According to scientists,
red and white wines from various countries contain potentially harmful amounts
of at least seven heavy metals, including vanadium, chromium, manganese,
nickel, copper, zinc and lead. The authors suggest that these metals may pose
health risks in people who consume wine frequently over an extended period of
time.
Declan Naughton and Andrea
Petróczi from Kingston University, South West
London, did not measure the amounts of metals in wine. Instead, they analyzed
data published in scientific journals.
After collecting the data,
they estimated the potential safety of 15 wines from Europe, South America and
the Middle East by calculating their target
hazard quotients (THQs). The THQ formula, developed by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), is used to estimate the potential risks associated
with long-term exposure to environmental pollutants. A THQ score below one is
considered safe.
"The THQ is a risk
assessment designed to avoid underestimation. It therefore incorporates several
assumptions, such as maximum absorption of ingested metal ions and lifetime
exposures. In contrast, bolus dosing (e.g., drinking) and cross effects with
other potential toxins (e.g., alcohol) are not accounted for, nor are the
effects on the elderly, the young or those with a clinical condition," the
authors wrote.
Italy,Brazil and Argentina
produced wines that had safe levels of heavy metals. However, wines from
Hungary and Slovakia each had a total THQ level above 350, while wine from the
remaining 10 countries, including France, Austria, Spain, Germany, Portugal,
Greece, Czech Republic, Jordan, Macedonia and Serbia, each had a total THQ
value above 100.
Although drinking red wine
in moderation has been linked to positive effects on the heart, the authors
caution that the heavy metal contaminants may diminish possible health
benefits. The heavy metals may act as pro-oxidants, possibly canceling out the
positive antioxidant effects of the wine.
For more information about
the antioxidant compounds found in wine, please visit Natural Standard's Foods, Herbs & Supplements database.
What can toxic amounts of heavy metals in wines do to the body? How often is "frequently" and what is considered an "extended period of time"? What do the THQs actually mean? Is there a scale of severity? What is the maximum possible THQ? If a THQ of under one is safe, 100 and 350 seem deadly to me.
Posted by: Joe | November 04, 2008 at 09:37 AM
Are wines regulated like food by the FDA? Is there an agency that tests the safety of wines, substances ingested by consumers? And even so, they probably only test for what’s on the label, not for what’s not on the label.
Posted by: Grace | November 04, 2008 at 10:46 AM
Hopefully, this report will prompt the wine industry to look at ways to remove these metals from wine or to find out where the metals come from and prevent this from happening.
Posted by: betty | November 04, 2008 at 11:21 AM
I agree with Joe that the THQ value of some wines do seem dangerously high; however, the study does state the THQ values are additive, not multiplicative. I would like to know what the average THQ value is for wines regardless of country. What’s more, the life expectancy rates of these countries should be taken into account when looking at the antioxidant effects and health benefits vs. risk from drinking wine. And it’s a pity the report did not go into greater regional-specific detail in its findings. I find it hard to believe that all wines from within a country have the same amounts of heavy metals contaminants.
Posted by: Anne | November 04, 2008 at 11:51 PM
Wow! So many articles report how healthy one glass of red wine is. Although this article is not saying that it’s still not healthy, we have more to look out for, such as where the wine came from.
I have the same question that Joe does. What do these heavy metals to do the body? The brain? The nervous system? Also, is the FDA going to stop the making of wine in these countries where there is a problem? This is an interesting article but I think we need to know a lot more about what the FDA is doing/going to do about this problem.
Posted by: Brooke | November 05, 2008 at 08:39 AM
Grace:
Wine is actually regulated by the TTB (the Alcohol and Tobacco Trade Bureau) for wines made in the United States and also imported wines as well. Yes, you are right in saying they only test for what is on the label and not for what is not on the label. They make sure all the labels are accurate.
After this study, I wonder if the TTB will extend their responsibility to account for the safety of substances that are not suppose to be in the wine like heavy metals.
Posted by: Jack | November 05, 2008 at 10:48 AM
I wonder at what phase of production the contamination of the wines occur. Is there any way these processes could be regulated to decrease the levels of metals found in the wine?
