Arsenic & Cheap Wine (Part 1) Comments

Order Xanax, Oxycodone, Tramadol, Adderall, Vicodin, Klonopin, percocet, phentermine, Psychedelics and More here, All pains, anxiety, depression, adhd, ptsd relief, weight lose, all steriods & pyschedelics. Wickr/Kik: peterking2014, text/call/whatsApp: +1(775)-773-5306, peterkings2014@gmail.com (Med 16)

So much for the veracity "health articles" from Wellness:
http://www.naturalnews.com/049095_California_wine_arsenic_science_hoax.html

As if I need a reason to cut back on my alcohol consumption (which is low considering my three-times weekly glass of Malbec - Trapiche being one of them. YIKES)! Fortunately, only two of these (both the Malbecs) are the only ones I drink or have drank in the past. And for those pointing out the natural occurrence of arsenic in everything, thank you. It only further inspires me to not add more than what I already have floating about my bloodstream.

Back to spa water and Xanax, I guess. (Beer makes you fat and I'm too shallow to rock a beer gut).

Seriously, thanks for the information, Rob and for posting the link to the entire list.

All wines have arsenic in it. Hell, juice and water has arsenic. Are you to say we're not to drink any liquids at all? It's an organic trace material present, and I guarantee that before you get an arsenic OD you'll die of alcohol poisoning first. And building up to toxic levels of arsenic over time? Well, we're talking about one person drinking at least one bottle of wine every day for a week straight without drinking anything else. Or drinking a 12 pack of beer a day for a week straight. Then your arsenic levels might... Just might... be high. But we're getting into the territory of alcoholism and alcohol poisoning. Rob, stop trying to scare everyone with unfound rumors. Use real data and real world numbers. Of course, our toenails have a surprisingly high amount of arsenic in them. Just so the nail biters can be scared from eating their own toenails. Face it, arsenic is in everything, it's just a factor to consider. I actually did a study on this during my final year at the University of Florida, and arsenic in water scares me less than when I pricked my finger and though I had cancer from a test. Everyone experiences that in human anatomy and physiology. Anyways, here's another site that did a study of arsenic in beer and wine from two years ago. These studies are nothing new, mine's a decade old. http://www.livescience.com/41504-wine-and-beer-arsenic.html

The complaint says in one place that the concentration of arsenic is up to 500% of what is allowed (in ppb, but is there a standard for wine, or is the standard for drinking water being used as a proxy, and how much drinking water does one really consume (via cooking, etc.) compared to wine (where we aim for 100% of the 'serving')), then talks about daily consumption levels of arsenic. These are not the same thing. The first thing we should look for as a quick check on the validity of the complaint is: what is the rate of arsenic poisoning across the nation (since that is where the products go), is there a change over time that might coincide with when production started, and what are the statistical rates of arsenic poisoning among wine drinkers?

If there is no supporting data that suggests that there is arsenic poisoning in the wine drinking population, we can stop panicking and start looking at detailed analysis of the products, the toxicity levels of arsenic, how much is actually being ingested, etc. This would allow us to see if we are dealing with a big problem (widespread poisoning) or a small problem (questionable levels of arsenic).

I am not aware of an outbreak of arsenic poisoning, either acute or chronic, in the US, either recently or over a long period of time. That there is arsenic in groundwater is a fact of life, and 38% of wells in California were out of compliance with the 10 ppb. requirement (Alison Bohlen (2002) States move forward to meet new arsenic standard, Southwest Hydrology, May/June 2002, p.18-19.).

The current issue may well be one where arsenic is considered a carcinogen, or has other nasty affects on people. Again, it will have to be shown that this is a problem with the wine. Similarly, there are organic arsenate compounds, but these have a much lower acute toxicity than inorganic arsenites, which are more common in groundwater. But it is possible for the organic compounds to be converted to the inorganic forms in the body.

