- checking login information
Loading...Put Down That Glass! Red Wine Is Not Good For You!
Attention, wine lovers! If you thought drinking all that red wine was good for you, think again.
It turns out that the University of Connecticut researcher who announced that red wine has anti-aging qualities and is good for your heart was lying.
No Proof That Red Wine Improves Heart Health
Dipak K. Das worked as the director at the University’s Cardiovascular Research Center, and until 2008 led research on resveratrol, a substance found in the pulp and skins of grapes, as well as in grape byproducts like red wine. According to Das’s research, resveratrol can slow or even reverse signs of aging and improve heart health.
There was big money behind looking into the benefits of grapes, too; Das worked closely in conjunction with a drug maker that boasted that resveratrol was “the next asprin,” and in 2007 pharmaceutical GlaxoSmithKline bought a company expressly to research a drug that mimicked resveratrol.
145 Instances Of Fabrication And Falsification Of Data
However, in a case reminiscent of the charges brought against Dr. Andrew Wakefield for claims that the MMR vaccine could lead to autism, the 60-page summary of an investigative report into his research reveals that Dr. Das’s published research articles contain 145 instances of fabrication and falsification of data.
As a result, the University has had to return two new grants to Dr. Das, worth a total of $890,000, to the federal government.
That’s a whole lot of telling lies. I wonder what made Dr. Das persist in his fabrications?
From The New York Times:
A charge of widespread scientific fraud, involving 26 articles published in 11 journals, was leveled by the University of Connecticut today against Dipak K. Das, one of its researchers, whose work reported health benefits in red wine.
Many of the articles reported positive effects from resveratrol, an ingredient of red wine thought to promote longevity in laboratory animals.
The charges, if verified, seem unlikely to affect the field of resveratrol research itself, because Dr. Das’s work was peripheral to its central principles, several of which are in contention. “Today I had to look up who he is. His papers are mostly in specialty journals,” said David Sinclair, a leading resveratrol expert at the Harvard Medical School.
The significance of the case seems more to reflect on the general system of apportioning research money. Researchers complain that federal grants are increasingly hard to get, even for high-quality research, yet money seemed to have flowed freely to Dr. Das, who was generating research of low visibility and apparently low quality.
Investigation Begun In January 2009
Apparently the investigation of Dr. Das’s work began in January 2009, two weeks after the university received an anonymous allegation about research irregularities in his laboratory. A special review board headed by Dr. Kent Morest of the University of Connecticut has now produced a 60,000-page report, which has been forwarded to the Office of Research Integrity, a federal agency that investigates fraud by researchers who receive government grants.
So, bad news for all you lovers of red wine; you can no longer pretend that your imbibing is good for your health.
That’s OK, I prefer white wine anyway.
Related Stories
The Real Damage Wrought To Autistic Individuals By Andrew Wakefield
Red Wine Is Exercise In A Bottle
Feel Better About Sustainable Beer And Wine
Photo Credit: Rosemarie Wirz
Read more: Dr dipak das, falsifications, glaxosmithkline, health policy, red wine, resveratrol, university of connecticut
Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may
not reflect those of
Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.
Recent Comments from Causes
Great news, it's time this was a worldwide ban. So many chickens have a miserable short life.
I am afraid I don't pay much attention to where toilet paper comes from.
Soon we have no animal anymore only the ones which we eat and that is wrong.
meet our writers
277 comments
+ add your ownI think wine kind of sucks anyway. Thanks.
OK this researcher apparently did sloppy and/or fraudulent research. That does not prove that red wine and resveratrol have no health benefits. What it means is that from his research, we simply don't know. It means that good research has to be done.
I don't care, I don't drink wine or any type of alcohol anyway.
I agree Carol C kind of like the egg! wish thes people would make up their freaking minds we all no everything is fine as long as its in moderation! I will never ever give up my wine!
Wish they'd make their minds up! One day it IS good for you and next day it isn't!! I don't drink anyway but I have been known to add a glass of Red to my Spaghetti sauce....lol. Gives it a bit of oomph!
I'm allergic to the tannins in wine. I love the flavor, but it doesn't like me. But anyway, a glass of wine isn't hurting anybody. Just quit drinking the whole bottle.
Too much salt, too much fruit, too much potassium, etc. is bad for you too, but some is actually helpful. A little will never hurt.
Plus how many times have we flipped on milk? It's good, it's bad, it's great, it's terrible, it's healthy, it's disgusting... Here we go on the same flip with wine. I think it's time to quit listening to the experts because they don't know what they're talking about, correct?
There's plenty of scientific research supporting the fact that red wine is fine:) It helps aid digestion of fatty foods, and hell yes it keeps you younger--I know when I have a glass, I feel younger and giddy too. That, for me, is anti-aging. Just because some vain baby boomers had a cry that reversatrol(?) doesn't REALLY work on wrinkles and reverses aging, face the truth, we will all get old, our bits will hang, we will be ugly, and one day we will DIE. If it was good enough for Jesus, that's evidence enough for me!
Dr. Das isn't the only person in the world who has said wine is beneficial to health. Healers have been saying this for centuries. Today's wine, however, could be very toxic. Some experts say that the quantity of pesticide residues it contains is 1,000 times greater than that found in water.
scary.
thanks.
login to add your comment
use your care2 login
add your comment
20