ReviewNutrients2026
Interpreting the Evidence on Wine Consumption and Health: A Narrative Review of the J-Shaped Association and Contemporary Alcohol Guidelines.
Review in Nutrients, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Moderate wine consumption has historically been associated with a J-shaped relationship between dose and total mortality, driven primarily by cardiovascular protection, enhanced endothelial function, improved glucose metabolism, and anti-inflammatory and antioxidant effects attributable to both ethanol and grape-derived phenolic constituents. Yet in recent years, international alcohol guidelines have shifted markedly towards the assertion that 'no safe level' of alcohol exists. This transition has occurred despite the continued consistency of mechanistic, clinical, and epidemiological evidence demonstrating hormetic (biphasic) responses to wine and its constituents and despite methodological controversies over the mathematical models used in several recent national guideline revisions. This narrative review synthesises mechanistic evidence on hormesis and wine-specific biological effects-including polyphenols, resveratrol, nitric oxide signalling, platelet modulation, and endothelial benefits-with epidemiological data on J-shaped associations with cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and total mortality. It further examines key methodological changes in recent guidelines, particularly the adoption of the 'Sheffield model' and the exclusion of or reduced emphasis on cardioprotective outcomes. The review argues that these methodological decisions, rather than new scientific evidence, largely explain the departure from earlier guideline thresholds that allowed moderate wine consumption. Understanding wine's biological specificity, the differential health implications of drinking patterns and contexts, and the limitations of model-driven policy changes is essential to develop coherent, evidence-informed public health recommendations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.