One of the big problems with so-called “scientists” is that they follow the scientific method but not the scientific speak. It’s so common to find that facts state a particular case and then the scientists contradict it—because they have some problem accepting the data.

So there is the pretense of science. People are fooled into believing they are being “scientific”, when in fact they are just resorting to personal opinions, at variance with the proven facts.

As an example consider this new study from Spain, showing that alcohol reduces death by heart disease by up to 54%–and that’s from HEAVY drinking. Yet they still insist that nobody should drink and “other studies” show alcohol kills. Why shouldn’t people adopt alcohol? If their science is worth a spit, drinking saves and enhances lives, for heaven’s sake.

This fanatical onslaught against alcohol continues, despite all common sense and scientific method. Spain and France, both very heavy drinking countries, where a bottle a day per person is almost the norm, do not have higher death rates than the rest of civilization. On the contrary, you have probably heard of the “French paradox”—meaning that the French drink HUGE amounts of alcohol and yet on average do not die younger than the rest of us.

Thousands of studies have shown that alcoholic drinks have an ameliorating effect on dietary excesses and seem beneficial. Papers on resveratrol and other polyphenols in red wine are coming out at the rate of about one a month. Yet born-again critics (many of whom I suspect are recovered drunks, from their ridiculous language) still rant against drink.

Most so-called alcohol deaths are from drink driving and alcoholism: in both cases anti-social and psychotic behavior is the problem, not the alcohol. If I drink a bottle of wine and DON’T go out on the roads and kill somebody but another person does go out and kill somebody, in what possible sense can the alcohol be the real cause of the second instance?

It’s just not logical.

Roaring drunks like Oliver Reed and Judy Garland had deep-seated psychological problems. Their self-destruct pathways killed them; alcohol was just the tool. Sometimes, like Mary Tyler Moore and Larry Hagman, the person doesn’t die physically but their life comes off the tracks and they are “dead” career-wise.

Well, with all that off my chest, let me talk more about this interesting Spanish study. Dr. Larraitz Arriola, MD, a researcher at the Public Health Department of Gipuzkoa, San Sebastian, evaluated 15,630 men and 25,808 women ages 29 to 69, all free of heart disease at the beginning of the study, following them for a median of 10 years (half longer, half less). That’s 41,000 people in all: a MAJOR study.

Dr. Arriola considered a “drink” as an alcoholic beverage with 10 grams of alcohol, the U.K. standard [In the U.S., a standard drink is equal to 13.7 grams of alcohol, according to the CDC].

The study’s definition of drinking levels was not scientifically-based and just made up “off the wall”.

But she chose to set it as follows:

• Light drinking was up to 5 grams a day — or about one glass of wine, one and one-half beers, or less than a half glass of hard liquor.
• Moderate drinking was 5 to 30 grams a day, or about two glasses of wine, two or three beers, or a half to one glass of hard liquor.
• High and very high levels of drinking were 30 to 90 grams a day, or about five or more glasses of wine, seven or more beers, and one to one and a half glasses or more of hard liquor.

What Dr. Arriola found was that:

• Light drinking reduced risk by 35%
• Moderate drinking reduced risk by 51%
• High and very high levels of drinking reduced risk by 54% and 50%.

Even former drinkers had a 10% risk reduction. As I keep pointing out, teetotalers don’t do so well on life expectancy. That might be counter-intuitive but it is an uncontestable fact.

One of the things that frustrates me with studies on alcohol is they rarely distinguish the types of drink. In my opinion (I’m labeling it an opinion) wine is far safer and more natural than either spirits or beers. So when all drinks are lumped together, it often masks the benefits of wine, which are quite clear when it is examined alone.

But in this study, I note that all drinks were counted and the conclusion was that beer, wine, or hard liquor all reduced the risk of heart disease in men by up to 50% or more.