Posted by: Jeremy | November 05, 2008 at 01:10 PM
Are there any data regarding health risks associated with wine drinkers in those countries where heavy metals level scores are above 100 and 350? I also wonder if these findings are limited to some brands of wines or isolated incidents. This finding is very disturbing since the THQ score level has to be below one to be safe.
Posted by: liz | November 05, 2008 at 09:52 PM
Researchers have noted that heavy metals are linked to Parkinson's disease, chronic inflammatory disease and cancer. This is the first time I have heard of the THQ (target hazard quotients) value. Our bodies need trace metals to meet normal body function and synthesis. The requirements are well established. Wine labels only show the alcohol content; they should also be showing the amounts of metals so consumers can decide what they want to purchase. The wine industry should be looking at ways to remove or to find out where these metals are coming from and prevent it from happening.
Posted by: Becca | November 06, 2008 at 06:40 PM
With the exception of Italy, Europe and the Middle East seem to have the highest levels of TQHs, which are harmful due to some heavy metals. This could mean an elevated level of environmental pollutants live in these countries, which make wine unsafe to drink. Before consuming a bottle of wine, make sure to research the TQH score. A safe score would be less than one.
Posted by: Anna H. | November 07, 2008 at 02:57 PM
How much wine (two glasses/day) is concerning for these THQ scores? THQ scores, as mentioned above, estimate risks associated with long-term exposure. What is considered to be long-term exposure to wine?
So Brooke, I think one glass of red wine still has its benefits. When data like these come out, I think we cannot jump to the gun. We should think about the risk-to-benefit ratio. How is THQ measured? Are the risks with higher THQ scores relevant to one glass of red wine? Are they relevant to an occasional glass here and there throughout the week?
Posted by: Julia | November 07, 2008 at 04:52 PM
Will the controversy about wine ever end? Science recently has shown that drinking a glass of red wine every day can improve endothelial function. Compounds attributed involve tannins and an interesting ingredient called resveratrol. Although resveratrol can be a purchased and consumed separately from wine, interestingly, the positive effects are negated when it is isolated from the wine. This article makes me wonder if maybe these "toxic metals" may help to form this beneficial active complex when only in small quantities, although in high amount may prove toxic…
Posted by: Steve Q | November 10, 2008 at 03:32 PM
Very interesting topic and one which I now have to consider, as I have my evening glass of wine. On the other hand, as others have echoed, red wine does have proven benefits. It also would be helpful to have baseline THQ values. There are a lot of old wines out there, just waiting to be measured, although I suppose this is an expensive proposition...
Posted by: Metu | November 10, 2008 at 03:50 PM
Wine is an important and integrative part of many European cultures. It would be interesting to see if countries, such as Italy and France, have higher rates of Parkinson’s disease or other disease states that heavy metals could contribute to.
Posted by: lilian | November 10, 2008 at 04:41 PM
This is quite alarming! I drink lots of wine from all different countries. I could not find any info about this from the FDA site (why am I not surprised). Where can I find out more about this?
Posted by: Kami Rogers | November 11, 2008 at 01:16 PM
Knowing which countries produce with the highest levels of heavy metals will help me when I go to the wine store! This study should be run on American wines as well along with comparative sulfite levels. Lead content should be made available to everyone for every wine since we know the hazards of lead. I’ll continue to drink my Luigi Bosca wine in the mean time.
Posted by: K.K. | November 11, 2008 at 04:17 PM
Brooke:
I do not think the FDA is going to stop wine production in these countries since it has no regulatory control over other countries, only the United States. Also, wine is regulated by the TTB in the United States.
I would also be very interested if there is knowledge of what stage of production the wine is being contaminated with heavy metals. Is it during the instillation or fermentation, or does it go back to the ground that the grapes (or other sources) are grown in?
Posted by: Jessica | November 12, 2008 at 09:58 AM
Wow! This is news to me! For a minute, I thought I was reading an article about herbs or dietary supplements! The information noted in this article regarding contamination of wine with heavy metals is similar to information that has been found on many herbal products! Unfortunately for the consumer, it also highlights the fact that what is ON the label is not necessarily what is IN the bottle! I, like Jack, wonder if the results of this study will prompt further investigation by the industry. As is the case with herbal products, contamination may occur any time prior to production or during production- questions to consider-are the heavy metals found in the soil of the vineyards or is the contamination occurring during processing of the wine? It will be interesting to see what regulatory changes, if any, occur. Will this industry now be required to follow GMP (Good manufacturing Practices)? Quality of product has been an issue with herbs and dietary supplements, now it looks like it has expanded to the wine industry!
