Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Is beer better (or worse) for you than wine?

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 48 posts

Re: Is beer better (or worse) for you than wine?

#31

Post by brianmcc »

gambiting wrote: post #3
miseg wrote: post #2

The article doesn't mention gluten which you'd normally find in beer, and which itself might affect your health.

Is there any proof that it does affect your health in any way? I thought the consensus was that in people who do not suffer from Colic disease, there is absolutely no impact of gluten on anything, none whatsoever. Am I wrong?

I have some sympathy with the disdain shown towards bandwagon-jumpers. However gluten has turned out to be a real problem in my own family. There seems to be a range of problems that gluten sensitivity can be linked with, even while traditional coeliac tests return negative. Our own research suggests this can sometimes mean "not yet bad enough to show positive" and that things need to get really bad for that to finally register.

There seems to be a term NCGS emerging - Non Coeliac Gluten Sensitivity. It's somewhat at the not-yet-proven-to-exist stage. For us though, we're in no doubt: given a regular gluten-containing morsel, my wife's face next day will show swelling and she'll be fatigued for days, plus be hit by abdominal cramps and various other things. Since she cut out gluten this has only ever happened "blind" btw, i.e. waking up with symptoms then figuring "ah that piece of XYZ must have had gluten" after the fact. She never eats gluten intentionally.

It's been interesting - she was all set to go onto thyroid medication for life, and had really quite severe symptoms, sometimes requiring hospitalisation. Cutting out gluten fixed them all within weeks.

We've seen it suggested that gluten proteins resemble thyroid molecules, hence the immune system's attack on gluten leading to those symptoms indicating thyroid dysfunction.

It makes you wonder: how many people with low level health complaints could do better by just trying a gluten free diet for a couple of weeks.

Re: Is beer better (or worse) for you than wine?

#32

Post by bengale »

tragomaskhalos wrote: post #30

A theory I have heard in the UK is that brewers put chemicals in beer specifically to give you a hangover, so you think you must have had a good night. Whilst I think that is, ahem, unlikely, the monopolisation of beer production by a shrinking cabal of vested interests is hammering beer quality here. And the evidence certainly suggests that unwanted chemicals - either in the product itself or introduced through badl…

Could be completely wrong, but I've noticed if I drink several "craft beers" I do wake up without any headache in the morning.

Re: Is beer better (or worse) for you than wine?

#33

Post by dx211 »

smcl wrote: post #17
RankingMember wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All of these are B.S., but for what it's worth, the one I grew up with: Beer before liquor, never been sicker Liquor before beer, you're in the clear

While we're at it, the one I knew growing up was probably the most sensible advice and suggested no mixing: Grape or grain, but never the twain Where grain was probably beer (but could've also been Whisky)

O' the demon of rum is abroad in the land. His victims are falling on every hand, The wise and the sinful, the brave and the fair. No station too high for his vengeance to spare. O woman, the sorrow and pain is with you. And so be the joy and the victory too ; With this for your motto and succor divine : The lips that touch liquor shall never touch mine! The lips that touch liquor shall never touch mine!

Sing it with me!

Re: Is beer better (or worse) for you than wine?

#34

Post by RobertoG »

bengale wrote: post #32
tragomaskhalos wrote: post #30

A theory I have heard in the UK is that brewers put chemicals in beer specifically to give you a hangover, so you think you must have had a good night. Whilst I think that is, ahem, unlikely, the monopolisation of beer production by a shrinking cabal of vested interests is hammering beer quality here. And the evidence certainly suggests that unwanted chemicals - either in the product itself or introduced through badl…

Could be completely wrong, but I've noticed if I drink several "craft beers" I do wake up without any headache in the morning.

In my experience, headaches are mostly due to dehydration.

You can avoid the worst of that if you drink a lot of water at the end of the night.

Re: Is beer better (or worse) for you than wine?

#35

Post by bmelton »

bengale wrote: post #32
tragomaskhalos wrote: post #30

A theory I have heard in the UK is that brewers put chemicals in beer specifically to give you a hangover, so you think you must have had a good night. Whilst I think that is, ahem, unlikely, the monopolisation of beer production by a shrinking cabal of vested interests is hammering beer quality here. And the evidence certainly suggests that unwanted chemicals - either in the product itself or introduced through badl…

Could be completely wrong, but I've noticed if I drink several "craft beers" I do wake up without any headache in the morning.

Should almost certainly depend on the type of beer, the ingredients, and its manufacture.

Some types of beer (specifically some types of bottle fermented) tend to lead towards leaving unfermented sugars in the bottle. Sugar can cause hangovers on its own, so combined with alcohol and fusel oils, could contribute extra towards a hangover beyond just the general dehydration.

I had a friend of mine complaining once that Belgian-style beers tended to cause more powerful hangovers, and halfway through telling him it was all in his head, I was interrupted by a more experienced craft brewer who interjected that it may well not be.

The science of it is pretty interesting. http://www.chemistryviews.org/details/ezine/1080019/Chemistr...

Re: Is beer better (or worse) for you than wine?