The benefits showed up mainly for men. The researcher found no statistical benefits for women drinking alcohol but Dr. Arriola concluded this may be because of the relatively low number of women in the study who developed heart disease. That in turn could be because the drinks benefited them greatly. But it cannot be stated as fact; we just don’t know on these figures.

Cheers!

The Mediterranean diet has been proved over and over again to be beneficial. Science is coming out of our ears to show it’s good for the heart and health in general.

But what you probably don’t know is that the evidence for the heart benefits of a low fat diet are almost non-existent. The only source I trust is Dean Ornish—but he confuses everything by adding many extra steps to just a “simple” fat free diet, which I consider the real cause of his undoubted success.^[1]

With no real validity to the low-fat regime (and lots of proven dangers) doctors still INSIST their patients do it.

Yet when it comes to a proven program, which flies in the face of their dumb prejudices, doctors rarely recommend the Mediterranean diet and most don’t even know what it is, beyond olive oil and salads!

The Mediterranean diet is something to get interested in; I love it! It consists of eating lots of olive oil, nuts, fresh fruits and vegetables, along with wine. And let me put in, right here, that Muslim Mediterranean countries (like Turkey, Syria, Egypt, Tunisia, Morocco) do not have better longevity, despite the fact they supposedly don’t drink alcohol. In fact their figures are worse.

Actually, you are allowed up to half a liter of wine a day. Don’t worry if you prefer white; my friend John Ionescu did some oxidative value readings years ago (before the ORAC tests) and found white wine and champagne to have more antioxidants than red wine; red wine had way more antioxidant values than blueberries and all the supposed good stuff (ignore the phoney scores put out by MLM marketing people).

I suppose you shouldn’t start drinking wine but never be shy of it if you do. Wine is NOT “alcohol”; wine is wine. All the bad stuff you read about “alcohol” ALWAYS includes negative figures from spirits (very bad) and beers (lousy and fattening). Plus those who drink beer and spirits are poor lifestylers, by my definition!

The fact is, wine is a lovely form of sunshine. Just don’t get carried away with it and always drink it with food if you can. 2 – 4 glasses is just fine; it depends on your glass, of course!

Saluté.

Now The Science

So, the present study was carried out in Spain. I lived there for 3 years and they are, of course, a Mediterranean country, as well as having an Atlantic coast. The Spanish are very naughty and their fishing fleet goes all over the world, violating every international quote agreement there is.

British fishermen have to sit on the shore and watch the Spanish fleet come to within a few miles of land and harvest the fish that their own quota limits are supposed to be “preserving”.

The Canadians had a major run in with them a few years back, I remember; same reason. The Spanish love their fish, which is a crucial source of omega-3s!

Dr. Miguel Angel Martinez-Gonzalez, chairman of preventive medicine and public health at the Universidad de Navarra in Spain, led a 5-year investigation, tracking nearly 7,500 men and women, eating a typical Mediterranean diet. They ranged in age from 55 to 80 when they enrolled in the study, which began in Spain in 2003. Fifty-seven percent of the participants were women.

While they had no history of heart attack or stroke or other cardiovascular problems at enrollment, they did have risk factors such as type 2 diabetes, smoking, high blood pressure or high cholesterol.

The researchers assigned the participants to one of three groups — a low-fat diet, a Mediterranean diet that focused on nuts or a Mediterranean diet that focused on olive oil.

During a follow-up period of about five years, study participants on the Mediterranean diet that emphasized either olive oil or nuts had a 30 percent greater reduction in relative risk of a heart attack, stroke or death from cardiovascular disease, compared to the low-fat regimen.

“This is a moderate-to-high benefit,” Gonzalez is reported as saying. “The low-fat diet also helped, but to a lesser degree.”

The new findings are published online Feb. 25, 2013, in the New England Journal of Medicine. The findings were also presented at the 2013 International Congress on Vegetarian Nutrition in Loma Linda, Calif. ^[2]

Overweight, Obesity and Diabetes

These were not even healthy subjects, yet the benefit was clear. On average, the men and women were overweight or obese. In all three groups, the average body-mass index was 30 or close to it, which is defined as obese.

