That Lederman's theory is right is just common sense for a majority of
physicians who were of the opinion that  "only those who drink today are at
risk of over-drinking tomorrow ". In terms of public health policy, this
truism-looking thought implied that efforts should be made to reduce all
types of alcohol consumption, irrespective of each and everyone's level .
 
This would certainly be the wisest policy to adopt if alcohol drinking was
the only health-hazardous alternative to water. But this is of course not
the case. Alcohol is not anymore the major health problem it used to be
sixty years ago, when french  teetotalers  thought about promoting grape
juice to fight this social plague. And it is foreseeable that it will
become less so, as the new generations raised on artificially sweetened
sorft drinks will reach adulthood. This perspective has been frightening
wine producers for the last twenty years, ever since soft drinks appeared
on the frenchman's table as a more fashionable  alternative to wine.
Despite relentless efforts to combat this "imported habit", they never
really succeeded in getting the  ear of french authorities, even though
the surge  of childhood obesity (related to soft drink addiction) might
soon be a heavier problem than alcohol-related pathology.
 
Tentatives to boost wine sales in France can only be read on the light of
these long term trends, and the importance of wine in french economy. These
tentatives have not been able to shift the image of wine from the purely
"festive" (ie occasional)  image in which modernity has confined it  in
non-wine producing countries  but also, more  recently,  in France.  The
last scientific theory on the protective value of moderate drinking will
probably do no more than giving one additional "argument" to the
ever-diminishing number of habitual wine drinkers and lovers. Should we
lament it ? I personally don't think so
 
 
Denis Peyrat
French Student in History of Medicine (and ex soft drink sales executive )
.