واسواقهم على الاطلاق الشاي الشاي اللي ملان انتي اوكسنت ده مشروب سيء يساوي امساك يساوي ارتجاع مريق دغري يساوي مشاكل بقيه الجسم
verbatim according to source. Translation by the project; the Arabic wording is authoritative.
Translation
Tea is the second most dangerous and worst drink of all (after carbonated drinks); although it is full of antioxidants, it is a bad drink that causes constipation and acid reflux and thereby problems in the rest of the body.
Origin
- Source status
- Video transcript (own words)
- Attribution
- Elawady (machine transcript)
- Video
- الجن . آلام العمود الفقري . الحقيقه والسراب (Open source)
- Published
- 26 November 2025
- Timestamp
- 0:42:42 (location in the original video’s automatic YouTube caption track; confirms where the words occur, not who speaks)
- Attribution uncertainty
- Archive transcript (YouTube CC or AI-generated); no timestamps; wording may contain speech-recognition errors; speaker turns are not marked, the excerpt was judged to be Elawady's own speech from context.
- Claimed mechanism
Not stated; he acknowledges that tea contains flavonoids and antioxidants.
- Claimed health effect
Constipation, acid reflux and downstream 'problems in the rest of the body'.
- Population concerned
Tea drinkers in general.
- Geographic restriction by Elawady
none found
Diverging source versions
ما هو الشاي هيعمل لك امساك الشاي هيعمل امساك بالرغم ان هو ملان في لافينويد وانتي اوكسدنت ومضاد للسرطان
Tea will give you constipation; tea causes constipation, even though it is full of flavonoids and antioxidants and is anti-cancer.
- Source status
- Video transcript (own words)
- Attribution
- Elawady (machine transcript)
- Video
- حقيقه جرثومه المعده . #ضياء_العوضي (Open source)
- Published
- 15 December 2025
- Timestamp
- 0:27:29 (location in the original video’s automatic YouTube caption track; confirms where the words occur, not who speaks)
- Attribution uncertainty
- Archive transcript (YouTube CC or AI-generated); no timestamps; wording may contain speech-recognition errors; speaker turns are not marked, the excerpt was judged to be Elawady's own speech from context.
Scientific assessment
Mostly false – Essential parts of the statement are not supported by the evidence or are strongly exaggerated.
Certainty of evidence: moderate – Further research may still affect the assessment.
1. What was claimed?
Tea is the second most dangerous drink and causes constipation and reflux, despite its antioxidants.
2. What is demonstrably correct?
Tea does have a real downside he does not mention: tannins in tea taken with meals inhibit the absorption of plant (non-haem) iron (I-INTA-04), which matters for people with iron deficiency or plant-based diets. Very hot tea (above 55-60 °C) is associated with oesophageal and gastric cancer (I-INTA-03). In East Asian studies tea drinking was associated with higher odds of reflux disease (OR 1.27, 1.07-1.51; I-INTA-01). He correctly notes that tea contains flavonoids and antioxidants.
3. What is wrong or exaggerated?
Calling tea one of the most dangerous drinks is contradicted by large cohort data: highest versus lowest tea intake was associated with 10% lower all-cause mortality (0.90, 0.86-0.95) and 14% lower cardiovascular mortality (0.86, 0.79-0.94) in nearly 2 million people (I-INTA-02), and an umbrella review of 96 meta-analyses found more benefit than harm at usual intake (I-INTA-03). Overall, tea was not significantly associated with reflux disease (OR 1.12, 0.98-1.27), and in Middle Asian studies it was associated with lower odds (I-INTA-01).
4. What remains unclear?
We found no human study showing that tea causes constipation at usual intake (PubMed search 'tea consumption constipation', 2026-10-25, returned mainly animal or unrelated studies). The observational design of the mortality studies cannot prove that tea itself lowers risk. Indirectly, caffeine intake was not associated with constipation in 13,941 US adults (I-SRC-122).
5. Which studies support it?
I-INTA-04 (iron absorption), I-INTA-03 (very hot tea), regional subgroup in I-INTA-01.
6. Which studies contradict it?
I-INTA-02, I-INTA-03, I-INTA-01 (overall). I-SRC-122 (caffeine and constipation), I-SRC-123 (tea and lower reflux prevalence in Taiwan), I-SRC-124 (tea/coffee not a reflux risk factor in Saudi studies).
7. What applies to Germany and Europe?
Tea is not restricted in European dietary guidance; no specific guideline was fetched for this review.
