(Manfred Klimek)
There are small turning points in the war waged by the established ascetics of the hyper-correct media against wine. One of them has just emerged, as is so often the case, quietly, but in the very newspaper that had distinguished itself over the past two years as a mouthpiece for morally charged calls for asceticism: the Süddeutsche Zeitung.
Where warnings about the deadly dangers of an aperitif were usually issued with the missionary meticulousness of a traffic warden, one now reads, almost in a whisper, the news that sounds like music to the ears of all those who regard wine not as a sin but as culture: Wine is not as deadly as the ‘deluded’ folk at the WHO – and those who have been drumming this into us for nearly two years during their ‘Dry Orgy Days’ – would have us believe.
Or, to put it scientifically: moderate alcohol consumption can – yes, brace yourselves – prolong life.
The return of reason to the glasses of reality
The source of this heresy is not some dubious wine magazine, but the US National Academy of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine (NASEM). In a 253-page report – ‘Review of Evidence on Alcohol and Health’ – the experts reach a conclusion that, until now, would have been considered heresy not only in parts of the *Süddeutsche* editorial team: people who drink in moderation live longer. Their cardiovascular health is better. Their overall mortality rate is lower.
How can this be, when talk-show pundits and ascetic bloggers have been preaching the mantra for years that ‘even the first glass of wine can cause cancer’?
Quite simply: life is more complex than addiction statistics.
The Nasem study found that with moderate consumption – that is, one glass of wine a day for women and two for men – overall mortality falls by 16 to 23 per cent.
The risk of a heart attack is reduced by 22 per cent, and that of a stroke by 11 per cent.
Only in the case of breast cancer (and, as I read the study, in both sexes) was there a slight increase of five to ten per cent – which certainly warrants mention in this context.
The wine that disappeared from the statistics
The real point, however, runs deeper: in recent years, many studies that the temperance movement was so keen to cite had a simple methodological flaw – they lumped non-drinkers and ex-drinkers together.
And ex-drinkers are often people who, quite rightly, have given up alcohol for health reasons. But anyone who compares them with perfectly healthy wine-lovers naturally comes to the hasty conclusion that wine is more dangerous than not drinking wine.
The new US study has once again set the record straight on this nonsense. And suddenly, a very different picture emerges – and this time, perhaps, it is gaining wider recognition: the moderate wine drinker lives longer – not in spite of, but because of their glass of wine.
The moralising machine stutters
Naturally, the authors are quick to emphasise – in the finest American liability rhetoric – that this is ‘not a recommendation’ to drink alcohol. One might almost think they were afraid that a health-conscious reader might already be reaching for the corkscrew whilst reading between the lines.
But the genie is out of the bottle. And whilst the moralising camp is still trying to salvage its old arguments, the statistics are beginning to speak for themselves. They say: moderation is key.
From ‘Dry January’ to wet realism
Barely two years ago, ‘Dry January’ seemed to have become a substitute religion.
The Süddeutsche Zeitung, The Guardian, DIE ZEIT – they were all vying to come up with the most elegant metaphor for abstinence. Wine was suddenly the new smoking, sparkling wine the new cholesterol. An entire section of the media preached abstinence, backed up by an industry of non-alcoholic alternatives – which can certainly be an excellent complement, without replacing wine.
It is not wine that makes us ill, but the hypocrisy with which it has been – and continues to be – discussed.
This new study now brings yet another era of uncertainty to a close. It shows that moderate enjoyment is not a crime, but can be part of a healthy lifestyle. That a glass of wine with dinner means more than just calories and blood alcohol levels – namely, ritual, rhythm and connection.
A glass of common sense, please
The report from the US is not a licence to drink, but a long-overdue corrective. It reminds us that between the first glass and cirrhosis of the liver, there is such a thing as pausing to reflect, mindful consumption and moderation.
And that the truth usually lies in the middle – where life actually happens.
The Süddeutsche Zeitung, hitherto known as a mouthpiece for excessive correctness, has thus unwittingly performed an act of atonement: it has, at least to some extent, rehabilitated wine.
So that, after years of deliberate lies, a glass of wine may finally be regarded once more for what it is – a reason to talk to one another, rather than trying to lecture one another.