Close
today i learned (til)

Matcha: More Than Just a Trend

April 24, 2026

After going viral on social media in the early to mid 2020s, matcha – a traditional Japanese green tea drink – now has a ubiquitous presence in many cafes and even bakeries. Popular for its aesthetic green color and unique earthy taste, matcha’s global market has exploded over a short period of time and was estimated to be worth 5.07 billion USD in 2025 (Grand View Research, 2023). Along with its popularity, there has been growing interest in its potential health benefits. 

In fact, recent research has suggested that matcha may actually have several health benefits – such as increasing cognitive performance, decreasing stress and anxiety, and even reducing inflammation. 

What is matcha exactly?

Matcha is the powdered form of Japanese green tea and has been mostly consumed in traditional settings as well as incorporated into many food items. Originating from the Camellia sinensis plant, it has been traditionally cultivated by shielding the tea bushes from the sun using bamboo mats and steamed afterwards to prevent oxidation (Sokary et al., 2023). This process allows for higher production of amino acids and compounds like chlorophyll, which gives matcha its dark and vibrant green color as well as umami flavor (Sokary et al., 2023). 

In addition, matcha’s chemical composition consists of polyphenols (aka very powerful antioxidants), catechins, caffeine, and phenolic acids. It also contains theanine, which is a non-protein amino acid that is known to have anti-stress effects (Baba et al., 2021). Notably, it is believed that the combination of theanine and caffeine in matcha, which is not found in coffee, helps improve attention (Baba et al., 2021). 

Benefits of Matcha

A recent study researched the effects of matcha on executive functioning such as attention (Baba et al., 2021). The participants were randomly assigned to three groups, which were placebo, caffeine, and matcha (Baba et al., 2021). They consumed 9 pills – either placebo, caffeine, or matcha – for 12 weeks every morning and afterwards, were tested on several skills (i.e., memory, facial expression recognition, attention, etc.) using a set of cognitive tests (Baba et al., 2021). The results from this experiment found that the matcha group demonstrated significantly lower reaction times and increased perception of emotion (Baba et al., 2021). In addition, the same group conducted another experiment to observe the effects of matcha under mildly stressful conditions. They found that continuous consumption of matcha helped improve performance under stress (Baba et al., 2021).

Another study conducted an experiment that examined matcha’s effect in mice exposed to air pollution. All mice were exposed to particulate matter before the experiment. The experimental group of mice were given 20 or 40 mg/kg of matcha, which was based on body weight (Jong Min Kim et al., 2021). Afterwards, it was found that matcha helped to alleviate inflammation (Jong Min Kim et al., 2021). The researchers also found that the experimental (matcha) group was protected from antioxidant deficits in several tissues of the body (Jong Min Kim et al., 2021).

Conclusion

Beyond its trendiness and aesthetic, matcha can be described as a delicious concoction of various nutrients, ranging from antioxidants to amino acids that help prevent inflammation and even reduce stress. So the next time you find yourself stressed or need to sharpen your attention skills, head on to a nearby cafe and try a matcha!

References

Baba, Y., Inagaki, S., Nakagawa, S., Kobayashi, M., Kaneko, T., & Takihara, T. (2021). Effects of Daily Matcha and Caffeine Intake on Mild Acute Psychological Stress-Related Cognitive Function in Middle-Aged and Older Adults: A Randomized Placebo-Controlled Study. Nutrients, 13(5), 1700. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu13051700

Grand View Research. (2023). Matcha Market Size, Share | Global Industry Trends Report, 2018 – 2025. Www.grandviewresearch.com. https://www.grandviewresearch.com/industry-analysis/matcha-market

Jong Min Kim, Jin Yong Kang, Seon Kyeong Park, Jong Hyun Moon, Min Ji Kim, Hyo Lim Lee, Hye Rin Jeong, Jong Cheol Kim, & Ho Jin Heo. (2021). Powdered Green Tea (Matcha) Attenuates the Cognitive Dysfunction via the Regulation of Systemic Inflammation in Chronic PM2.5-Exposed BALB/c Mice. Antioxidants, 10(12), 1932–1932. https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox10121932

