Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘health’

Until there is definitive evidence that the unique matrix or “chemical soup” of wine, by itself, leads to healthier outcomes for individuals, we need to stop with this “wine is healthy” talk.  The only thing we can say for sure at this point of the scientific path is that a healthy individual probably won’t suffer any negative outcomes by moderately drinking, preferably with food, and not as an attempt to alleviate stress.  Admittedly, I’m the one pushing last point, but I have good evidence and following that advice definitely will not hurt you.  Having said that…

Are people saying wine is good or bad for you today?  I can never keep up. According to some Google searches, on May 21, 2017 all of the “news” sources that I’ve never heard of viewed wine as health savior, but on May 22, 2017, that all changed.  The Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs published two articles the day before looking at the potential associations between moderate drinking and long-term cardiovascular health.  Both of these articles were critical of how numerous studies conducted previously that suggested (not proved) there is a link between light to moderate drinking and reduced rates of cardiovascular disease may have made a common error in research by assuming that the results seen in the groups of individuals studied were widely applicable to everyone in the general population.  And then this happened:

 

Search

First, neither of the papers were about wine specifically so let’s tone it down “Starts at 60” (Tag line: “Australia and New Zealand’s, and increasingly, the worlds largest digital media platform for over 60s.”).  Second, neither of these papers proved or even attempted to prove that there is no association between wine and long-term cardiovascular health.  The edition of the journal these articles were published in even opens with the following text (red text mine):

This issue of the journal contains two articles with three associated commentaries on the yet-unanswered question of the association between moderate drinking and cardiovascular health as well as general mortality.

Third, the idea that a single food or drink item should be deemed “Healthy” or “Not healthy” is beyond ludicrous because that’s just not how health works.

In general, this see-sawing you see in the news about whether something is healthy or not is a result of misinterpretations of what the results of a single study or small number of studies say.  Most journalists aren’t great at interpreting scientific literature unless they also have a science background; wine and food writers are especially bad.  As a general rule of understanding scientific research: the more studies that are conducted on a particular question, the less likely any single study is going to contradict all of the research performed before it.  For example, let’s take a look possible outcomes of the question: Is there an association (relationship) between moderate drinking and cardiovascular health?

  • Yes, there is a positive association between moderate drinking and cardiovascular health. (This means moderate drinking could make you heart-healthy)
  • Yes, there is a negative association between moderate drinking and cardiovascular health. (This means moderate drinking could make you heart-unhealthy)
  • No, there is no association between moderate drinking and cardiovascular health. (This means being a moderate drinker in itself won’t determine your heart health)

The results of every study conducted on this question will add evidence to one of these possible outcomes. I generally visualize this as each study producing a single cube of evidence of roughly the same size/weight/volume as any other study that gets filed into one of the outcome columns.  Why the same size/weight/volume? Because an important aspect of the scientific process is that an experiment is repeatable.  The process is highly democratic in this respect which means that a single study cannot overturn the bulk of work done through previous studies.  A single study can influence future studies to be done to repeat the results however, which could lead to a turning of the tide, so to speak, but this process takes time.

Evidence

*Not actually representative of the current body of evidence no matter how much we want it to be true.

It is also important to note that in the scientific method there is no point where testing is stopped which is why declarative statements that an ultimate truth have been found are foolhardy.  Yet, there are times when the body of evidence is so large and convincing that it paints a picture of an inevitable outcome.  In other words, the pile of evidence is so vast in one column that the chances of that changing are slim to none.  Human-caused climate change, no association between vaccines and autism, an association between tobacco use and cancer, the theory of evolution, Aaron Berdofe being a pretty cool guy…these are all areas where the evidence paints a clear picture of the inevitable outcome.

But, as the Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs pointed out, we just don’t have a clear picture yet on if there is an association between moderate alcohol consumption and cardiovascular health and general mortality.  Same goes for most health related questions about alcohol.  The only certain thing we know about our relationship with alcohol is that if we drink too much we can permanently damage ourselves and perhaps die.  How we define “too much” varies by individual, but that’s why we have population health recommendations about how much is too much.  To a somewhat lesser degree of certainty, we also know that there seem to be few negative consequences to drinking lightly or moderately.  Again, thresholds and circumstances affecting that may vary.

