don’t take my freedom
but you can take hers or his
if I don’t like it
Not quite a year later, I wrote this in a Wine Review Column under the title “In Vino Veritas: A Useful Allegory in the Age of the Big Lie”: In wine, there is truth. I don’t know about you, but it seems to me that truth is a pretty hot commodity right now. After a few years of the “Alternative Facts Era” (which is hopefully taking its final breaths on the same day that this column is published) I couldn’t be hungrier for an unobstructed view of truth bolstered by actual factual evidence and the perspectives of experts whose hard-earned expertise has been severely undervalued of late. I believe that wine and the truths that lie within might just be instructive for a time such as this. [Note: you can read the rest of this column in the WRO archives.]
Happy mid-spring to fellow wine aficionados everywhere. It’s a time of year here in the earth’s northern half when growers of our favorite beverage are either nearly or all the way through bud break and are thinking about trellising, flowering and fruit set. In the Southern hemisphere, makers are wrapping up fermentation of the year’s harvest and putting things in bottles or barrels. On both sides of the equator, it’s all about promise of future reward – financially for growers, producers, and sellers, or epicurious-ly for those of us who are always in search of that transcendent glass that tells us something true about the world and who we are while we’re in it.
Of course, there are elements that can hamper these efforts and cause all sorts of problems for both sides of the industry. An unexpected weather event can dash the hopes and dreams of those on all sides of the equation. Market forces can bring (and have brought about) eras of expansion or contraction of what becomes available to producers and consumers. And of late, myriad publications, studies (some reputable, some questionable) and “trends” seem to want to drive us away from wine – and any other form of alcoholic beverage – to “healthier” alternatives, based on the idea that “no amount of alcohol is safe.”
Some see sinister forces at play – what to make of it all? Here are a few thoughts.
First, it seems clear that definitive answers about the “safety” of drinking alcohol in general and wine in particular are difficult if not impossible to come by. In these days of search engines and tailored news feeds that show us things that algorithms “think” we want to see or hear, getting at the truth seems to be more difficult and time consuming than it has ever been before. It can be argued that our average attention span seems to be decreasing (not your attention span of course – you’re still here, right?) and that people’s propensity for knee-jerk reactions seems to be increasing at a corresponding rate. So, when an entity like the World Health Organization (WHO) January 2023 statement that “when it comes to alcohol consumption, there is no safe amount that does not affect health” hits, you can almost feel the wind created by all the jerking knees, followed by the detritus that the wind carries along behind. Is there truth here?
Just last month Beer Business Daily published an article entitled “New Generation of Anti-Alcohol Crusaders Push ‘No Safe Level,’” arguing that the WHO is part of a neo-prohibitionist industrial complex crusade that seeks to eradicate alcohol consumption globally. Tom Wark, in his blog Fermentation, writes of a conference held just last week in Arlington, VA, called “Alcohol Policy 20,” the theme of which was “How Do We Change America’s Relationship with Alcohol?” Break-out sessions included seminars with titles like, “Big Alcohol: How Do We Fight Back?” and, “Unveiling the Influence of the Alcohol Industry on Public Health Policy.” How about “dry January” and “sober October” and other attempts to convince us to turn away from wine ‘for our health” that continue to crop up?
Health and safety. Can alcohol be unhealthy and/or unsafe? Of course it can. We know—and actually have valid science to confirm—that a certain level of blood alcohol content (BAC) causes death. We also know that the level required to bring death about can vary somewhat from person to person. Additionally, we know anecdotally (and no doubt some of us know experientially) that BAC above certain amounts can affect us physically to the point that we could injure ourselves and/or others in certain situations, i.e., driving a car, operating machinery, falling down, etc.
We also know it to be true that too much sun exposure can cause cancer. And we also know that lack of sun exposure can cause vitamin D deficiencies that can reach an unhealthy level.
The arguments can go on and on with like this with many of the problems the world faces today, from climate to war to diets etc., etc. The problems are complex, but we crave a simple solution, and thus are susceptible to the agendas of those who would convince us that one exists.
When it comes to wine in particular, an interesting article by about the San Diego community of La Jolla looking into “Blue Zone” certification caught my eye. A “Blue Zone” is described as a place on the earth where a high percentage of residents live to advanced ages, i.e., Sardinia has the highest concentration of men over the age of 100. Looking at factors that influence longevity led researchers to nine principles that the zones have in common, three of which are dietary in nature, with one of those three being to “drink alcohol, preferably wine, moderately and regularly.”
Does this mean that wine is the fountain of youth? Hardly, but it does seem to play a role in a lifestyle that leans toward longevity. Is it the alcohol, the antioxidants, or something else in wine that does the trick? Naturally, more research is needed, and unfortunately, it’s the kind of research that doesn’t offer quick answers. My daughter works as a neurobiologist and is quick to note that the main thing that we’ve learned about human physiology through all of science to date is that what we don’t know is a significantly larger pile than the pile of what we do know.
None of the above is likely surprising to you, but I hope you share my concern about groups in America that would seek to remove a choice from us without solid evidence that doing so would improve the general welfare of the country. Ironically, such groups often claim to be all about freedom of choice. Specifically, a so-called partial “truth” (“alternative fact” if you will) or a claim that is not fully tested and flies in the face of thousands of years of anecdotal evidence to the contrary that is used to advance an agenda that seeks to tell us what we can and cannot drink should be viewed with hefty skepticism at the very least, and hopefully pushed back on at every turn.
How? You can start by continuing to support wine producers whose work you appreciate through your purchases and recommendations. Discuss the issue with fellow aficionados – over a great glass of course – to keep awareness at the highest possible levels. And take heart that truth does have a tendency to make itself known eventually – in the glass and out. Saluté!