Kochman, J., Jakubczyk, K., Antoniewicz, J., Mruk, H., & Janda, K. (2020). Health Benefits and Chemical Composition of Matcha Green Tea: A Review. Molecules, 26(1), 85. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules26010085

Sokary, S., Al-Asmakh, M., Zakaria, Z., & Bawadi, H. (2023). The therapeutic potential of matcha tea: A critical review on human and animal studies. Current Research in Food Science, 6, 100396. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crfs.2022.11.015

Uchida, K., Meno, K., Tatsumi Korenaga, Liu, S., Suzuki, H., Baba, Y., Tagata, C., Araki, Y., Shuto Tsunemi, Aso, K., Inagaki, S., Nakagawa, S., Kobayashi, M., Tatsuyuki Kakuma, Asada, T., Ota, M., Takanobu Takihara, & Arai, T. (2024). Effect of matcha green tea on cognitive functions and sleep quality in older adults with cognitive decline: A randomized controlled study over 12 months. PLoS ONE, 19(8), e0309287–e0309287. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0309287

0Likes
About Author

You May Also Like

today i learned (til)
Forged in Fire: The Discovery of Bronze
today i learned (til)
We need to talk about the women founders of modern science: Meet Chien-Shiung Wu
today i learned (til)
A Future of Painless Tattoos
today i learned (til)
Social media is killing our environment

Your journey starts here! Let’s talk!

ThemeRex © 2026. All rights reserved.
  Timothy Durham was convicted of rape when a test showed his DNA genotype matched the DNA recovered from the crime scene. Eye witnesses testified that Durham was in a different state at the time of the incident, but he wasn’t exonerated from his 3000 year sentence until follow up DNA analysis showed that the preliminary forensic analysis used in the trial was misinterpreted (Thomas et al.). DNA testing serves an invaluable part in our criminal justice system, but it comes with complications and bias that can lead to wrongful convictions and misinformed juries.  

Background:

Forensic genetics aims to identify the origin of a biological sample. It can be traced back to Karl Landsteiner who discovered human ABO blood groups. With blood groups, suspects could be eliminated based on their blood type. For example, if a suspect had type A blood and there was type B blood left at the scene by the perpetrator, the investigators could rule out the suspect. Unfortunately, the reverse didn’t work. If the suspect and perpetrator both had the same blood type, it can’t be concluded that the suspect was guilty. Blood identifiers evolved into 8 distinct categories which improved the ability to eliminate suspects, but could only conclude that (if the system matched) it might be the perpetrator or this person might be related to the perpetrator (Jobling and Gill). The field evolved in the 1980s with the discovery of Minisatellites, lines of repetitive DNA that don’t encode proteins. Minisatellite patterns in DNA create what we know today as the DNA fingerprint, and it has a much higher accuracy rate than previous methods (Augustyn et al.). Around the same time, a breakthrough for victims of sexual assault was discovered. In the case of assault, bodily fluids of both the victim and the assaulter can get mixed. A process called differential lysis was created which could selectively increase the concentration of sperm in a fluid sample thereby allowing for accurate DNA testing (Jobling and Gill). Forensics evolved to use single-locus probe testing after several years because of its ease of interpretation. It looked at specific minisatellites that had high variability between subjects. This was the first DNA-based method to be used in a criminal investigation. Two murder homicides from several years apart were connected using DNA evidence. The evidence was then used to exonerate an innocent man, and the guilty party was found when he tried to evade mandatory DNA testing for all men in the small town. His guilt was then reinforced when the DNA profiles matched, and he gave a confession (Jobling and Gill). Finding DNA at a crime scene doesn’t guarantee that you’ll find a murderer. There are issues with non-pure samples and limited samples that make DNA work difficult, and accreditation of facilities and new techniques and take time (Jobling and Gill).  

