Decades of allowing the possibility of some positive health effects enjoyed through moderate drinking have been replaced by a more draconian, prohibitionist view. The weakening of consumer demand appears to have been accelerated by the resurgence in anti-alcohol health messaging.This is therefore a topic worth addressing in a blog about wine, which is a very nice alcohol-containing beverage. I have already started with my very recent post: There is one diet that actually recommends wine.
First, we need to get a few things clear. I have been a professional scientist all of my adult life (see ResearchGate). I have those fancy research qualifications like a PhD, so that I can be called Doctor Morrison. I have taught at universities, both undergraduate and postgraduate students, and done scientific research there.
I am a biologist by specialization, and I have written 107 research papers about that topic, funded by government agencies, and written 28 review articles, as well as contributed to 5 books. According to Academia, my work has been cited >11,000 times (this always amazes me!).
This means that I can read all of those complicated research publications about human health, and actually understand those incredibly long words describing what was done and to whom. Furthermore, I can draw my own conclusions from the data presented there. Therefore, I feel qualified to write about this topic.
Now, there may well be a reason to be skeptical about some of the previous experiments on the effects of alcohol (What’s the truth about alcohol’s benefits and risks?). However, it is my own conclusion from looking at the current primary medical literature that there is no evidence that alcohol is harmful to human health, if taken in relatively small doses. For wine, those low doses are currently taken to be 2 standard glasses or less per day for men (or large women), and 1 glass or less per day for women (or small men) (eg. Dietary Guidelines for Americans 2020–2025).
Therefore, the current stance being taken by some of the official health organizations seems to be extreme to me. They are actively claiming that wine is harmful (Pour one out). Indeed, The U.S. could soon declare alcohol unsafe, since it is contemplating new 2025 Dietary Guidelines and alcohol consumption recommendations. Further, as noted by Harry Eyres:
Medical squadrons are in the vanguard of the attack. The Chief Medical Officers of the United Kingdom now advise that men as well as women should not exceed 14 units of alcohol per week. Don’t be surprised if the recommended level drops further. Much more ominously the World Health Organization warns that “no level of alcohol consumption is safe for our health.”How can the World Health Organization (WHO) and the U.S. Surgeon General take this official stance, when there is little actual scientific evidence for it? In fact, quite the contrary, as I noted above. See also: Are the Surgeon General’s alcohol risk calculations correct?], which points out that the Surgeon General’s explanations of risk are based on a single study (from Australia) with calculations that “make no sense.” Note that my conclusion goes further than my previous post on this topic (There are no scientific experiments saying: don’t drink alcohol); and that earlier claims about a causal relationship between alcohol and cancer have previously been dispensed with elsewhere (A glass of wine with dinner is fine after all, study finds).
From this latter perspective, it is a relief (to me) that all of the most recent research publications put it in black-and-white that wine turned out to be not harmful in their experiments. As evidence, I have listed a few of the papers from December 2024, linking an introductory web page for non-experts (plus a link to the original scientific paper):
- Drinking wine does not raise risk of cancer or death in healthy older adults (original experiment: Alcohol consumption patterns and mortality among older adults with health-related or socioeconomic risk factors)
- Occasional wine with Mediterranean diet may lower cardiovascular disease risk (original experiment: Wine consumption and cardiovascular health: the unresolved French paradox and the promise of objective biomarkers)
- Study using more reliable measure of wine consumption finds protective effect for low to moderate drinking in people at risk of cardiovascular disease (original experiment: Urinary tartaric acid as a biomarker of wine consumption and cardiovascular risk: the PREDIMED trial)
- NASEM report affirms benefits of moderate drinking (original review: Review of evidence on alcohol and health)
It could be that some of the current cohort of medical bureaucrats just don’t “get” wine; and that is, of course, fine, at a personal level. However, it is not fine for them to then actually attack wine, aggressively, as many of them are currently doing (The Barbarians are at the gate). Equally importantly, an crucial public omission has been noted: Wine needs support from doctors, if a neo-Temperance (not neo-Prohibition) outcome is to be avoided.1
If anyone needs a justification for consuming wine, other than the buzz from the alcohol, then this presentation by Harry Eyres provides a very good one (Is there any justification for wine?):
Wine, like other artforms, has purely sensuous, emotional, intellectual elements, and can be appreciated at all those levels. Above all, it is, or can be, part of culture, not merely a gluggable route to anaesthesia or oblivion ... [Furthermore,] hobbies need no justification beyond the pleasure one derives from them. 2So, being alive has risks, and our activities (such as driving a car, or drinking wine) potentially increase those risks to one extent or another. We should therefore not take unnecessary risks (such as driving too fast, or drinking too much). This latter is taken to be regular excessive alcohol consumption or, at the extreme, binge drinking (at one time: women = 4 or more drinks, men = 5 or more). 3
Nobody needs wine, unless they are an alcoholic; and we do not have to get drunk in order to drink wine. Importantly, however, you could consider this young-person comment to the oldies (Rediscovering the fun in wine):
Why don’t you guys talk about how much fun you have when you drink wine with your friends at dinner? 4
1 The National Prohibition Act of 1919–1933 (aka the Volstead Act) prohibited the production, importation, transportation, and sale of alcohol within the USA, but not its consumption. So, the wine media needs to change its headlines, since the current pressure solely concerns consumption.
2 Bill Ireland, my wine mentor (Some personal anecdotes), once wrote (Picking a winner): “Unless you have multiple bottles of the same wine, a particular wine can only be enjoyed once. That’s why I think wine is the most cruel of all the arts.”
3 If a couple share a bottle of average-strength wine, then they will consume c. 3 drinks each.
4 See also my recent post: Wine quotes, ancient and recent, to cheer you up.