Posted by: SUMA | November 14, 2008 at 05:53 AM
I wonder why the authors did not test the wines directly themselves, instead of taking data from journals? How current was that data?
But I'm even more curious to see if the health records in the countries where high levels of heavy metals were found reflect the potential dangers? Has anyone looked at a correlation here?
I think this will add to public confusion over whether drinking wine specifically and alcoholic in general are healthy or not. I guess right now you can twist the data any way you want.
Posted by: MH Malley | November 14, 2008 at 03:16 PM
Steve Q, the beneficial effects of wine are most likely not attributed to heavy metals, as they are not found in all wines. Many natural products only work when a multiple components are together, and stripping a single “active” ingredient out could lead to an ineffective supplement.
Posted by: PK | November 20, 2008 at 11:53 PM
I don’t see why wine manufacturers aren't required to follow GMPs -- any company that makes consumable products should. That being said, given our treatment of the environment, it is not overly surprising that any plant-based product might have heavy metal contamination quite possibly from the ground water.
Posted by: PK | November 21, 2008 at 12:01 AM
Metal or no metal, I will be drinking my favorite zinfandel this evening! Oooo delicious tyramines. Initially peppery, followed by the most ragingly-tasty-fancy-pants cheese flavor as the 15.2% alcohol accompanies those excellent health side effects like improved endothelial function and vascular preservation. Full bodied…oh drat I need to stop typing and try some this very second…….bye.
Posted by: mandajane | November 24, 2008 at 11:23 AM
In the article it talks about how the THQ formula estimates the potential risks associated with long-term exposure to environmental pollutants. What is considered long-term exposure? A week, a month, years?? What levels are considered dangerous?
Posted by: Eric | November 25, 2008 at 10:47 AM
If these THQ levels were to be so toxic, wouldn’t we have seen dramatic changes in their health? How many different wine batches did they test and from what year(s)? Was there a trend, or were the results sporadic? Before jumping to conclusions, this study needs to be looked into further.
Posted by: lilian | November 25, 2008 at 10:48 AM
This seems like just another study that has limited implications and many flaws designed to scare the public. Making headlines seems more important than actually publishing usable scientific papers with reliable data. People in those countries have been drinking wines for hundreds, if not thousands, of years, and they are still alive. As for heavy metals, the only ones I care about are Zeppelin and Metallica.
Posted by: Skeptical Skip | November 25, 2008 at 01:44 PM
I agree with MH Malley. Why not get a first-hand account of the information instead of looking at data from other journals? This could have a huge impact on the reliability of the data. This study needs to be repeated with data being collected by a team going from country to country testing the wine for heavy metals with standardized equipment and collection techniques.
Posted by: Kate | November 25, 2008 at 01:52 PM
MH MALLEY,
As far as I know, the existing studies that support red wine come from a specific region in France. I did not view the actual study, but is it possible that a specific heavy metal found in the grapes in this region help form the amazing complex? I read that when resveratrol is isolated, it loses all properties supporting healthy endothelial function. I think it is possible, though I agree not likely.
What’s your favorite wine by the way? Your heart might hope it’s red and not so heavy in the metals department:)
Posted by: Steve Q | November 25, 2008 at 02:35 PM
So the question is, where did these metal contaminants come from? The authors suggest the influence of grape variety, soil type, geographical region, insecticides, containment vessels and seasonal variations. Hmmmm...perhaps I will look for some Argentinian and Italian wines. I am not familiar with the Brazilian varietals.
Posted by: linus | November 26, 2008 at 04:19 PM
Please click on the link below to see a rather informative editorial on this very study. Apparently, the U.S. Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) tests wines for heavy metals if a safety hazard is thought to exist. In addition, the TTB uses mass spectrometry to measure metals in wines, which is a better and more direct measure than the THQ estimation formula. Elevated levels are sent to the FDA.
