organic Archives - Wining with Chris

Sulfites in Wine: What's the Deal?

Posted on

Sulfites in wine is the latest buzz in the beverage world. It became entangled with the so-called natural ~~fallacy~~ movement. It carries the dreadful distinction of being a chemical, requiring—GASP!—a warning label on wines.

But is it a problem?

What Are Sulfites?

It’s essential to begin with a discussion about what sulfites are before we launch headfirst into its safety.

I will admit that my research had me scratching my head about whether sulfur dioxide (SO2) and sulfites were one and the same. A couple of sources helped me get my head around the terminology.

Technically, SO2 is a noxious gas. It has a burnt match smell that many people find offensive. Ironically enough, it is naturally occurring and is even produced by the human body.

You’ll find it in a host of other foods and beverages too like dried fruits, pop, and even French fries. So much for it being a horrible chemical.

You’ll see both SO2 and sulfites in the literature. Going technical again. Sulfites are non-organic salts, meaning that they don’t contain any carbon. Other chemicals can produce sulfites. They are sulfiting agents.

That’s where the familiar uses come into play. These compounds have widespread use in food and beverage products as antimicrobial substances like sodium metabisulphite. They kill germs and help keep them from spoiling.

The distinction between SO2 and sulfites is blurred because the use of these agents is quantified as the former. That’s why you’ll see both terms used.

For the sake of clarity, I will refer to them as sulfites.

Why Do Winemakers Use Sulfites in Wine?

Sulfites serve a lot of vital purposes in the winery. They keep bacteria and non-Saccharomyces yeasts in check. Those are the desirable ones that most winemakers use.

They also can halt malolactic fermentation. They can help prevent the formation of Brettanomyces or the barnyard smell characteristic of some wines.

Its use isn’t new either. The Romans figured out its usefulness back in the day. There really aren’t any adequate substitutes for it either. That’s why organic wines unless labeled certified organic contain this chemical.

To be clear, certified organic wines don’t use sulfites during the winemaking process. However, it’s still there, nevertheless. And, yes, made-from-organic wines use pesticides like sulfites.

That’s not a failing of organic wines to say as much. Instead, it’s c’est la vie. Winemakers admit this fact as well. That’s why the current uproar exists in the EU as they consider its use.

What If a Winemaker Doesn’t Use Sulfites?

The problem that winemakers—and organic farming, in general—have is that bacteria and fungi don’t go away just because you’re producing foodstuffs this way. And sometimes that means you need to take action.

Not using sulfites is just as worrisome. It leaves the wines vulnerable to spoilage. That’s what made its initial discovery so crucial to the evolution of winemaking and, thus, the industry. Otherwise, you’re left with vinegar.

The wines produced without added sulfites have a shorter shelf life.

Why Are Sulfites Called-Out on Labels?

Sulfites in wine are not without their issues. Gray areas, after all, are the rule instead of the black-and-white versions to most things.

These chemicals are a concern for individuals with asthma. The effects, after all, are potentially deadly. That’s why the FDA stepped up to the plate in 1986 to require labeling on foods and then, wines.

However, sulfites don’t cause headaches. They won’t give you warts. You can’t get cancer from ingesting them. Scientists aren’t sure of the exact mechanism, but the usual suspects include histamines, tannins, and congeners.

Congeners are by-products of fermentation. You’ll find them in varying degrees in all alcoholic beverages. The more that’s in the drink, the more the unpleasant effects (read: hangover).

The Sulfite Reality

The fact remains that sulfites are a fact of life. They are a by-product of fermentation. There will always be sulfites in wine.

Imagine my surprise when a so-called wine expert claimed that you could remove all sulfites by decanting wine, shaking them back and forth between containers.

Bullshit.

The only ways to get rid of sulfites are to filter them out or add hydrogen peroxide to your glass so that it can precipitate out of the liquid.

Pass.

IMHO, sulfites aren’t going away. Get over it. Vilifying sulfites in wine is a straw man argument at best. There are so many other everyday products that contain the compound without the uproar. Why the hate?

Again, my advice to you is to raise a glass of conventionally grown wine and praise the wine gods that you have the chance to enjoy this marvelous libation.

Photo by Zachariah Hagy on Unsplash

Are So-Called Natural or Organic Wines Better for You?

