Skip to main content

Is red wine a performance-enhancing drug?


Lance Armstrong’s doping revelation aside, a recent study added controversy to the question of whether quercetin, a red wine-derived substance, can boost athletic performance by boosting testosterone levels. Though it was a test-tube study not backed up by any human subject data, the researchers thought it significant enough to inform the World Anti-Doping Agency. Quercetin has been reported in reputable publications to enhance oxygen uptake and endurance, and since many of these have come out since my review in "Age Gets Better with Wine," so I thought it might be worth another look.

For starters, quercetin is an antioxidant bioflavanoid that can be found in foods other than wine (apples for instance.) It first caught researchers’ attention as a component of red wine, being a possible contributor (along with other compounds such as resveratrol) to the famous “French paradox.” Like other wine-derived compounds, quercetin seems to alter energy metabolism at a cellular level. But does this translate to measureable changes in athletes? The data is conflicting. One well-designed clinical trial examined the effects of a quercetin + vitamin C supplement on 60 male athletes. After 8 weeks of using the supplement, no changes in exercise endurance were found, but there were slightly reduced markers of post-exercise muscle damage and a reduction in body fat (compared to placebo.) Another study by the U.S. Army evaluated a high-dose quercetin supplement on aerobically demanding soldier performance. No measurable benefit was found, though this was a shorter trial (just over a week.) Still another trial on endurance runners found no benefit.

One way to troll for meaningful data from conflicting study results is what is called a meta-analysis, which combines the results of all properly designed published studies. The School of Applied Physiology at Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta conducted such a review, concluding that “On average, quercetin provides a statistically significant benefit in human endurance exercise capacity (VO2max and endurance exercise performance), but the effect is between trivial and small.” So whether red wine or quercetin supplements boost testosterone or not, the effect seems unlikely to be enough to affect the outcome of the Tour de France or explain the French paradox by itself. There are plenty enough healthy reasons to have a glass of wine anyway.

Comments

  1. If you know the rule of golden middle, then you'll havee an opportunity to experience not only deep taste of red wine but also its healing properties:
    Green-up.
    By the way, I followed you up with GFC, it'd be great if you follow me back.

    ReplyDelete
  2. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

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