The olive oil group consumed about a liter — roughly 34 ounces — of olive oil a week. The nuts group ate about one ounce of nuts a day, including walnuts, hazelnuts and almonds. Members of both groups also ate plenty of fruits and vegetables, as well as fish, and drank wine with meals. They could have white meat but were told to avoid red and processed meats.

The low-fat group ate low-fat dairy, breads, potatoes, fruits and vegetables and lean fish. They were told to avoid oils, baked goods, nuts, red and processed meat and fatty fish. In other words the classic Western carbohydrate junk food diet, all starch and little protein.

The French Paradox

Hand in hand with the Mediterranean diet, comes the so-called “French Paradox”. Most of France is NOT on the Mediterranean shore but the principles of good fresh food, plenty of vegetables, all served enjoyably, with lots of wine, seems to be a French thing. Earlier studies than the present one have shown the same amazing healthy properties of this style of eating (low carbs, virtually no manufactured foods).

The Lyon Diet Heart Study is a randomized single-blinded secondary prevention trial aimed at testing whether a Mediterranean-style diet may reduce the risk of recurrence after a first myocardial infarction. A surprising 50 to 70% reduction in the risk of cardiovascular complications was reported.

This strong protective effect was confirmed in the GISSI trial, where the risk of death was three times as low among CHD patients on a traditional Mediterranean diet as among patients following a Western diet. ^[3]

The Lyon trial also suggested that patients following the Mediterranean-style diet might also be protected from cancer. ^[4] Although further trials are warranted to confirm the cancer data, those of the Lyon trial are in line with epidemiological studies emphasizing the role of nutrition in the prevalence (and prevention) of many cancers. ^[5]

Note that, according to data from the first French national dietary survey (1999), called ASPCC, the consumption of fruit and the intake of fiber by the French appears to be very low, whereas their intake of saturated fatty acids is very high (16% of energy).^[6]

Wow! That’s the end of the saturated fats are bad story, surely?

Why?

So why does the Mediterranean diet seem to boost heart health? It’s the combination of good-quality fats — both monounsaturated like olive oil and polyunsaturated like vegetable oils — and the wide range of other nutrients. It’s also excluding unhealthy carbohydrates, though the people of those countries eat some bread and occasional rice.

The wine is a very important factor, I’m convinced. Evidence for the health benefits of wine are overwhelming, whatever the “can’t be true therefore it isn’t” party poopers have to say. Interestingly, the alcohol consumption per capita in France, Spain and Italy is vastly more than other non-Mediterranean countries in Europe (see table). Even Greece has double the average intake.

Country and Wine Alcohol Consumption Per Capita
• France –195
• United Kingdom –33
• Spain –129
• Italy –144
• The Netherlands –38
• Greece –84
• Sweden –33

There’s one element in this wine thing that nobody talks about: it’s summed up in one word — bonhomie. There is something about the slow, leisurely lunches in the sunshine, with a bottle of wine and amigos, that can’t be captured in scientific statistics.

But it’s real. I know. I’ve been there…

In a world dedicated to stress, rush, worry and tension, the idea of relaxing for lunch is revolutionary. But it calms and soothes. Wine opens the heart, as the Italians say (a day without wine is a day without sunshine). Good friends, good talk and good food and drink is a very healthful formula, whatever the nutritional ingredients may be.

But make them good ingredients: like fish, salads, fruit, vegetables and vino. You’ll live longer and…hey! If you don’t, at least you’ll have enjoyed your time on Earth!

