I never cease to be astounded by how frequently we manage to get ourselves worked up in this country over nothing. Yes, most winemakers add various schemicals during winemaking - sulfites, acids, tannins, acidified water - even copper (as part of copper sulfate treatments of sulfide problems). But in all those cases there are already FDA rules regulating what are 'acceptable' levels below which no consumer warnings are required. And yep - other stuff falls in to the wine; spiders, webs, bees, dirt, you name it. I doubt it is even possible to identify and list everything that has some presence - especially when those things may be present in quantities measured in parts per trillion. Before we cry that the sky is falling, I'd like to know what the data is on wine additives as a public health risk.
Prev Next Normal view To: snipped-for-privacy@webtv.net
> From: NewsMax Health
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > ----------
> 6. Whats in Wine? (You May Not Want to Know)
>
> You know the old saw about sausage the one that says if you love it,
> you should never watch it being made. Well, it turns out the same
> thing may be true about wine, and the government may end up being as
> heavily in involved in policing the making of wine as it is in the
> grinding of sausage: Federal regulators are contemplating changing
> the rules for wine labels, and after you read a new label or two, you
> maynever drink another drop.
>
> It turns out that labels may have to tell whats really in that fancy
> bottle, and common ingredients in wine are (no joke) fish, milk,
> chicken, and wheat products. Sometimes an agent called Mega Purple is
> thrown in for coloring. (It comes in purple, red, pink, and white.)
> Sometimes oak chips are added, and other additives may include grape
> juice concentrate, tartaric acid, oak gall nuts, citric
> acid,dissolved oxygen, water, copper, and other items too numerous to > mention.
>
> No one doubts that such labeling would tend to take the romance and
> mystery out of buying wine, since current labels focus on things like
> special soils, ideal climate conditions, and the arcane knowledge and
> ancient skills of little old winemakers. Current rules only require
> that labels disclose alcohol content and whether sulfites are
> present, and must warn against drinking when pregnant or while
> driving. And this is the way the Wine Institute, which is the
> industrys primarylobbying arm, says it should be.
>
> The Wine Institute says ingredient labels would bring traditional
> wine- making practices into public controversy for no good reason.
> Clark Smith, chairman of Vinovation, a California firm that uses
> additives to turn not-so-great vats of wine from over 1,000 winery
> clients into salable goods, said, Why freak out the ignorant when we
> are adjustingsomething that is already there in the wine?
>
> On the other hand, industry consultants like Leo McCloskey,
> president of Enologix, a California company that has analyzed over
> 70,000 wines, disagreed and said that the best wines dont rely on
> additives. The wine industry is completely unregulated, he said. It
> would be useful to have labels that detail everything in a wine. It
> would tell theconsumer what they are drinking.
>
> The squabble stems from a 2004 congressional mandate which requires
> labeling to disclose allergens, including specifically labeling for
> alcoholic beverages. Currently, derivatives from milk, chicken,
> wheat, and fish are allowed in wine, and the feds say people need to
> be warned. These derivatives are used as fining agents during the
> wine- making process (e.g., albumen from egg whites may be added to
> remove tannins), and the Wine Institute says there is no way to prove
> theallergens are actually present in wine.
>
> Is there some slight trace of these agents left in the wine? It is
> very difficult to detect, said Gordon Burns, co-founder of ETS
> Laboratories, another California analysis company. How many
> wineriespractice some sort of fining? Burns says almost all of them > to some
> extent.
>
> Before the 2004 mandate, the last attempt at labeling was when Jimmy
> Carter tried to stick his nose in the vintners business. By the time
> his administration got the regulations ready to roll out, however,
> Reagan was in the White House and rescinded them with a stroke of
> theexecutive pen before they could take effect.
>
> Whos pushing for labeling this time around? A coalition of consumer
> groups led by a well-known organization that many regard as suspect
> in its intentions if not downright deceptive: the Center for Science
> in the Public Interest. Proposed rules are expected to be published
> laterthis year by the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau.
>
>
> -----------------------------------
>
> ps;
>
> and ps: campagna floated bad wine as bulk alcohol wihtout licensure
> already and its out there and maybe vinovation perked it and because
> campagna paid $2,000 for bush jr's primary in alexandria va and got
> his phoney blue-blooded virginians to do likewise, he's getting a
> freepas from the ttb? or so it seems.
>
> doesn't swharzenegger know that bad practices can lead to the death
> of an industry? he should ask his bootlegging relatives (the
> kennedy's )about this or is smith a kennedy just following on ihe > family
> tradition?
>
> so much for the california wine industry.
>
>