It is unlikely that the growers used arsenical pesticides, as these are not commonly used in the US. The most likely source of arsenic would be in the groundwater used for irrigating the vines. In this case, as the southwestern US has high levels of arsenic in the soil and so groundwater, it's something that is hard to avoid, but it's also something that most of the southwest has been living with for many years. And we aren't seeing people dropping like flies with arsenic poisoning in those areas.

To add to the panic, another study noted that rice grown in the US has an average arsenic content of 260 ppb., but US arsenic intake remains far below WHO recommended limits (WHO also recommend 10 ppb. for drinking water). (See: http://www.speciation.net/News/Surprisingly-high-concentrations-of-toxic-arsenic-species-found-in-US-rice-;~/2005/08/03/1561.html)

The FDA allows arsenic levels in fruit juice up to 50 ppb., because people drink far less juice than water. Time to panic about fruit juice!

As the study that suggested that the wine had high levels of arsenic was released only in 2015, it probably caught the wineries off-guard as well. It also appears to be from a private testing company, BeverageGrades, and was not 'scientific' in the sense of being peer-reviewed. "CBS This Morning" apparently tested some of the same wines and found much lower levels of arsenic than BeverageGrades did. A representative of the wine vendors pointed out that wine exported to Europe had to meet EU standards for things like arsenic, which are quite stringent, and there seems to be no problems.

It also seems that BeverageGrades sent a press release to some of the wine vendors named in the lawsuit to offer their services to provide a "screening and certification model that allows them to assure their customers of the purity of all the alcoholic beverages they sell."

There are several conclusions one can draw. One is how much people panic when there is plenty of data that suggests the opposite of what they are being told, i.e., a notable lack of people with arsenic poisoning, even among alcoholics. Another is re-inforcement of the all-too-obvious observation that fear is the emotion that drives much of what happens in the US, and people like BeverageGrades knows how the population will react to something like this (and the reaction doesn't include skepticism and fact-checking). One possible inference from all this hoo-haa might be linking the works "BeverageGrades" and "blackmail," and that the panic and publicity merely increases the changes that BeverageGrades will get bought off by the targeted wineries.

Nice to think that you may well be helping blackmailers succeed, Rob. I hope your mother approves.

P.S. Note the absence of profanity. Excuse the rather disjoint argument presented here, as I don't have time to spend making it pretty, when I suspect it will be ignored. Panic sells, skepticism doesn't.

None of the wines I enjoy are on this list. These seem to be the larger vineyards and certainly not organic! I wonder if these vineyards with high arsenic concentrations use herbicides or GM grapes...it could explain the high levels of arsenic! Thanks for your article which caught my attention.

Rob, Really enjoyed reading your article! You entertained me right into convincing me to explore the serious arsenic issue on my own. We do enjoy wine at dinner so I found your article very timely and applicable to our lifestyle choices. Good read. Thank you!

Thanks for info, Rob! I am happy to say that none of the wines on the list are wines that I enjoy, and believe me, I enjoy a variety of different wines!!!!

I drink wine...should I be worried or should I start drinking scotch?

First, the suit says the wine exceeded 10 parts per billion (ppb), with some wines exceeding that by 500% (which would be 50ppb). The EPA lowered the acceptable level for drinking water from 50ppb to 10ppb and required water systems to comply by 2006, but even the highest contamination is still acceptable under the old standard for drinking water, let alone something occassionally ingested.

Second, one of the plaintiffs, Jason Peltier, has had a career in water management as is currently Chief Deputy General Manager of the Westlands Water District in California. According to his bio, he "has spent the majority of his career as manager of California’s Central Valley Project Water Association, an organization representing the interests of the 80 water districts serving 3 million acres of irrigated farm land and 4 million households."

I would bet money that all the wineries in the suit have vineyards in the District, but pump their own groundwater, and he really just wants them to buy water from the District instead. What's the real backstory?

Sources:
https://irp-cdn.multiscreensite.com/f0533877/files/uploaded/Summons_Complaint.pdf
http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/rulesregs/sdwa/arsenic/regulations_factsheet.cfm
http://www.westlandswater.org/wwd/orgchart.asp?title=Organization/Staff&cwide=1280