In summary, I wouldn't worry about this study. http://www.winespectator.com/Wine/Features/0,1197,4702,00.html
Posted by: Kathy | November 26, 2008 at 04:35 PM
This is a report on international wines. I wonder if the TTB in the United States will take this serious and conduct more research or investigate these allegations. Even though these heavy metals mentioned are trace metals that are important or needed by the body in nontoxic quantities, it will be great if we can know how much can be in a glass of wine (if present) so we can limit the quantity consumed while maintaining good health.
Posted by: Luce | January 09, 2009 at 01:29 PM
This is the first time I've heard such a thing with wine. I've always heard that you should drink a glass a day for cardiac protection. I need to notify my father of this because instead of a glass a day, which is what his doctor recommended, he drinks a bottle a day. He won't be too happy hearing that it could be harming him.
Posted by: vln | January 09, 2009 at 01:53 PM
I wonder why they are detecting these heavy metals in the wine. Could it be that the soil in those countries have higher metal concentrations and it is passing on to the grapes? Even though the red grapes have different properties from the white, both are being found to have high metal concentrations if they are from a specific area.
Posted by: beth | January 15, 2009 at 11:23 AM
Our bodies require varying amounts of heavy metals. Iron, cobalt, copper, manganese, molybdenum and zinc are required by humans; however, excessive levels can be damaging. Other heavy metals, such as mercury, plutonium and lead, are toxic metals that have no known vital or beneficial effect on organisms, and their accumulation over time in the bodies of animals can cause serious illnesses. Certain elements that are normally toxic are also sometimes beneficial. Examples include vanadium, tungsten and even cadmium. I’m still having a hard time understanding how a level less than one is considered safe but yet some have reported levels as high as 350!! I sure hope the wine industry is going to seriously intervene on this issue to somehow remove these heavy metals before they reach the shelves. Overall, interesting article!
Posted by: Ryan | January 17, 2009 at 07:23 AM
Thank you for sharing!! I drink at least one glass of wine every night, and I often purchase the imported wine. So this information was truly an eye opener for me. I don’t see this being a major issue for those who may only drink a glass every now and then, but I could see this being harmful for me in the long-run. I hope the wine industry will be taking action very soon.
Posted by: Kevin | January 23, 2009 at 12:27 PM
Part of this article actually reports that 250mL of apple juice had a THQ value greater than one. I would definitely wonder when the original data were compiled and how they have changed since then (if at all).
Posted by: Nanette | February 13, 2009 at 01:45 PM
I just read two more studies promoting the beneficial effects of wine. One study was about reducing the risk of prostate cancer, and another said that "one's risk of stomach cancer is reduced by up to 40 percent for each glass of wine consumed per day." It seems that overall, the reports about wine consumption are generally well balanced, if not more toward the positive end.
Posted by: Ethan | February 13, 2009 at 02:18 PM
I have so many questions about this study! I would have preferred to see that actual sampling was done of wines from the different countries instead of reading about the "potential" safety of 15 wines based on published THQ estimates from PAST studies. How old was this previous information? Were there any environmental disasters that occurred in Hungary or Slovakia, for example, around the times that those studies were done, to account for those high 350+ THQ counts? Too many questions, not enough answers.
Posted by: SM | February 23, 2009 at 10:41 PM
This study also claims that Italian, Brazilian and Argentinian wines have the least amount of heavy metals. (Perhaps everyone will switch to Chianti now?) The findings are quite alarming, and I assume much more for people in European countries, where average daily wine consumption is much higher than in the US.
My major question is whether or not the protective health benefits of wine are still present after taking these findings to regard. Has all wine research in the past studied only non-heavy metal wines? I'm assuming not. Given the non-uniformity of these studies, can we still trust what research has said about the health benefits about wine in the past?
Posted by: April | February 27, 2009 at 11:15 AM
Wine is all about the soil, the rain, the sun and the shade. The metal here comes from the soil. I’m guessing that's why the former Soviet Bloc and European countries had the highest suspected levels of metals – they manufactured metal goods for years, probably with little regard for heavy metal disposal.
Posted by: jon pazzioni | April 03, 2009 at 09:30 AM