8. What is known about Egypt?
Tea is a very common drink in Egypt; no Egypt-specific outcome data were found. Drinking tea with or right after meals may matter for iron status where iron deficiency is common. In the closest regional data (Saudi Arabia), frequent tea or coffee drinking was not a risk factor for reflux (31.6% vs 31.3%; I-SRC-124).
9. What practical conclusion is appropriate?
Usual tea drinking is not dangerous for most people. It is reasonable to let tea cool before drinking, to avoid tea with meals when iron deficiency is a concern, and to cut down if tea clearly triggers personal reflux symptoms.
Assessment details
- Rationale for certainty of evidence
Large prospective cohort meta-analyses and an umbrella review consistently associate usual tea intake with lower mortality and more benefit than harm; the reflux meta-analysis shows no significant overall association. Evidence is observational, and data on constipation are lacking, so certainty is moderate rather than high.
- Source quality
Elawady's own words in an archive machine transcript (live stream); exact wording may contain recognition errors.
- Regional transferability
Mostly transferable; Egypt-specific tea habits (strength, sugar, temperature, drinking with meals) were not studied in the sources read.
- Individual exceptions
Some people notice reflux symptoms after tea or caffeine; people with iron deficiency or at risk of it may benefit from not drinking tea with meals.
- Regional scope of the claim
- general (biological/medical)
- Last reviewed
- 26 October 2026 provisional
Scientific evidence in detail
Not supported by high-quality evidence – There is no good evidence for the claim; this alone does not prove it wrong.
Research question: Is usual tea drinking dangerous, and does it cause constipation and reflux?
Research question in detail (PECO)
- Population
- Adults
- Intervention or exposure
- Habitual tea drinking
- Comparison
- Low or no tea
- Geographic scope
- universal biology; tea type and temperature vary by region
- Outcomes
- Mortality
- Constipation
- GERD
Study results as reported by the authors. Our assessment follows below.
What speaks for the claim?
Does tea cause heartburn?
Cao H et al.. Medicine 2019 · PMID 30681584 · DOI 10.1097/MD.0000000000014173 Meta-analysisfull text, structured risk-of-bias assessmentMeta-analysis of tea and GERD.
- Actual result
- Overall OR 1.12 (0.98-1.27); East Asia OR 1.27 (1.07-1.51).
- Methodological quality
- moderate
- Relevance
- direct
- Limitations
- Mostly cross-sectional.
Does tea block iron from food?
Tea and iron absorption.
- Actual result
- Tea reduces non-haem iron absorption.
- Methodological quality
- moderate (old physiological study)
- Relevance
- indirect (a real downside, not the one claimed)
- Limitations
- Old study.
What speaks against the claim?
Do tea drinkers live shorter or longer?
Kim Y et al.. Epidemiology and health 2024 · PMID 38938012 · DOI 10.4178/epih.e2024056 Meta-analysisfull text, structured risk-of-bias assessmentMeta-analysis of tea and mortality (~2 million).
- Actual result
- All-cause mortality 0.90 (0.86-0.95); CVD 0.86 (0.79-0.94).
- Methodological quality
- moderate (observational)
- Relevance
- direct for 'dangerous'
- Limitations
- Confounding.
Reflux risk factors in Saudi Arabia
Alhafid IA et al.. BMJ Open 2026 · PMID 42303406 · DOI 10.1136/bmjopen-2026-118665 Meta-analysisabstract checkednewly addedSaudi GERD meta-analysis (Arab region).
- Actual result
- Frequent coffee/tea: GERD 31.6% vs 31.3%, not a risk factor.
- Methodological quality
- moderate
- Relevance
- regionally relevant
- Limitations
- Coffee and tea combined.
Caffeine and constipation
Li Y et al.. J Neurogastroenterol Motil 2025 · PMID 40205901 · DOI 10.5056/jnm23181 Cross-sectional studyabstract checkednewly addedNHANES caffeine and constipation.
- Actual result
- OR per 100 mg caffeine 1.01 (0.94-1.10).
- Methodological quality
- moderate
- Relevance
- indirect for tea
- Limitations
- Caffeine from all sources.
What does the overall evidence say?
Editorial assessment based on the studies above – not itself a study result.
Which position is better supported?
Usual tea drinking is not dangerous; associations with reflux are inconsistent and region-dependent; no evidence for constipation.