<sup>REFERENCES:
1. http://www.ornishspectrum.com/proven-program/
2. Feb. 25, 2013, New England Journal of Medicine, online; Feb. 25, 2013, presentation, International Congress on Vegetarian Nutrition, Loma Linda, Calif.
3. Marchioli R., Valagussa F., Del Pinto M., et al. Mediterranean dietary habits and risk of death after myocardial infarction. Circulation 2000;102(Suppl II):379.
4. de Lorgeril M., Salen P., Martin J.L., et al. Mediterranean dietary pattern in a randomized trial. Prolonged survival and possible reduced cancer rate. Arch Intern Med 1998;158:1181-1187.
5. Cummings J.H., Bingham S.A. Diet and the prevention of cancer. Br Med J 1998;317:1636-1640.
6. Volatier J.L., Verger P. Recent national French food and nutrient intake data. Br J Nutr 1999;81:S57-S59.</sup>

If they’re crushed and fermented into wine – studies show they can.

The Power of Antioxidants

Produce is healthy and beneficial for your body. Over the last few years, scientists around the world have discovered just how good it is for you.

However, as healthy as fruits and vegetables are to add to your diet, some are even better for us than others are – and researchers have the data to back it up.

The skins and seeds of grapes are a rich source of antioxidant compounds known as polyphenols. Long known to help combat autoimmune disorders and strengthen your bones, polyphenols also have been proven to have amazing cancer-fighting abilities.

The Free Radical Fight

The scientific community now recognizes long-term, free radical damage as one of the leading causes of cancer. What exactly is a free radical?

Free radicals are formed when your body is attacked by an invading force such as pollution, cigarette smoke, even radiation from the sun. These harmful forces cause damage to your body’s molecules, literally breaking them apart.

Seeking to maintain the natural balance and harmony of your body, these molecules will do whatever is necessary to reform, even if that means stealing an electron from neighboring healthy molecules to do so.

As you can imagine, over time, this produces a cascade effect. The damaged molecules begin to disrupt the cell they are bonded together to form. Once the cell is disrupted, it may begin dividing uncontrollably which is the process that leads to cancer.

Can this be prevented with a glass of wine?

When wine is fermented, the polyphenols in the grapes are dissolved into it. This creates a liquid antioxidant.

Red wine contains more polyphenols than white due to the fermentation process but white wine – even champagne – also contain high levels of polyphenols and other powerful antioxidants.

Wine – Cancer Fighting in Moderation

Scientists have said for years that wine is good for your heart and wine prevents cancer. Now there are studies coming out every day proving that vino can also keep you cancer free.

A paper published by the US National Library of Medicine in 2003 speaks of wine consumption lowering the risk of several types of cancer including colon, lung, and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.

A more recent study by the Northeastern Ohio University Colleges of Medicine and Pharmacy showed further conclusive evidence that resveratrol, a polyphenol commonly known as a plant antibiotic, has anti-cancer properties that are simply astounding.

With man-made antibiotics, the human body adapts to them, ultimately becoming resistant. This results in superbugs that your body has no ability to fight.

Bacteria do not adapt to resveratrol – they have no way to mutate and resist it.

During tests, resveratrol was shown to inhibit – and in some cases even reduce – tumor growth in skin, breast, prostate, gastrointestinal, and lung cancers.

A separate study performed at the University of Leicester indicated that two glasses of wine a day could reduce the rate of bowel cancer by nearly 50%.

The more research that is done, the clearer it becomes that wine prevents cancer – in moderation – is good for you. It’s healthy for your heart, reduces your risk of dementia, and can even protect your brain from damage after a stroke. All of this and it can prevent cancer.

Why Big Pharma Doesn’t Care About the Science

The pharmaceutical companies will never talk about this. If you prevent cancer, they lose billions of dollars every year in cancer treatment drugs. That you might enjoy yourself with a lovely glass of wine prevents cancer while affecting their profits probably makes them angry.

Cancer is a wily foe and there is no magic bullet but there are three major secrets that you must know to beat cancer and remain in good health. Click here now to discover these secrets for yourself. While you browse, open up a bottle of good wine, and enjoy the day.

It will put a smile on your face, it will heal your body, and let’s be honest, isn’t everything better with a glass of wine? Salut!

