Skip to main content

French study says wine causes cancer

Just when we thought the issue was settled, a new large scale study from France's National Cancer Institute finds that even small amounts of regular drinking can increase the risk of cancer. In fact, even as little as one glass of wine per day supposedly ups the odds of cancers of the throat all the way through to the colon and rectum. Problem is, this study is so out of phase with everything we have been hearing about wine and health that it ends up confusing the issue rather than helping. Here's what I think:
The first key to putting this in context is to remember that cancer isn't the whole story with wine and health. Benefits in lowered cardiovascular disease risk, Alzheimer's, diabetes, osteoporosis, and many others would vastly outweight the increased cancer risk even if it did exist. Secondly, no single study provides the definitive answer; in order for it to be meaningful, it has to be independently confirmed by other studies. This one is inconsistent with nearly every previous study of its type, notably statistics from the American National Cancer Institute. Cancers of the type referenced in the French study are known to have a high association with smoking, and a very large percentage of French drinkers also smoke, so it is impossible to tease out the statistical risk attributable to wine drinking alone with any accuracy.
There was a similar hubbub about a year ago when a large study from Kaiser-Permanente found that even modest consumption of wine increased breast cancer risk. Less noticed was a study from Japan published the same month finding exactly the opposite. I cover the reasons behind this in the next edition of Age Gets Better with Wine.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Revisiting resveratrol: new findings rekindle anti-aging debate

Just when we thought the bloom was off the rosé for resveratrol, the anti-oxidant polyphenol from red wine with multiple anti-aging properties, along comes new research giving life to the debate. But first a bit of background: As I detailed in my book Age Gets Better with Wine , it is well-documented that wine drinkers live longer and have lower rates of many diseases of aging. Much or the credit for this has been given to resveratrol, though there isn’t nearly enough of it in wine to explain the effects. Nevertheless, I dubbed it the “miracle molecule” and when it was reported to activate a unique life-extension phenomenon via a genetic trigger called SIRT, an industry was born, led by Sirtris Pharmaceuticals, quickly acquired by pharma giant Glaxo. The hope was that resveratrol science could lead to compounds enabling people to live up to 150 years and with a good quality of life. But alas, researchers from other labs could not duplicate the results, and clinical studies disa...
7 comments
Read more

Is wine a functional food?

Then again, didn’t all foods used to be functional? In the modern era of bulging waistlines, it would seem that nutrition has taken a back seat to processed foods engineered to tweak our taste buds and pleasure centers in the brain. And it is all too easy – and wrong – to cast wine as merely empty calories. But can we really consider wine to be a food, especially a nutritious one? To begin with, the term “functional food” means that it contains specific nutrients with identifiable health benefits. Sometimes these are added in, as with vitamins A and D in milk or calcium in orange juice. The way I see it, in a well-balanced diet there shouldn’t be a need for such enhancements. Wine for example naturally contains an abundance of antioxidant polyphenols, nutritionally vital ingredients that are increasingly lacking in many foods. A glass of wine with dinner on a daily basis is associated with longer life and better health by a variety of measures, a claim difficult to prove with vita...
4 comments
Read more