Skip to main content

Wine and breast cancer: an update

With October being the annual exercise in breast cancer awareness, our attention turns to the ongoing issue of drinking and breast cancer risk. What we usually hear is the established advice that alcohol consumption in any form contributes to the risk of developing breast cancer, in a direct ratio of about one daily drink to a 10% increase. But if you have been following my posts here, you will know that the question of wine consumption and breast cancer is considerably more nuanced, and it remains entirely possible-even likely, in my analysis-that red wine decreases risk, in the right amounts. A recent study from the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center here in Seattle, in collaboration with major cancer centers around the country, helps to shed some light on the subject.


But first we need to revisit the question of why alcohol could contribute to cancer in the first place. As I point out in my book, a scientifically provable basis for alcohol leading to the cellular changes that progress to cancer remains elusive. The best idea out there is that it somehow interacts with estrogen receptors, which would imply that only certain types of breast cancer (know as estrogen-receptor positive) would correlate with drinking. However, no large studies had previously looked at drinking and breast cancer subtypes before the recent Hutch project. What they found was a relationship of ER positive cancer only in an uncommon variant called lobular carcinoma, but not the much more common ductal type. This particular study did not evaluate subcategories of drinking, however, but it nevertheless raises more questions than it answers. Here’s why:

If alcohol contributes to breast cancer via the only plausible mechanism proposed, by interacting with estrogen receptors, the risk would not correlate only to an uncommon subtype that also happened to be ER positive. So we still lack a plausible cause-effect explanation for the role of alcohol in breast cancer. One reason why these studies give such conflicting results is the reliance on self-reporting, which is wildly unreliable when it comes to the question of drinking habits. Another is that drinking habits tend to be erratic; few have only wine, only a glass or two a day, and always with dinner. Studies from populations that do have more traditional wine drinking patterns show a reduction in breast cancer risk. As these populations become more and more modernized, the opportunity to get meaningful data from population studies diminishes. So pink may be the theme color for breast cancer awareness, but I prefer to call it rosé.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Revisiting resveratrol: new findings rekindle anti-aging debate

Just when we thought the bloom was off the rosé for resveratrol, the anti-oxidant polyphenol from red wine with multiple anti-aging properties, along comes new research giving life to the debate. But first a bit of background: As I detailed in my book Age Gets Better with Wine , it is well-documented that wine drinkers live longer and have lower rates of many diseases of aging. Much or the credit for this has been given to resveratrol, though there isn’t nearly enough of it in wine to explain the effects. Nevertheless, I dubbed it the “miracle molecule” and when it was reported to activate a unique life-extension phenomenon via a genetic trigger called SIRT, an industry was born, led by Sirtris Pharmaceuticals, quickly acquired by pharma giant Glaxo. The hope was that resveratrol science could lead to compounds enabling people to live up to 150 years and with a good quality of life. But alas, researchers from other labs could not duplicate the results, and clinical studies disa

Which came first: Beer or wine? (or something else?)

Actually neither beer nor wine was the first fermented beverage, and wine arguably has a closer connection to health, but recent evidence indicates that humans developed the ability to metabolize alcohol long before we were even human. The uniquely human ability to handle alcohol comes from the digestive enzyme alcohol dehydrogenase, or ADH4. A new science called paleogenetics identifies the emergence of the modern version of the ADH4 gene in our ape ancestors some 10 million years ago. Interestingly, this corresponds to the time when our arboreal forebears transitioned to a nomadic lifestyle on the ground. We went from swinging from tree limbs to walking upright, and the rest is history. Understanding the circumstances that led to perpetuation of the ADH4 mutation may contain clues to what made us human in the first place. How the ability to metabolize alcohol made us human Paleogenetecist Matthew Carrigan has an idea about how this happened . Arboreal species rely on fruit tha