So there is the pretense of science. People are fooled into believing they are being “scientific”, when in fact they are just resorting to personal opinions, at variance with the proven facts.

As an example consider this new study from Spain, showing that alcohol reduces death by heart disease by up to 54%–and that’s from HEAVY drinking. Yet they still insist that nobody should drink and “other studies” show alcohol kills. Why shouldn’t people adopt alcohol? If their science is worth a spit, drinking saves and enhances lives, for heaven’s sake.

This fanatical onslaught against alcohol continues, despite all common sense and scientific method. Spain and France, both very heavy drinking countries, where a bottle a day per person is almost the norm, do not have higher death rates than the rest of civilization. On the contrary, you have probably heard of the “French paradox”—meaning that the French drink HUGE amounts of alcohol and yet on average do not die younger than the rest of us.

Thousands of studies have shown that alcoholic drinks have an ameliorating effect on dietary excesses and seem beneficial. Papers on resveratrol and other polyphenols in red wine are coming out at the rate of about one a month. Yet born-again critics (many of whom I suspect are recovered drunks, from their ridiculous language) still rant against drink.

Most so-called alcohol deaths are from drink driving and alcoholism: in both cases anti-social and psychotic behavior is the problem, not the alcohol. If I drink a bottle of wine and DON’T go out on the roads and kill somebody but another person does go out and kill somebody, in what possible sense can the alcohol be the real cause of the second instance?

It’s just not logical.

Roaring drunks like Oliver Reed and Judy Garland had deep-seated psychological problems. Their self-destruct pathways killed them; alcohol was just the tool. Sometimes, like Mary Tyler Moore and Larry Hagman, the person doesn’t die physically but their life comes off the tracks and they are “dead” career-wise.

Well, with all that off my chest, let me talk more about this interesting Spanish study. Dr. Larraitz Arriola, MD, a researcher at the Public Health Department of Gipuzkoa, San Sebastian, evaluated 15,630 men and 25,808 women ages 29 to 69, all free of heart disease at the beginning of the study, following them for a median of 10 years (half longer, half less). That’s 41,000 people in all: a MAJOR study.

Dr. Arriola considered a “drink” as an alcoholic beverage with 10 grams of alcohol, the U.K. standard [In the U.S., a standard drink is equal to 13.7 grams of alcohol, according to the CDC].

The study’s definition of drinking levels was not scientifically-based and just made up “off the wall”. But she chose to set it as follows:

• Light drinking was up to 5 grams a day — or about one glass of wine, one and one-half beers, or less than a half glass of hard liquor.
• Moderate drinking was 5 to 30 grams a day, or about two glasses of wine, two or three beers, or a half to one glass of hard liquor.
• High and very high levels of drinking were 30 to 90 grams a day, or about five or more glasses of wine, seven or more beers, and one to one and a half glasses or more of hard liquor.

What Dr. Arriola found was that:

• Light drinking reduced risk by 35%
• Moderate drinking reduced risk by 51%
• High and very high levels of drinking reduced risk by 54% and 50%.

Even former drinkers had a 10% risk reduction. As I keep pointing out, teetotalers don’t do so well on life expectancy. That might be counter-intuitive but it is an uncontestable fact.

One of the things that frustrates me with studies on alcohol is they rarely distinguish the types of drink. In my opinion (I’m labeling it an opinion) wine is far safer and more natural than either spirits or beers. So when all drinks are lumped together, it often masks the benefits of wine, which are quite clear when it is examined alone.

But in this study, I note that all drinks were counted and the conclusion was that beer, wine, or hard liquor all reduced the risk of heart disease in men by up to 50% or more.

The benefits showed up mainly for men. The researcher found no statistical benefits for women drinking alcohol but Dr. Arriola concluded this may be because of the relatively low number of women in the study who developed heart disease. That in turn could be because the drinks benefitted them greatly. But it cannot be stated as fact; we just don’t know on these figures.

Cheers!

[Source: Arriola, L. Heart, online, November 2009].