Why some studies weigh more
Large cohort meta-analyses weigh more than inconsistent cross-sectional reflux data.
Is a causal relationship established? Not established Observational evidence only.
Remaining uncertainty
Tea-specific constipation data are lacking.
Justified conclusion
The claim that tea is among the most dangerous drinks is not supported; real issues are iron absorption with meals and very hot tea.
Why do studies seem to disagree?
East Asian studies show positive tea-GERD associations, Middle Eastern and Taiwanese data neutral or inverse; tea type, temperature and study design explain the differences.
Does this depend on the country?
- General biological effects
- Universal.
- Eating habits
- Egyptians often drink strong black tea, sometimes with meals.
- Origin of the food
- Not applicable.
- Contaminants
- Not applicable.
- National production conditions
- Not applicable.
- Legal rules
- Not applicable.
- Actual monitoring data
- Arab-region GERD data (I-SRC-124) show no tea effect.
A regional difference that changes the conclusion is not supported by robust data.
Statistical re-check
- OR CI symmetry – 0.843 (0.779-0.911) symmetric recalculated
- Prevalence difference – 31.6% vs 31.3% (0.3 points) recalculated
Certainty of the overall evidence (GRADE, simplified)
- Main outcome
- Mortality with habitual tea drinking
- Starting level
- low (observational studies)
- Reasons for downgrading
- inconsistency (I2 ~80%)
- Reasons for upgrading
- dose-response
- Result
- low
Simplified assessment by a single reviewer, following the GRADE approach; not a formal GRADE panel. GRADE rates the body of evidence for one outcome, not individual studies.
Search strategy
Documented literature searches for this review (search strings in the original database syntax).
| Database | Date | Search | Looking for | Hits | Included |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Europe PMC | 26 October 2026 | (tea OR caffeine) AND (constipation OR "bowel movement" OR "stool consistency") AND (NHANES OR cohort OR "cross-sectional" OR trial) AND PUB_YEAR:[2015 TO 2026] | supporting evidence | 5606 | |
| Europe PMC | 26 October 2026 | (tea) AND ("gastroesophageal reflux" OR GERD OR "reflux symptoms") AND ("meta-analysis" OR cohort OR "Mendelian randomization") AND PUB_YEAR:[2019 TO 2026] | both directions | 671 |
Open questions
Tea-specific constipation studies.
How deeply was this checked?
7 linked studies: 2 checked in full text (2 of them with a structured risk-of-bias assessment), 5 on the basis of the abstract, 0 bibliographically only. No formal assessment with two independent reviewers and no independent human expert review has taken place yet.
Last scientific review: 26 October 2026
History of the verdict
- 25 October 2026 · Phase 1 · Initial assessment: Mostly false (moderate)
- 26 October 2026 · Phase 4 (systematic evidence review) · Re-examined with extended evidence; verdict unchanged: Mostly false (moderate)
New regional and constipation data are consistent with the existing assessment.
New sources: I-SRC-122 I-SRC-123 I-SRC-124
In plain language
Dr. Elawady called tea the second most dangerous drink and said it causes constipation and heartburn. Studies of almost two million people found that tea drinkers had somewhat lower death rates, not higher. Across 30 studies, tea was not clearly linked to reflux overall. Tea does reduce iron absorption when drunk with meals, and very hot tea is linked to throat and stomach cancer. These are reasons to drink it cooler and between meals, not to call it dangerous.
Studies on this claim
Studies supporting the claim (1)
-
Does tea block iron from food?
Disler PB et al.. Gut 1975 · PMID 1168162 · DOI 10.1136/gut.16.3.193Otherindependent cross-checkabstract checkedTea taken with meals reduced absorption of plant (non-haem) iron in volunteers.
Supports a real downside of tea (iron absorption), different from the harms he names.
Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: moderate · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim
Original publication · Scientific details
Study explained simply
- What did the researchers want to find out?
Tea and iron absorption
- How was the study done?
Absorption studies in volunteers
- How many people, animals or samples were studied?
Not stated in abstract
- What was actually found?
Tea inhibited non-haem iron absorption
- How large was the observed effect?
Not given in abstract
- What do the results mean in everyday life?
People at risk of iron deficiency may drink tea between rather than with meals
- What are the study's limitations?
Old; short-term
- What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?
Supports a different harm than constipation/reflux
- Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?
High
- What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?
Effects on long-term iron status
No study in this group is marked as key.
Studies contradicting or limiting the claim (5)
-
Do tea drinkers live shorter or longer?