Posted on

Drinking has always had its positive points and downsides. We’ve seen misguided legislation that only fueled the latter along with the more sobering side of the devastating effects of alcohol.

It hasn’t been an easy road but instead falls into that proverbial gray area. Even Benjamin Franklin addressed this quandary when he said,

Moderation in all things—including moderation.

Changes in technology—for good and bad—have brought us to a new place where we must ask the question again with these factors in mind.

Are natural or organic wines better for you?

Defining Organic

Let’s set aside the official definition for the moment to consider something more fundamental, namely, the proper use of the term. It is a misnomer at best.

The definition of the term means “noting or pertaining to a class of chemical compounds that formerly comprised only those existing in or derived from plants or animals, but that now includes all other compounds of carbon.”

The chemical formula for wine fermentation is:

C6H12O6 + Yeast → 2(C2H5OH) + 2(CO2) + Heat

By that equation, it is evident that all wine is organic. It’s simply a matter of how the USDA and other government agencies regulate it.

Now, let’s think about the other aspects of wine that may affect our determination of health. I’ll consider that point both from a human physiological perspective and environmental impact.

The concerns rest with several key points:

Consumption impacts
Pesticide use
Environmental effects

Drinking Alcohol

Drinking to excess is wrong and unhealthy. That’s a given. Alcoholism is a serious issue with consequences that affect society. But let’s focus on what it does to you.

It rocked the world when news first broke about the possibility of health benefits from drinking wine because of resveratrol. But let’s be realistic.

The initial study involved mice which doesn’t necessarily equate to humans. Even rats have a different genetic makeup than those rodents. Later evidence hasn’t established anything definitive, let alone the amount that may offer something of value.

It doesn’t matter if you buy wine labeled “Organic” or “Made with organic grapes.” The health benefits aren’t enough to justify that you start drinking if you don’t already.

Pesticide Residue

Now we come to that tricky part of the discussion that is sure to rattle a few cages.

Organic farming, in general, doesn’t forbid the use of pesticides. Farmers can and do use pesticides in some operations. The difference is whether they are permitted by federal regulation.

The fact remains that there is an extensive list of things that are allowed in organic farming. It includes things like:

Boric acid
Insecticidal soaps
Rodenticides containing vitamin D3
Copper sulfate

Vineyards are no more immune to the ravages of pests than any other crop. One word: phylloxera. Pest control isn’t a luxury; it’s a necessity. The question is how do you manage it?

To be fair, the use of pesticides and sulfites in organic farming boils down to the fact that they’re aren’t a lot of alternatives. Some wine growers use other elements of integrated pest management such as ground cover to prevent weed infestations.

And after losing an entire patch of tomatoes to blight two years ago, I can tell you that there is a special place in my garden shed for copper sulfate.

But what about residues and potential human harm?

You’ll be pleased to know that the 2017 Pesticide Data Program (PDP) Annual Summary found that nearly 100 percent of tested produce samples contained amounts well below anything that could hurt you, concluding that “The US food supply is among the safest in the world.”.

The caveat that I must add is that data show that both so-called organic and conventional grown crops had approximately equal amounts of residue.

The conclusion we can draw from this information is that there is no health advantage to organic wines. The produce isn’t even superior.

Environmental Impacts

The American scholar and journalist H. L. Mencken once said,

There is always an easy solution to every problem—neat, plausible, and wrong.

He couldn’t have been more right.

It’s not a far stretch to assume that minimizing your use of the land is better for the environment. When the question of using herbicides comes up, it’s a logical leap of faith to assume that using so-called natural products are better.

Unfortunately, it’s not that simple.

Synthetic pesticides have a distinct advantage. Researchers can isolate the chemicals within them to minimize collateral damage to non-targeted pests. When you go to your local Lowe’s store and buy wasp spray, you know you’re getting a product that kills them and not bees.

It goes back to chemistry and genetics.

Organic products often lack this trait and kill honeybees. In fact, some of the most deadly pesticides are ones approved for this use like citronella and neem oil.

Okay, so vines don’t need bees, but the point is well-taken, nevertheless. The other problem exists with effectiveness.

Synthetic products are fine-tuned to do the job with the least amount of pesticide. For the vineyard owner, that means spraying the vineyards every couple of weeks to keep things under control.