Subjectivity of DNA Interpretation:

In a 2009 publication, the National Academy of Science discusses the possibility for subjective influence in lab based forensics. The interpretation bias happens in complex cases where, for example, there could be a mixture of DNA. A study published in 2011 looked specifically at this issue. A gang rape happened in Georgia, and the mixture in DNA from the case was used to prosecute one suspect after another suspect took a plea bargain to testify against him. With DNA mixtures, there are three possible conclusions: suspect excluded, suspect cannot be excluded, and inconclusive. If the suspect is excluded, it means that there’s little to no possibility that his DNA is part of the sample. If the suspect cannot be excluded, it means that there’s a possibility that his DNA is part of the sample. In the trial, the DNA examiners who knew the context of the case concluded that the suspect being prosecuted could not be excluded. The 2011 study gave the DNA evidence from this case and the DNA profiles of the suspects to 17 forensic examiners. These examiners had no context of the case, and they all worked independently. Of the 17, only 1 came to the same conclusion (suspect cannot be excluded) as the examiners who knew the context of the case. Twelve of the 17 concluded that the suspect who was prosecuted and convicted had no relation to the DNA found in the sample. Not only does this show that subjectivity occurs due to the context of the case, but the 17 examiners came up with different findings based on their past experiences meaning that not all DNA analysis is objective. Some organizations like the Scientific Working Group on DNA Analysis Methods say that quantitative statistical evidence should be presented with every categorical conclusion, but the US doesn’t require this (Dror and Hampikian).

False Positives:

There are two categories that cause wrongful identification in a DNA report: coincidental matches and false positives. Coincidental matches are DNA matches between two unrelated people. The probability of these matches is about 1 to 500,000 for white individuals and about 1 to 350,000 for black individuals. This small probability of coincidental matches makes people feel confident in DNA evidence. False positives, on the other hand, are matches between DNA and test DNA that result from issues in the forensics lab. There have been multiple cases of forensics labs accidentally switching victim and suspected rapist DNA which lead to convictions that were later overturned when the lab realized the error. There are also cases of misreading or misunderstanding a sample. In a case from 1993, a man was convicted of rape because someone interpreted a mixed sample of victim and perpetrator DNA as an individual sample. The conviction was again overturned. To prevent false convictions, retesting DNA is allowed, but it’s not an efficient solution. Many people are pushing for statistical information on the probability of false positives, so that the jurors can make accurate judgements based on DNA evidence (Thomas et al.).  

Conclusion:

DNA analysis is a useful tool for the criminal justice system, but subjectivity can be an issue in forensic testing. To combat wrongful convictions, there are organizations like The Innocence Project who use DNA testing to free the innocent, but reformed forensic testing standards should be put in place to prevent subjectivity and to ensure juries are correctly informed during trials. https://www.innocenceproject.org/    

Citation:

Augustyn , Adam, et al. “DNA Finerprinting.” Encyclopedia Britannica , 26 Apr. 2018, www.britannica.com/science/DNA-fingerprinting#ref153186. Dror, Itiel E., and Greg Hampikian. “Subjectivity and Bias in Forensic DNA Mixture Interpretation.” Science & Justice, vol. 51, no. 4, 2011, pp. 204–208., doi:10.1016/j.scijus.2011.08.004. Jobling, Mark A., and Peter Gill. “Encoded Evidence: DNA in Forensic Analysis.” Nature Reviews: Genetics, vol. 5, no. 10, Oct. 2004, pp. 739–751., doi:10.1038/nrg1455. Thompson, William C, et al. “How the Probability of a False Positive Affects the Value of DNA Evidence.” Journal of Forensic Sciences, vol. 48, no. 1, Jan. 2003, pp. 1–8., doi:10.1520/jfs2001171.