Kim Y et al.. Epidemiology and health 2024 · PMID 38938012 · DOI 10.4178/epih.e2024056Meta-analysisindependent cross-checkfull text, structured risk-of-bias assessment★ key studyAcross nearly 2 million people, tea drinkers had about 10% lower death rates than non-drinkers.
Tea drinkers had lower, not higher, mortality.
Does the study support the specific claim? No · Methodological quality: moderate · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim
Original publication · Scientific details
Study explained simply
- What did the researchers want to find out?
Tea and risk of death
- How was the study done?
Meta-analysis of 38 cohort data sets
- How many people, animals or samples were studied?
1,956,549 participants
- What was actually found?
Lower all-cause and cardiovascular mortality with tea
- How large was the observed effect?
All-cause 0.90 (0.86-0.95); CVD 0.86 (0.79-0.94)
- What do the results mean in everyday life?
Usual tea drinking is not linked to harm
- What are the study's limitations?
Observational; high heterogeneity; benefit seen mainly in Asian studies, not in European ones
- What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?
Contradicts 'second most dangerous drink'
- Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?
Moderate (no association in European cohorts, but no harm either)
- What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?
That tea itself causes the lower risk
-
Is tea good or bad for health overall?
Yi M et al.. Molecular nutrition & food research 2019 · PMID 31216091 · DOI 10.1002/mnfr.201900389Systematic reviewindependent cross-checkabstract checked★ key studyAcross 96 meta-analyses, tea showed more benefits than harms; only very hot tea (>55-60 °C) was linked to oesophageal and gastric cancer.
Benefit outweighs harm at usual intake; only very hot tea linked to harm.
Does the study support the specific claim? No · Methodological quality: moderate · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim
Original publication · Scientific details
Study explained simply
- What did the researchers want to find out?
Overview of tea and health
- How was the study done?
Umbrella review
- How many people, animals or samples were studied?
96 meta-analyses
- What was actually found?
More benefit than harm; harm only for very hot tea
- How large was the observed effect?
Lower risks at 2-3 cups/day
- What do the results mean in everyday life?
Normal tea drinking is safe for most people; let it cool
- What are the study's limitations?
Observational
- What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?
Contradicts 'dangerous drink'; supports a temperature caveat
- Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?
Moderate
- What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?
Causation
-
Caffeine and constipation
Li Y et al.. J Neurogastroenterol Motil 2025 · PMID 40205901 · DOI 10.5056/jnm23181Cross-sectional studyindependent cross-checkabstract checkedIn 13,941 US adults, caffeine intake was not linked to constipation.
Caffeine intake not associated with constipation (indirect for tea).
Does the study support the specific claim? No · Methodological quality: moderate · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim
Original publication · Scientific details
Study explained simply
- What did the researchers want to find out?
Test caffeine-constipation link
- How was the study done?
Cross-sectional survey
- How many people, animals or samples were studied?
13,941 adults
- What was actually found?
No association
- How large was the observed effect?
OR 1.01 per 100 mg
- What do the results mean in everyday life?
Caffeine drinks do not seem to constipate
- What are the study's limitations?
Not tea-specific
- What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?
Indirectly contradicts the claim
- Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?
Moderate
- What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?
Effect of tea tannins
-
Tea drinking and reflux in Taiwan
Kuo CM et al.. Int J Med Sci 2026 · PMID 42807308 · DOI 10.7150/ijms.139922Cross-sectional studyindependent cross-checkabstract checkedHabitual drinkers of green or oolong tea had somewhat less reflux; black tea showed no link.
Tea drinkers had lower GERD prevalence; black tea neutral.
Does the study support the specific claim? No · Methodological quality: moderate · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim
Original publication · Scientific details
Study explained simply
- What did the researchers want to find out?
Test tea and reflux
- How was the study done?
Cross-sectional study
- How many people, animals or samples were studied?
27,119 adults
- What was actually found?
Lower reflux with green/oolong tea; black tea neutral
- How large was the observed effect?
OR 0.843
- What do the results mean in everyday life?
Tea does not generally cause reflux
- What are the study's limitations?
Self-report; tea types differ
- What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?
Contradicts the claim
- Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?
Low
- What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?
Causation
-
Reflux risk factors in Saudi Arabia
Alhafid IA et al.. BMJ Open 2026 · PMID 42303406 · DOI 10.1136/bmjopen-2026-118665Meta-analysisindependent cross-checkabstract checkedPainkillers and smoking were linked to reflux; frequent tea or coffee drinking was not.
