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

Popular posts from this blog

Which came first: Beer or wine? (or something else?)

Actually neither beer nor wine was the first fermented beverage, and wine arguably has a closer connection to health, but recent evidence indicates that humans developed the ability to metabolize alcohol long before we were even human. The uniquely human ability to handle alcohol comes from the digestive enzyme alcohol dehydrogenase, or ADH4. A new science called paleogenetics identifies the emergence of the modern version of the ADH4 gene in our ape ancestors some 10 million years ago. Interestingly, this corresponds to the time when our arboreal forebears transitioned to a nomadic lifestyle on the ground. We went from swinging from tree limbs to walking upright, and the rest is history. Understanding the circumstances that led to perpetuation of the ADH4 mutation may contain clues to what made us human in the first place. How the ability to metabolize alcohol made us human Paleogenetecist Matthew Carrigan has an idea about how this happened . Arboreal species rely on fruit tha

Why I am not surprised that the NIH cancelled the alcohol-health study

Not long after enrolling the first patients in the much hyped prospective study on alcohol and health, the National Institutes of Health recently announced that they were pulling the plug. I am actually more surprised that they ever got it off the ground in the first place. As I wrote a year ago when the study was still in its planning stages, there were too many competing interests, criticisms of the study design, and concerns about funding to expect that whatever results came out would be universally accepted. Nevertheless, I am disappointed. The study, called Moderate Alcohol and Cardiovascular Health Trial (MACH) was intended to provide hard evidence about the health effects of moderate alcohol consumption by prospectively assigning subjects with heart disease to one drink per day or not drinking, which they were to follow for up to 10 years. Most existing data on the question is retrospective, or simply tracks a subject population according to their drinking preferences, w