On Oct 28, 1:08*pm, DaleW > wrote:
> On Oct 27, 3:14*pm, "Borg Master" > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "James Silverton" > wrote in message
>
> ...
>
> > > Anders *wrote *on Tue, 26 Oct 2010 21:55:45 +0200:
>
> > >> "Borg Master" > skrev i melding
> > ...
> > >>> Hungary and Slovakia had maximum potential THQ values over
> > >>> 350. France, Austria, Spain, Germany, and Portugal -- nations
> > >>> that import large quantities of wine to the U.S. >
> > >> You cannot import anything to another country..., you export
> > >> to it...
> > >> :-) Anders
>
> > > Justified grammatical quibbles aside :-), I think I will be staying away
> > > from Old World Wines. You can do very well and save a lot of money by
> > > drinking US, Argentinian, Chilean, New Zealand and Australian wines.
>
> > Heavy metals can become a long term health risk if one drinks wine every
> > day, so it is safer and wise to skip *the worse offenders.
> > B.M.
>
> But how are you determining worst offenders? From this report
> ( published in an "online journal", not sure if peer reviewed) There's
> no clue WHAT wines were studied. Maybe one wine *from Italy is free,
> but another loaded. And since the study totally ignored US, NZ, Au,
> are you making assumption they're somehow free- without any results?
>
> The article I quoted had comments from someone who actually tests wine
> for metals for the LCBO:
>
> "We buy wines from Slovakia, Hungary and the Czech Republic, as well
> as the usual suspects from the Old World—France, Italy, Greece," said
> Soleas, who has degrees in clinical biochemistry and enology. "We buy
> from 68 countries, and rarely find dangerously high levels of metals.
> Maybe if we find arsenic with lead, then it's due to the use of the
> two in combination in the 1980s and '90s when it was an approved
> fungicide. You still get remnants of it, but it hasn't been used for
> 10 to 15 years. It's rare and we reject it."
>
> Soleas said he found the study results to be "wishy-washy" based on
> his experience testing wines for heavy metals and expressed
> disappointment in both the way the results were published and the
> extended coverage in the press. The levels of heavy metals the
> scientists found, he added, are actually lower than what is allowable
> in tested water reservoirs across the western world.
>
> "Drinking water is sometimes higher in metals than these wines,"
> Soleas said. "I'm not trying to minimize the fact that contaminants
> get into wine, but they are targeting the wrong contaminants. Most
> people will drink two glass of wine a night, but eight glasses of
> water per day, and if they take a multivitamin tablet they get two
> milligrams of manganese on top of that, so how is the metal obtained
> from wine going to kill anyone?"- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

This is why I still love reading AFW. So many folks with a real
passion for and the skills set to debunk myths and innuendo.