In Saudi studies frequent coffee/tea was not a GERD risk factor.
Does the study support the specific claim? No · Methodological quality: moderate · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim
Original publication · Scientific details
Study explained simply
- What did the researchers want to find out?
Find reflux risk factors in the Gulf
- How was the study done?
Meta-analysis
- How many people, animals or samples were studied?
14 studies
- What was actually found?
Smoking and NSAIDs, not tea/coffee
- How large was the observed effect?
31.6% vs 31.3% prevalence
- What do the results mean in everyday life?
Tea is not a main reflux cause
- What are the study's limitations?
Heterogeneous data
- What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?
Contradicts the claim (regional)
- Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?
High for Arab region
No study in this group is marked as key.
Studies with mixed or unclear results (1)
-
Does tea cause heartburn?
Cao H et al.. Medicine 2019 · PMID 30681584 · DOI 10.1097/MD.0000000000014173Meta-analysisindependent cross-checkfull text, structured risk-of-bias assessment★ key studyAcross 30 studies, tea drinkers did not have significantly more reflux disease overall (OR 1.12, 0.98-1.27).
Overall no association with GERD; some regional subgroups show higher odds.
Does the study support the specific claim? Partly · Methodological quality: low · Certainty of evidence: see overall assessment of the claim
Original publication · Scientific details
Study explained simply
- What did the researchers want to find out?
Link between tea and reflux disease
- How was the study done?
Meta-analysis of observational studies
- How many people, animals or samples were studied?
30 studies from 23 articles
- What was actually found?
No significant overall association; higher odds in East Asia, lower odds in the Middle East; cohort studies null
- How large was the observed effect?
OR 1.12 (0.98-1.27)
- What do the results mean in everyday life?
Tea is not a proven general cause of reflux
- What are the study's limitations?
Mostly cross-sectional, mostly unadjusted studies; high heterogeneity; no protocol; reporting inconsistencies
- What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?
Contradicts 'tea equals reflux' as a general rule
- Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?
Moderate
- What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?
Whether tea triggers symptoms in a particular person
No study in this group is marked as key.
Regional context
Germany / EU
Tea is not restricted in European dietary guidance; no specific guideline was fetched for this review.
Egypt
Tea is a very common drink in Egypt; no Egypt-specific outcome data were found. Drinking tea with or right after meals may matter for iron status where iron deficiency is common. In the closest regional data (Saudi Arabia), frequent tea or coffee drinking was not a risk factor for reflux (31.6% vs 31.3%; I-SRC-124).
What applies in my country?
General scientific assessment
Mostly false Tea is not a dangerous drink at usual intake; its real downsides (iron absorption, very hot temperature) differ from those he names.
This statement concerns biological or medical relationships. The scientific assessment above applies regardless of the country; country-specific food data do not change it.
References
- The effect of tea on iron absorption.. Disler PB et al.. Gut 1975 · PMID 1168162 · DOI 10.1136/gut.16.3.193
- Tea consumption and risk of all-cause, cardiovascular disease, and cancer mortality: a meta-analysis of thirty-eight prospective cohort data sets.. Kim Y et al.. Epidemiology and health 2024 · PMID 38938012 · DOI 10.4178/epih.e2024056
- Tea Consumption and Health Outcomes: Umbrella Review of Meta-Analyses of Observational Studies in Humans.. Yi M et al.. Molecular nutrition & food research 2019 · PMID 31216091 · DOI 10.1002/mnfr.201900389
- Association Between Caffeine Intake and Stool Frequency- or Consistency-Defined Constipation: Data From the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2005-2010.. Li Y et al.. J Neurogastroenterol Motil 2025 · PMID 40205901 · DOI 10.5056/jnm23181
- Habitual tea consumption is associated with a low prevalence of gastroesophageal reflux disease in a Taiwanese population study.. Kuo CM et al.. Int J Med Sci 2026 · PMID 42807308 · DOI 10.7150/ijms.139922
- Prevalence and risk factors of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease in Saudi Arabia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.. Alhafid IA et al.. BMJ Open 2026 · PMID 42303406 · DOI 10.1136/bmjopen-2026-118665
- Association between tea consumption and gastroesophageal reflux disease: A meta-analysis.. Cao H et al.. Medicine 2019 · PMID 30681584 · DOI 10.1097/MD.0000000000014173