(ID 39850200 © Superanry | Dreamstime.com)
BARCELONA — Is red wine good for your heart? It’s a question that has sparked fierce debate in the medical community for decades. While the famous “French Paradox” – the observation that French people have relatively low rates of heart disease despite a diet rich in saturated fats – helped popularize the idea that red wine might be protective, proving this scientifically has been remarkably challenging. Now, a sophisticated new study has taken an innovative approach to finally help answer this contentious question, using our own biology as a measuring stick.
The study, published in the European Heart Journal, followed over 1,200 participants in Spain and used a compound called tartaric acid – found almost exclusively in grapes and wine – to measure wine consumption through urine samples. This innovative approach helped overcome a common problem in alcohol research: people’s tendency to misremember or misreport their drinking habits.
For years, scientists have debated the so-called “French Paradox” regarding the potential benefits of red wine. While previous studies have hinted at the potential benefits of moderate wine consumption, many relied on participants accurately reporting their drinking habits, which can be as reliable as asking someone to recall what they had for lunch three weeks ago.
Moreover, a prominent study that focused on the benefits from the red wine compound resveratrol mistakenly led many to believe that having a glass will help you. However, in light of that study, the researchers very bluntly stated that an individual couldn’t drink enough red wine in their lifetime to enjoy those benefits.
Previous studies have relied on self-reported red wine consumption, but scientists used urine samples in this latest study to prove their theory. (Photo by Atsushi Hirao on Shutterstock)
And of course, many studies shows how drinking any amount of alcohol can raise the risk for countless conditions from cancer to high blood pressure to heart failure.
“Part of this debate is due to conflicting results of studies that have pointed to a protective effect of wine, while others have found no such effect,” says study co-author Ramon Estruch, a professor from the University of Barcelona’s Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, in a statement.
The research team, led by investigators from various Spanish institutions including the University of Barcelona and the University of Navarra, analyzed data from the PREDIMED trial, which originally studied the effects of the Mediterranean diet on cardiovascular health. They focused on 1,232 participants with an average age of 68, including 685 people who had experienced cardiovascular events and a random subset of 625 participants for comparison.
Instead of just asking people how much wine they drank, researchers measured tartaric acid levels in participants’ urine. Think of tartaric acid as wine’s fingerprint – it’s a compound that’s rarely found in other foods and shows up in urine after wine consumption. This innovative approach provided a more objective measure of wine intake than traditional self-reporting methods.
The results were intriguing. Analysis showed that light wine consumption (between one glass per week and less than half a glass per day) reduces the risk of having a cardiovascular complication by 38%, but this reduction reaches 50% when consumption is moderate (between half a glass and one glass per day). Study authors also warn that “when we talk about moderate wine consumption, it is always with meals, never between meals.“
Importantly, the benefits weren’t linear – more wasn’t better. People with very high tartaric acid levels, suggesting heavier wine consumption, didn’t show the same cardiovascular benefits. This finding supports the old adage that moderation is key.
Having a glass of red wine with a healthy dinner may offer some benefits, researchers suggest, but their (Credit: Andrea Piacquadio from Pexels)
The study found particularly strong associations between moderate wine consumption and reduced risk of heart attacks. This relationship was especially noticeable in men and participants with diabetes, though the researchers noted that women showed similar trends, albeit with less statistical significance.
What makes this study particularly compelling is its methodology. Traditional studies often rely on food frequency questionnaires, where participants try to remember their consumption patterns. Anyone who’s ever tried to accurately recall what they ate last week knows how challenging this can be. By using tartaric acid as a biomarker, researchers could more accurately assess actual wine consumption patterns.
So where does this leave us in the great wine and heart health debate? While this study provides compelling evidence that moderate wine consumption may have cardiovascular benefits, it doesn’t end the controversy. The researchers are careful to note that their findings don’t suggest non-drinkers should start drinking wine for health benefits. Rather, the results indicate that for those who already enjoy wine in moderation – particularly as part of a Mediterranean diet – there may be some protective effects for heart health thanks to various compounds in wine, particularly polyphenols, which have anti-inflammatory properties.
“[T]here is no doubt that excessive alcohol consumption has serious health consequences. However, the effects of moderate and responsible wine consumption are still the subject of debate in the scientific community,” the authors write. “The results of this study and others should help to place moderate wine consumption in its rightful place as an element of the Mediterranean diet, considered to be the healthiest in the world.”
As with many aspects of nutrition science, the answer isn’t black and white, but rather a complex shade of burgundy. What this study does offer is a more reliable way to study these effects, helping to move the debate from speculation to science, one molecular marker at a time.
Paper Summary
Methodology
The researchers used a case-cohort design within the PREDIMED trial, collecting urine samples at baseline and after one year. They measured tartaric acid using liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry, a highly accurate laboratory technique. Participants were divided into five categories based on their tartaric acid levels, ranging from less than 1 μg/mL to more than 35 μg/mL. The study tracked cardiovascular events including heart failure, heart attacks, strokes, and cardiovascular deaths over a median follow-up period of 9 years.
Results
The study found a J-shaped relationship between wine consumption and cardiovascular risk. Moderate consumers (3-35 glasses monthly) showed significantly lower cardiovascular risk compared to both minimal consumers and heavy drinkers. The strongest protection was observed in the 12-35 glasses per month range, with a 50% lower risk of cardiovascular events. The relationship was particularly strong for heart attack prevention.
Limitations
The study population consisted of older Mediterranean adults at high cardiovascular risk, potentially limiting generalizability to other populations. While tartaric acid is a reliable biomarker for wine consumption, it doesn’t capture intake of other alcoholic beverages. The observational design, despite its sophisticated methodology, cannot prove causation.
Discussion and Takeaways
The study suggests that light-to-moderate wine consumption, particularly within a Mediterranean dietary pattern, may offer cardiovascular benefits. The use of an objective biomarker strengthens these findings compared to previous studies relying on self-reporting. The results support the notion that moderate wine consumption might contribute to cardiovascular health, possibly due to its polyphenol content rather than just alcohol.
Funding and Disclosures
The study was primarily funded by Spanish government research grants and received support from wine industry organizations. Several authors disclosed receiving speaking fees or grants from wine-related organizations, though these organizations had no role in the study design or analysis. This transparency allows readers to consider potential conflicts of interest while evaluating the findings.