International reports, most notably in the Washington Post, that Hungarian wines contain unhealthy doses of heavy metals, including vanadium, copper, manganese, nickel, zinc, chromium and lead, have been rubbished by Hungarian winemakers in what seems like a typical knee-jerk reaction to criticism. According to Declan Naughton, a researcher at Kingston University in London, “We used literature reports of concentrations of metals in wines originating from 16 countries to determine the Target Hazard Quotients (THQ) for these wines. Many of the wines gave very high THQ values, which is concerning.” József Sümegi, Hungarian Wine Academy president hit back that the findings were based on major misunderstandings and motivated by an intention to discredit Hungarian wine producers, telling MTI that the findings were “impossible” based both on the grape varietals grown and the country’s soil conditions. Although only three countries scored below THQ levels, wines from Hungary were said to have reached 300 times the target level. One crumb of comfort is that the Brits know even less about wine than the Germans.
Here some pertinent and troubling items left out of this blurb:
THQ values typically ranged from 50 to 200. Red and white wines from Hungary and Slovakia reached THQ levels of 300.
So the authors were against both Hungary & Slovakia! How quaint. So much for Sümegi playing the anti-Hungarian card, as if there was one.
the end of the WaPo article…
Joan R. Davenport, a professor of soil science in the Department of Crop and Soil Sciences at Washington State University:
“Knowing what I know about not only growing wine grapes but the whole process of turning them into wine and looking at some of the countries where these wines came from, it makes me wonder what may happen in the processing,” Davenport said.
A lot of the heavy metals found in the wines in the study, exist in only very small quantities in soil, Davenport said. “The likelihood of that being in the grapes isn’t very likely,” she said. The contamination could be coming from the metal barrels used in processing the wine, she added.
—-
So Sümegi isn’t even addressing the factor that processors could be using barrels that leach heavy metals far more than their peers.
The professor concludes: “I’m not going to drink any less wine,” she said. “Enjoy what you enjoy in moderation. But if you like only Hungarian wine, you might be in more trouble than if you like Argentinean wine.”
—
Anyone up for a beer? An imported one please just to be really safe. While over the beer we might begin to surmise the actions of the wine-drinking portion of the electorate and if there’s any relation.
Hungarian bias? Not sure. Andrea Petroczi, one of the article’s other authors, has a suspiciously Hungarian-sounding name.
Sad to see that Mr Sumeghi just goes into major denial with this article. If the research is good, and reading through the abstract it seems solid, then this is a fairly serious health concern for the Hungarian wine industry. One problem is that the article currently only shows the country producing the wine and if red/white, i.e. no indication of varietal, producer, terroir. Sample could be Gere Kopar or Brand X from the Alfold, who knows?
At least it would be good to see winemakers looking at potential sources for heavy metals in their wine and how these contaminants may have gotten in there.
This is interesting, I read most of the report. I have to say that
in the science community many* of the initial reports/findings
turn out to be inaccurate, or even worse, wrong. Worse than
that, there is the tabloid-effect, that when subsequent findings
come out to prove otherwise, they tend to be ignored. A large-
scale, well-controlled (usually over many years) peer-reviewed,
reliable and repeatable study tends to come up accurately.
“Another basic expectation is to document, archive and share all
data and methodology so they are available for careful scrutiny
by other scientists, thereby allowing other researchers the
opportunity to verify results by attempting to reproduce them.
This practice, called full disclosure, also allows statistical
measures of the reliability of these data to be established.”
(source: wikipedia)
This study does not contain full disclosure, namely the wines
tested. Of course the vintners don’t do themselves any favours
by a knee-jerk reaction, however to counter this study and the
effects thereof, they will probably need to commission a credible
study, which if in accordance with the above, will be quite
expensive. The study also fails by concentrating solely on
Portugese and Czech wines when separating out the reds and
whites: “see p9″. This is hardly a discrediting factor as it only
forms a part of the report, however full disclosure is necessary
to allow a meaningful, scientific debate. Only at this point it will
benefit consumers.
P.9 of the report, for anyone without the PDF in front of them:
“As the pattern of metal ions analysed varied between studies,
the THQ values were
calculated for selected red and white wines as a function of the
contribution of each
metal ion. For this part of the study wines from Portugal and the
Czech Republic were
chosen as the reports from these countries separated values for
levels of metals in red and white wines”
I regard this as insufficient, as given the effect of the results,
convenience should not have been a factor in their research.
Also, given the large variability of THQ values mentioned in the
study, it is of little benefit to break down the results in only two
countries, as they are not representative of the whole, according
to their own results/conclusions.
*many of the initial reports/findings:
* REF:
http://www.theness.com/neurologicablog/?p=424
a topical debate on the subject of studies