Organic ones don’t have that same lasting power. That means spraying again every week or after every rain. Have you spotted the elephant in the room?

The carbon footprint, and thus, greenhouse gas emissions are higher with organic wines than conventional ones.

Rarely is there a simple fix to any problem when dealing with complex organisms. That’s why the arguments fall to the wayside to justify buying organic or biodynamic wines.

There are no superior health benefits. They are just as susceptible to pesticide residue which is negligible at best. And they have more negative environmental impacts.

So, keep enjoying your wine in moderate moderation. And raise a glass to the environment with a conventionally grown libation.

Photo by Samuel Zeller on Unsplash

Biodyamic Wines?!

Posted on

This entry is in the series Alternative Wine

When I first read about biodynamic wines, I thought it was a joke. I even laughed out loud.

“Yarrow blossoms stuffed into urinary bladders from Red Deer?”

“A humus mixture prepared by stuffing cow manure into the horn of a cow and buried into the ground?”

Huh?!!

I thought I entered the Twilight Zone.

What Are Biodynamic Wines?

Apparently, it was the brainchild of an Austrian philosopher named Rudolf Steiner. He believed the vineyard was a life force that the vintner had to manage with potions like the two above, for lack of a better word. And you had to mix them in the correct proportions.

We’re talking about something on the order of one sixteenth of an ounce per ten tons of compost. Skeptics will recognize the homeopathic implications of this preposterous formula.

Oh, and did I mention the moon phases of flower, fruit, leaf, and root that dictate what you can do in the vineyard? You probably figured that was next.

What the Evidence Says

Casting aside the prescience for a moment, the moon has absolutely nothing to do with the growth of vines or any plant for that matter. It’s the sun and the photoperiod that make the difference.

And as for tasting different, let’s just call it a riff on the bandwagon effect. It’s not unlike someone believing the more expensive wine tastes better like I mentioned last time. Sure, it’s not a hard-and-fast rule, but cheaper ones are not necessarily bad. And wines do evolve.

The worst thing about biodynamic wines is that there are people that believe in this nonsense. The astrology angle is one thing, but the homeopathic element shoots it into the stratosphere.

The new requirements by the FTC say it all.

“(1) there is no scientific evidence that
the product works and (2) the product’s claims are based only on theories of homeopathy from
the 1700s that are not accepted by most modern medical experts.”

So, where does that leave us? Unfortunately, it is a splitter faction of the organic-nature-rules-chemicals-are-bad ideology that is fully of hype and shady marketing practices.

My take: It is utter nonsense of the most insidious type. Avoid at all costs.

Photo by Kenrick Mills on Unsplash

Organic Wines?

Posted on

This entry is part 2 of 3 in the series Alternative Wine

Let me start off by saying that I’m approaching this topic from what the scientific literature says about these issues.

Defining Organic

Let’s begin with the definition of a 100-percent organic product. According to the USDA’s National Organic Program, it means that all the ingredients and processing fall under this definition with no GMOs with ones that are approved.

There are varying definitions, not unlike the wine classification system in many countries. They involve different levels of organic ingredients, certification, and use of non-organic ones.

The critical takeaway is that an official framework and regulating body exists unlike natural and biodynamic.

The definitions are nuanced and probably out of the ken of the average person. We’re talking the difference between 100, 95, and 70 percent of the contents. Then, there is that stickler about sulfites.

Sulfites and Wine

Winemakers use them to control downy mildew and other pests that could wipe out a vineyard quicker than you can say phylloxera. As with agriculture, chemicals are necessary as are GMOs to reduce the use of the former.

That’s one reason why EU winemakers are in a panic as the debate continues whether to allow its use which is currently allowed. The problem is that there isn’t an alternative. Without it, they risk devastation of their vineyards.

Sorry to break it to you, folks, but the whole world is composed of chemicals including wine, food, and even you. Suggesting otherwise shows a general ignorance about chemistry and the world around us.
That’s called the appeal to nature fallacy.

Lest we forget, sulfites are a product of fermentation. And those chemicals keep wine from turning into vinegar and preventing you from contracting nasty bacteria. E. coli, anyone?

BTW, the most toxic substance in the world is a natural one, botulism.