None of this changes the the fact that wine drinkers just want to believe that wine will ultimately make them healthier people.  It’s perfectly natural to hope that our potential problems in the future can be alleviated by either doing nothing or continuing to do the things we currently enjoy.  I do believe that it is within this shared hope amongst wine drinkers that we write articles extolling the health benefits of wine, sell wine by incorporating it in the idea of being part of a healthy meal, or lecture beer drinkers on why wine is better.  I don’t think wine professionals or yes, even health/wellness professionals are being sinister when repeating incorrect or perhaps misleading statements regarding the relationship between wine and health*, but I do wish we’d all start being a little more thoughtful when talking about the topic.

If you are a wine professional, I would recommend you stop using binary descriptors when discussing wine and health like good/bad and healthy/unhealthy.  Adding or subtracting wine to a person’s diet, as we understand it today, does not make that person’s diet healthier or unhealthier.  Are there some interesting interactions that happen when we drink wine that have what we consider to be positive effects on our bodies? Yes, certainly.  There are also some effects we consider to be negative as well, but it’s very complex and research is underway to figure out in exactly what conditions those effects will take place.

It’s also good to remember that what the research says and what the headlines say are not always in alignment.  For example, the studies I first referenced about 1,000 words don’t conclude as the headlines purport that wine is “NOT good for the heart”.  They do suggest that some of the cubes of evidence presented to the “Good for your heart” column (Yes +) maybe need more work done before they can officially be put there.  I would at least recommend reading the parts of the study referenced in an article labeled “Abstract” and “Results” if you can.  Frustratingly though, most writers fail to provide a reference link to the original study they are basing their article off of.  Another frustrating road block you may run into is that the study is behind some journal’s paywall and I doubt you’ll want to pay the $25 to read it.  For that, all I can do is apologize for the world and let you know we’re working on it.

Therefore, until the number of studies performed and the results of those studies give a definitive picture to the question of how wine may affect our long-term health the best answer to give someone asking is a good shrug and tell someone that unless their doctor says otherwise, moderate drinking isn’t going to negatively affect you and too much will obviously kill you.  Of course, if you want to put a twinkle in your eye along with a sly grin and whisper “Maybe there’s something to it…” before taking a thoughtful sip of a particularly enchanting glass of wine, I won’t stop you.  Gourmand’s are willing to take the risk for pleasure, but do they do know there is a risk.

 

 

 

*There are a few companies these days claiming they can prevent headaches or hangovers from wine and there is simply no scientific evidence to back up their claims.  This is somewhat sinister and potentially in violation of Truth In Advertising laws.

Read Full Post »

AmericanWineFlag

My ears perked up as two middle-aged traveling businessmen started up a conversation with an attractive young woman sitting next to me.  I was in a wine-themed restaurant in the Denver International Airport on layover and passing the time by having a glass with some food.

“The only thing I’m hoping to get out of the wine is a little buzz!” the heavier set of the two who turned out to be from Seattle jovially announced after they were quizzing their new temporary friend about the wine flight she had ordered.  They then proceeded to embark upon an honest conversation about the “proper” ways they have heard of to hold a glass of wine.  At this point I almost interjected with an “Actually….” and then followed by something that I’m sure would have sounded pedantic, but I held my tongue.  Everything in their conversation about wine had a revelatory tone about it as if they were trying to figure out a way to pass themselves off as part of a storybook bourgeois class. To them, drinking wine took a certain degree of etiquette that they weren’t quite confident they could achieve.

To me, as someone who has spent the past 5+ years traveling around the country to both infinitesimally small and large towns alike, the overheard conversation exemplifies the current state of American wine culture.  We’re aware of wine, it is certainly in option in our beverage repertoire, but its primary role is either that of an intoxicating beverage or a declarative part as to some status of class (Mostly temporary as in during a fancy meal) in our minds.  We’re also pretty confident that there are a number of people who know how to drink wine in a more sophisticated way and are judging us when we don’t.  Yes, there are those on either side of the spectrum: Those who use wine in moderation to enhance the meals they eat on one end, and then those who don’t drink wine at all on the other.  However, most middle and upper class Americans have a relationship with wine that is very similar to the caricature of a pubescent teenage male: awkward yet really, really wanting to impress someone.