#36

Post by pavel_lishin »

kaitai wrote: post #28
JasonCEC wrote: post #24

This was actually the topic of the closing address at the Master Brewers Association of America (basically a modern guild meeting + trade show). The main thrust of the talk was that nutritionally, beer and wine should be about equal, but everyone believes that wine is healthy and beer isn't - which is not scientifically accurate. A more nuanced view: ethanol (alcohol) accounts for nearly all of the cardio-vascular be…

In particular, a pint of beer does have a lot of polyphenols which may be good for, say, sports recovery: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21659904 Some people are trying to make a lower-alcohol, salty beer that would be a real sports-recovery drink. Anyone here have experience with old-country low-alcohol everyday beverages like sima, kotikalja, kvass, etc? Europe used to have a grand tradition of these low-alcoho…

Oh yes, I used to love drinking kvass as a kid in Moscow. (I have no idea what the alcohol percentage was.)

I don't know if it's possible to get an equivalent here in the United States - I've tried bottled and other varieties, and they all tasted like crap-flavored soda. Went back to Moscow last summer, and got the good stuff - just like I remember.

Re: Is beer better (or worse) for you than wine?

#37

Post by macNchz »

kaitai wrote: post #28
JasonCEC wrote: post #24

This was actually the topic of the closing address at the Master Brewers Association of America (basically a modern guild meeting + trade show). The main thrust of the talk was that nutritionally, beer and wine should be about equal, but everyone believes that wine is healthy and beer isn't - which is not scientifically accurate. A more nuanced view: ethanol (alcohol) accounts for nearly all of the cardio-vascular be…

In particular, a pint of beer does have a lot of polyphenols which may be good for, say, sports recovery: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21659904 Some people are trying to make a lower-alcohol, salty beer that would be a real sports-recovery drink. Anyone here have experience with old-country low-alcohol everyday beverages like sima, kotikalja, kvass, etc? Europe used to have a grand tradition of these low-alcoho…

>Anyone here have experience with old-country low-alcohol everyday beverages like sima, kotikalja, kvass, etc? Europe used to have a grand tradition of these low-alcohol "near-beers" or "malt beverages" that people would drink on the farm. They were hydrating and had a lot of the health benefits of above, but since the ethanol was low I'm not sure what effect they had on cardiovascular health.

When I was in high school my dad came back from a trip with a taste for traditional kefir, and brought with him some of the yeast 'grains' that are used to make it. He stuck with it for a few months, enjoying a couple of glasses a day, a jug continuously fermenting in the pantry.

After a while he began to realize that he was more tired than usual in the afternoons and felt like taking a nap almost every day. As it turns out, the fermented kefir contains a small amount of alcohol–seemingly just enough to make him a bit drowsy. Maybe not even enough to be noticeable if you're doing something physical, but only if you're focused and working at a desk.

Re: Is beer better (or worse) for you than wine?

#38

Post by pavel_lishin »

noxToken wrote: post #20
chatwinra wrote: post #11

In case you're thinking of mixing beer and wine, don't forget to use this scientifically proven* formula: "beer before wine, fine wine before beer, queer" *Not scientifically proven

To spin a hypothesis into this as to why this is possibly true, think of beer as a walk, wine as a jog and spirits as a sprint. It will take you longer (generally!) to drink the same alcohol content from a pint of beer than it would from a shot of spirits. It can be inferred that one probably consumes alcohol at a faster rate in shot form than in pint form.

It probably helps that beer tends to have a higher water content than liquor.

Re: Is beer better (or worse) for you than wine?

#39

Post by pavel_lishin »

brianmcc wrote: post #31
gambiting wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there any proof that it does affect your health in any way? I thought the consensus was that in people who do not suffer from Colic disease, there is absolutely no impact of gluten on anything, none whatsoever. Am I wrong?

I have some sympathy with the disdain shown towards bandwagon-jumpers. However gluten has turned out to be a real problem in my own family. There seems to be a range of problems that gluten sensitivity can be linked with, even while traditional coeliac tests return negative. Our own research suggests this can sometimes mean "not yet bad enough to show positive" and that things need to get really bad for that to final…

> Since she cut out gluten this has only ever happened "blind" btw, i.e. waking up with symptoms then figuring "ah that piece of XYZ must have had gluten" after the fact.

Or she's allergic to something else.

Re: Is beer better (or worse) for you than wine?

#40

Post by drpgq »

coldpie wrote: post #22
pivo wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Atkins may have been a fad but at least for me it actually worked (I lost 18 kg/40 lbs). Gluten-free seems to be totally without merit for those without gluten sensitivity.

I do honestly have kind of a hard time making fun of fad diets. I don't want to discourage people who are concerned about their health and are trying to improve it. Gluten-free in particular is difficult because for most Americans, decreasing your carb intake is a really good way to improve your health, and going gluten-free means you'll skip that morning bagel. But at the same time it's frustrating because it's the…

"My cat's food has a gluten-free label, no joke."

Pet homeopathy also makes me laugh.

Post reply on HN