The bottom line is that chemicals are not bad.

What About Organic Wine?

The essential thing to understand about this topic is the cache that the term organic has with its followers. The USDA is precise about the distinctions from their regulatory perspective. Marketing is a whole different animal, and that’s where the questionable advertising practices come into play.

Some may claim that the wine tastes better. More likely, it’s another riff on the “marketing placebo effect.” In essence, it’s the phenomenon whereby someone thinks a bottle of wine tastes better just because it costs more. The opposite is possible with organic wines because of the spoilage risk.

Cutting to the Chase

If you’re drinking organic wine because you believe it’s healthier, forgive me if I chuckle. It is alcohol, after all, but I don’t fault you one bit for why you or I drink. It isn’t like drinking a glass of orange juice to ramp up your vitamin C intake even if you take it with a shot of vodka.

There are no superior health benefits, minuscule positive environmental effects, and certainly not a way to avoid the so-called evil chemicals.

Don’t get me wrong. Organic farming has lots of problems and questionable benefits, but it has brought to light better agricultural practices like integrated pest management.

It makes sense on so many levels both environmentally and economically. If we’ve learned anything from the last few years of wildfires, it’s that an income is not a sure thing for winegrowers. The fact remains that conventional agriculture has the least impact on the environment.

My take: It’s marketing hype and greenwashing with no clear consumer advantage.

Photo by Karsten Würth (@inf1783) on Unsplash

Natural Wines?

Posted on

This entry is part 1 of 3 in the series Alternative Wine

The word, natural, is a loaded one. The Dictionary.com definition of “existing in or formed by nature” may seem cut and dried.

So, where does that leave us?

Defining Natural Wines

While there isn’t an official designation or legal status, there are some common denominators like no chemicals, irrigation, mechanical harvesting, and, perhaps most importantly, no manipulation after-the-fact.

Again, I’m speaking as a consumer and wine enthusiast. I am not a vintner. As I see it, there are two ways to view that last point. First, you look at it from the old world perspective.

There’s a saying by Martin Luther that sums it up well.

“Beer is made by men, wine by God.”

Tradition has dictated that Nature rules the vineyard and the harvest. That’s why irrigation and other artificial practices are forbidden in some regions and for some classifications. Some in the industry won’t even call themselves winemakers for just that reason.

Then, there is the new world, specifically, American take on it.

Wine is a commodity like any other good sold on the market. That means making a consistent product that someone will buy consistently and appeal to a large segment of the targeted audience.

It also involves creating a brand. Pick up the average bottle of domestic wine, and you’ll see an eye-catching label with a fun name. It’s all about getting that impulse buy which brings this discussion to the next point.

The Bane of Marketing

Unfortunately, all of these practices equate to another case of a huge lobby misguiding and misinforming their followers. That’s right. It’s organic farming and the natural following.

Pick up any magazine or search for a recipe on the internet. The chances are the ingredients will mention at least one organic product not because it’s better or more nutritious but to sell the message and the gospel.

BTW, under its current wording, hybrids and grafted vines which are the vast majority would qualify as GMOs.

It’s easy to see how it can become a slippery slope quickly. After all, natural doesn’t equal safe. GMOs are not harmful to people or the environment. (I’m putting my money on WHO, AMA, and AAAS instead of the likes of misinformed bloggers who say otherwise.)

Organic farming uses pesticides too, and their products contain residue no matter what you’ve heard to the contrary. That’s marketing in action too. And while it bears the brunt, they are not alone.

The FDA Fail

The problems with the term, natural, regardless of its association with wine are many. The FDA has dragged its collective heels on defining it. Instead, they have vague explanations as they have with the terms, organic and GMOs.

What the FDA hasn’t done are the following:

Implied a health benefit
Considered the processing method(s)
Addresssed the question of pesticides

Natural wines are less insidious but guilty nevertheless. Minimizing any negative environmental effects is worthwhile and should be the aim of anyone in agriculture.

What is wrong is when the industry blurs the lines between cherry-picking and misinformation with a good message. Producers overstep the boundaries where there is no legal definition in place. They’re making it up as they go along. That’s also what makes it filthy.

My take: Buyer, beware! There’s a lot of greenwashing that muddies the waters.

Photo by Jax on Unsplash