Wine Advisor: One drink healthy, two not so much?

Mark, Here is a citation. Not to be taken too seriously!

Willett WC.
Ask the doctor.
For the health of my heart and arteries, how does regular consumption of red wine
compare with grape juice or the equivalent in grapes?.
[Journal Article] Harvard Heart Letter. 17(7):7, 2007 Mar.
UI: 17378077
Paul.

Thanks, Paul. I'll take a look at it when I have the time.

(Right now I'm busy reading about gp120/CD4 interactions in HIV infection)

Mark Lipton

2 drinks a day doesn't even qualify as drinking, in my book (it's a fantasy)

your body wouldn't even notice it, would it?

I read somewhere (forget where) that the body generates at least 1 oz of alcohol a day on its own from body processes (fermentation during digestion, I assume?)

So, what's an extra couple of ounces spread over a day? nothing!

my definition of moderate drinking is "drinking without getting impaired"

I agreed with all your points until this last one which, having read the original Danish study [which was extensively discussed in another forum], seems to be way off what was concluded. I can find no reference to anything which indicated that 'the amount [of alcohol] consumed was largely irrelevant'.

The main conclusions appeared to be 'Drink moderately and exercise - up to 2 drinks per day - and live longer' and 'Drink a lot and don't exercise and die early'.

Well, as they defined "moderate consumption" it was 1-14 drinks per week, which is a fairly big spread, but you're right that they draw a big distinction between moderate and heavy consumption.

Mark Lipton

Indeed having read many of the long term US, UK, Dutch, French studies and some of the meta-studies which looked across many more, the main conclusions appear to be:

1. Teetotalers have a higher rate of all-risk mortality than light to moderate drinkers

2. Cardiac risks are lowered and remain lower than others up to the higher end of moderate drinking before rising like others.

3. Other risks e.g. cancer and stroke reduce [as apparently do all others] versus teetotalers for light drinking and then rise continuously even through moderate drinking and upwards.

Some of the problem in using these studies is that the comparisons are often made with teetotalers since these appear to have a significantly higher risk than light drinkers.

However IMO the more logical conclusions concerning the risks of disease/mortality associated with increasing consumption would be comparisons with very light to light consumption after which point all risks appear to increase with the exception of cardiac – for a while.

In one major study cardiac related mortality appeared not to exceed that of teetotalers until the equivalent of almost a bottle of wine per day was being consumed. However, mortality rates having dropped as with others within a light drinking regime had resumed an upward curve even for cardiac related risk in the moderate range and below half a bottle [of 13% ABV wine] per day.

What appears to hold is that, with the exception of cardiac related issues, all other risks appear to increase from light drinking onwards whereas cardiac remains flatter for longer before also rising.

However there are other major variables that are clearly very important: size, gender, exercise, diet, general health, medication, water consumption et al. The potential for addiction at certain levels is another issue to be considered.

Within the whole population there are clearly individuals with a particular set of variables who should drink nothing to very little while there are others that can drink much more without apparent harm. BUT in the vast majority of cases light to moderate consumption appears the only sensible guideline with people, of course, being free to judge and choose their own level.

Regrettably for most of us that love wine as much for its taste and enhancement of eating as the pleasant buzz it produces, that means distinctly less than half a bottle of 13%ABV wine per day. And while the medics debate the efficacy of alcohol free days and the difference between different types of alcohol on general health, a couple of free days per week would seem a reasonable way to test the potential dependency factor on a regular basis.

I thought that the results of that study were scrapped last year when they realized they had included reformed alcoholics in the teetotaler's section?

2 drinks a day doesn't even qualify as drinking, in my book (it's a fantasy)

your body wouldn't even notice it, would it?

I read somewhere (forget where) that the body generates at least 1 oz of alcohol a day on its own from body processes (fermentation during digestion, I assume?)

So, what's an extra couple of ounces spread over a day? nothing!

my definition of moderate drinking is "drinking without getting impaired"

That would depend presumably by how you define 'impaired'.

If you use the Drink Drive limit [UK and USA] as a measure of impairment then an average weight [up to 13 stone] healthy male would be advised to stop before consuming 40% of a bottle of 13%ABV wine if he was going to drive anytime soon i.e. he would be considered ‘impaired’ by that definition.

So a max of less than half a bottle per day on that basis unless your definition allowed consumption up to the point of impairment but then allowed that to be approached several times in the day through e.g. the bottle being consumed over 10-12 hours with extensive breaks.

And if you were in continental Europe you would have to cut that to 25% of a bottle for most countries or zero for some since in those countries, above that amount, one would be considered 'impaired', at least from a driving standpoint.

If your definition was simply 'able to walk and talk and hold a rational conversation' the consumption could rise significantly and probably, for many currently fit people, well past the amount where consumption of that level every day would be considered safe from a potential disease or dependence viewpoint.

Their definition is, as they say "screwed" (i'd use another word on another forum)

there is a lot of mis (dis) information out there on how much alcohol it takes to raise your BAL a given amount

I have a lot of experience with personal breathalysers. I wrote an article once called "I'm the drinking driver with my pocket breathalyser" (nod to Kraftwerk)

I am 185-190 lbs and I can drink a 13% bottle of wine between 5 pm and midnight and never be impaired, In fact, I wouldn't even make it to 0.05%

I have a spreadsheet that I can send you if you like...

1 drink an hour for average male does not get you over 0.05

so, when you read stories about peopel beign 0.10 or 0.15 or - I've seen thios, over 0.3, just imagine how much they drank and how fast