Much has been written about the health benefits of wine consumption. Naturally nothing is definitive as everybody is different. In addition I am not a health care professional and nothing that follows should be taken as an admonition to drink wine. Wine consumption is a topic that should be discussed with your health care professional and the key word in wine drinking, as in everything else, is "moderation." Having said all that, one can generally discuss some of the research and what started it all.

In the late 1970s a Washington, D.C. lobby organization known as the Center For Science in the Public Interest (CSPI - why is it that we cannot discuss Washington D.C. without acronyms?) had just finished a very successful series of attacks on the tobacco industry. Convinced that consumption of beverages containing alcohol was also deleterious to human health, the CSPI commissioned a study to prove exactly that. Much to their dismay, the study ended up with a U-shaped curve. Non-drinkers and heavy drinkers were both at far higher risk of heart attack than moderate drinkers. Needless to say error was blamed for this result and when a new study was undertaken the results once again demonstrated that moderate drinkers were suffering fewer heart attacks than both non-drinkers and heavy drinkers. This particular set of studies did not differentiate between beer, wine, or distilled spirits.

At this point it may be appropriate to define moderate consumption. Moderation depends upon size, weight, and sex. As far as wine is concerned general consensus seems to suggest that three six-ounce glasses of wine a day is considered moderate. Naturally no individual should take this as a guideline and consultation with your personal health care professional is recommended. (I will keep repeating that until I am sure you, dear reader, get it.)

This brings me to a trivial but interesting aside. Also in the late 1970s federal and state excise taxes on distilled spirits were being dramatically increased. Seagram's, a very large purveyor of distilled spirits, felt this was unfair and that wine and beer should be taxed as well. They therefore launched a large publicity campaign stating that one glass of beer is equal to one glass of wine is equal to one shot of spirits. There has never been a study to confirm this and as Jerry Mead, longtime wine writer for the San Francisco Chronicle, once suggested, let's have Mr. Busch, Mr. Gallo, and Mr. Seagram each go into a restaurant together. With dinner they will each consume their respective beverage. When they are done we will check their blood alcohol level. It would be an interesting experiment.

To return to the CSPI: At the same time as they were conducting their disappointing studies they asked the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (all lumped together after prohibition - they had to do something with federal employees who specialized in chasing organized crime rings running rum) to require a "Contains Sulfites" statement and a warning label on wine, beer, and distilled spirits.

Let us briefly discuss sulfites in wine. Sulfur dioxide has been used as an antioxidant in winemaking since the Dutch discovered it in the 1500s. Most wines contain 35 parts per million (ppm) of sulfur when bottled. Dried fruits by contrast often are packaged with 600 ppm. I have read definitive articles by allergy specialists that state there is no such thing as an allergic reaction to sulfites in wine. On the other hand some wines have higher levels of histamines and there are people who just smell these wines and develop instant migraines.

Warning labels are always interesting. I am certainly in accord with the concept of not operating equipment after drinking. In addition drinking when pregnant is not to be recommended. However, there was the concept that drinking while pregnant would deform babies in the formative stages. This was called Fetal Alcohol Syndrome (FAS). Unfortunately babies that demonstrated FAS came from mothers that not only drank heavily, they smoked heavily, and healthy eating was not a priority. So the term was changed to Fetal Alcohol Effect (FAE).

Only one serious study has been done on consumption of wine during pregnancy. After all, no one wants to risk FAE, let alone FAS. The English ran a study where some mothers drank two glasses of wine a week. At six months there was no statistical difference between the babies. Babies from the wine drinking mothers scored slightly higher on their APGAR scores.

All these positive studies came to the attention of many different people. Studies started to occur worldwide and even led to a "60 Minutes" show. Once more, all humans at all stages of life (including pregnant women) should consult with their health care professional before even moderate consumption of wine.