The French paradox was the center of a 1991 “60 Minutes” segment where Morley Safer of CBS asked how French people could consume a high quantity of fatty foods such as pâté, butter, and triple crème brie but had lower heart disease rates compared to Americans.

He suggests the answer might be found in red wine. Safer shared with viewers that doctors thought wine could prevent blood cells that form clots from sticking to the walls of arteries, reducing the risk of blockage and heart attack.

Tim Stockwell, an epidemiologist with the Canadian Institute for Substance Use Research, said that at the time, several studies seemed to support this theory. Furthermore, the Mediterranean diet, which often includes one or two glasses of wine with meals, was being discovered as beneficial for heart health.

But it wasn’t until the “60 Minutes” segment that the idea of red wine as a beneficial health drink went “viral,” he stated. Following one year after the show was broadcasted, the sales of red wine in the United States saw an increase by 40%.

It took several decades for the aura of wine’s health benefits to fade away.

The evolution of our understanding of alcohol and health.

The idea that a glass or two of red wine might have benefits on your heart was “a wonderful concept” that researchers “embraced,” Stockwell claimed. It coincided with the broader evidence in the 1990s that tied alcohol consumption to good health.

In a research conducted in 1997 which followed about 490,000 adults in the United States over a period of nine years, findings suggest that those who claimed to take at least one alcoholic drink per day had 30% to 40% lower likelihood of dying from cardiovascular disease compared to non-drinkers. Such individuals also had approximately 20% lower chances of dying from any other cause.

By the year 2000, multiple similar studies have surfaced, as indicated by Stockwell. He believed that such findings are scientifically proven.

Nevertheless, some researchers have been questioning the veracity of these studies since the 1980s, expressing doubt if alcohol was indeed the factor leading to the observed benefits.

The skeptics argument was possibly because moderate drinkers are generally healthier than non-drinkers as they tend to be better educated, wealthier, more active physically, more likely to possess health insurance, as well as consume more vegetables. Another argument put forth by these opposing researchers was due to the fact that many of the so-called “non-drinkers” in these studies were previously moderate to heavy drinkers who decided to quit due to developed health issues.

Kaye Middleton Fillmore, a researcher at the University of California, San Francisco, was among those urging more scrutiny of the research.

"It is incumbent on the scientific community to assess this evidence carefully," she wrote in an editorial published in 2000.

In 2001, Fillmore persuaded Stockwell and other scientists to help her sift through the previous studies and reanalyze them in ways that could account for some of these biases.

"I’ll work with you on this," Stockwell remembered telling Fillmore, who died in 2013. But "I was really skeptical of the whole thing," he said.

As the team uncovered, unexpected results were discovered. The previous benefits associated with moderate drinking disappeared in their most recent analysis. These findings, which were published in 2006, were news-worthy since they contradicted the widely accepted belief. The Los Angeles Times reported, “Study Puts a Cork in Belief That a Little Wine Helps the Heart.”

Stockwell stated, “It upset a lot of people. When this unexpected message started to circulate publicly, the alcohol industry took extensive measures and invested large amounts of capital to counter it.” Just a few months later, a symposium was organized by a group sponsored by the industry to discuss the research, and they invited Fillmore.

In Stockwell’s preserved notes, Fillmore described the debate as intense, to the point where she felt as if she needed to remove her shoe and bang it on the table.

Following the symposium, two of its organizers published a summary establishing as “the conference’s consensus” that moderate alcohol consumption is linked to improved health. Stockwell said Fillmore was “furious” that her perspective hadn’t been included.

Studies have consistently shown that alcohol is not the beneficial health drink once considered, as confirmed by a study Stockwell and his associates published in 2023.

In the preceding year, an alarming revelation was made by researchers: Consumption of alcohol not only lacked cardiovascular benefits, but could also elevate the risk of heart complications, reported Dr. Leslie Cho, a cardiologist affiliated with the Cleveland Clinic.

Current research continually reveals that even daily consumption of a single alcoholic drink can heighten the likelihood of developing high blood pressure and irregular heartbeat, both of which can result in stroke, heart failure or additional health challenges, she added.

Clearly, there is a definitive link between alcohol consumption and cancer, a fact the World Health Organization has been asserting since 1988.

Indeed, the prevailing message has undergone a significant change, a fact that Cho acknowledges. The widespread opinion has now evolved.

According to assessments from the WHO and other health agencies, no quantity of alcohol, be it wine, beer, or spirits, is considered safe.

Does this mean we supercede wine?

Jennifer L. Hay, a behavioural scientific expert and healthcare psychologist at the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center located in New York City, communicates to her cancer patients. She noted that several of them express profound surprise when they discover that alcohol, which includes wine, actually has carcinogenic properties.

In a research conducted in 2023, it was found from a survey of nearly 4,000 American adults that merely 20% knew that wine could potentially lead to cancer. This was in comparison to the 25% who were aware about beer’s link to cancer and 31% about hard liquor.

Patients of cardiology, under the care of Cho, often express their surprise when advised to reduce their alcohol consumption, inclusive of wine.

They question, ‘Really? I was under the impression that it helped in warding off heart diseases,’ they would exclaim.

Yes, it’s true that red wine does have polyphenols, compounds known for their antioxidant and anti-inflammatory characteristics.

Despite numerous studies on polyphenols like resveratrol, there hasn’t been a conclusive association between the quantities found in red wine and beneficial health effects, according to Cho. Furthermore, there is no solid evidence that suggests wine is less damaging than other alcoholic beverages.

Hay recognises that this truth can be tough to swallow.

Whenever Hay mentions her research’s focus on the dangers of alcohol consumption, people’s mood noticeably dampens.

It’s not that Hay and other researchers are advocating for an alcohol ban. Hay’s primary concern is ensuring that people are cognizant of the associated risks.

And for most people, it’s acceptable to savor a glass of wine occasionally, Cho mentioned.

However, it doesn’t benefit your heart, she stated. “It’s simply time to abandon that assumption.”