Recently, I have been finishing up Thomas Pinney’s The History of Wine in America volumes which passionately, if not exhaustively details wine’s place in this country from colonization to the past decade.  In terms of wine culture, the takeaway lesson from history is that the founders of this country and its early denizens had every intention of making wine an integral part of society because that was the type of culture they had come from.  However, due to both a lack of knowledge of how to grow grapes of European origin in America and a lack of native grapes suitable to making the quality of wine people were accustomed to, wine was never there from the start to be a consistent feature in everyday lives.  Once we figured out how to grow grapes of European origin on the west coast we had to wait until Prohibition passed and then some until we finally had a stable and widely available source of wine produced in this country.   Even more recently, we are finally figuring out how to coax some of the native grapes into producing material of high enough quality to make wine that we are accustomed to with the European ones.

Yet, some context is needed before we get too humble about our country’s wine endeavors.  Let’s keep in mind that thousands of years have passed from the time a human happened upon some fermenting grapes (Intoxicating, but I’m sure of dubious quality) to the regular production of wines of a standard that was originally set in Europe (Yes, primarily by the French).  During that between-time was a lot of selecting of the best vines in every generation, cross-breeding intentionally or not, and trying vines out in different locations to get what we considered to be the perfect balance of acid, sugar, and the mix of flavor-related molecules known as phenolics.  In America, we have only have around 300 years of history with wine.  In that time we have figured out where to plant European varieties to produce wines that not only compete with, but can best wines made anywhere else in the world in international competitions.  Also, our hybridization programs of our native grapes has gotten to the point where the wines produced from some of them are not only merely drinkable, but can even be confused for European varietals.  Learning from the timeless and tireless work of others and innovating upon it is the American way [Chest Thump].

Yet, despite the fact that we can produce world-class wines, wine is still not an integral part of our culture.  Why? It isn’t, as some snobbishly think, a difference between the culturally affluent city life and country bumpkins.  We don’t vacation in wine city, do we (Although it sounds like a place where I want to be)? Historically speaking, I would say it mostly has to do with proximity.  How many of us can say that they live in an area where or near where wine has been produced for the past 50 years or so; let alone 100 or 500 years?  Again, you have to go visit wine country and it’s usually a hefty drive or flight away.  Wine history buffs will know that wine has been produced in some form or fashion nearly everywhere in the country since its inception, but it has only been in places like California and more recently, Washington and Oregon that it could be considered a viable industry.  These places were able to do something no one else in the country could: produce cheap wine in decent quantity and quality and get local people to drink it.  Until most of the country can achieve this goal, wine will not become an integral part of the American culture.

Much could be said about the Temperance Movement in the late 1800s and early 1900s and the ensuing Prohibition that followed, but I think that grip is starting to fade.  The Temperance Movement in its original state was not about banning alcohol; it was about getting people (mostly men) to not drink liquor excessively and go home and beat their wives.  The founders and initial proponents of the movement had no concern over moderate consumption of wine and beer. The radicals that took over the movement are a different story though and the fractured alcohol laws that can be seen across the nation are certainly a hurdle to America’s future healthy relationship with alcohol.  Despite what some say, it’s not that you don’t drink or you do (Which would mean: excessively).  Moderate consumption of wine; the generally proven to be part of a health culture kind, is still an option.

…and then most Americans simply say, “So what?”  Why do American wine lovers always seem so evangelical about getting other Americans to drink wine?  While I’m sure I cannot speak for everybody, for me it is simply the desire to have a wonderful and shared experience with the people around me.  I can and do enjoy a good glass of wine with a meal and find enjoyment in it, but that pales in comparison to the times where I can say, “Hey guys! Come look at this thing! Don’t you think it’s great?!?!” And someone simply says, “Yes”.  I’m tired of wine being the domain of those who choose to adopt it as something that makes them supposedly more elite than everyone else.  Wine, while being infinitely complex in the experience it can create, is at its heart a very simple thing: Tasty fermented grape juice.

I could certainly attempt to argue on economical grounds in terms of the wine industry’s addition to the local economy or the greenness of not having to ship as much wine to places that already produce their own.  These in themselves are logical arguments that support the investment of making wine just about everywhere in the United States (Excepting Alaska’s milk wine.  They may try and export it because no one wants it there.).  I could also argue on health grounds, since wine drinking cultures rank highest in longevity and enjoyment of life, but let’s be honest: I just want to share the experience I have with wine with other people.

It is also about world-view though:  The culture of having wine with a meal encourages moderation and relaxed sociability.  Both of those items Americans could probably use a little more of.  Forgive me then if I want those around me to take a step back, have a sip of wine, and enjoy the moment they are in with the people they are with.  When it comes down to it though, no one, and I really do mean no one, thinks that’s a bad thing.

Read Full Post »