Industry Group Disputes Health Commentary The National Association of Wine Retailers has issued a formal response to a Los Angeles Times opinion piece by Dr. Emma Fenske titled "Alcohol Should Be Stigmatized Like Smoking," published July 2, arguing the comparison oversimplifies public health science and conflates hazard with risk. Executive Director Tom Wark stated: "When major newspapers publish pieces that aggressively compare a complex dietary and cultural object like alcohol to tobacco, they prioritize sensationalism over truth. This trend can inadvertently damage public trust. When the public is told that a daily glass of wine is as dangerous as smoking or asbestos exposure—a claim that defies both lived experience and absolute risk statistics—the general public begins to tune out vital, evidence-based public health warnings regarding problems like binge drinking and dependency."
Biological Differences at Core NAWR's statement emphasizes fundamental physiological distinctions between the substances.
The human body contains enzymes—alcohol dehydrogenase (ADH) and aldehyde dehydrogenase (ALDH)—that metabolize ethanol in the liver and stomach, breaking it into acetate and water. Ethanol occurs naturally in trace amounts through fruit fermentation and in the human gut microbiome. Tobacco presents a different scenario. Burning tobacco introduces more than 7,000 chemical compounds into the lungs and bloodstream, roughly 70 of which are definitively linked to cancer. The respiratory system has no mechanism to safely metabolize tar or carbon monoxide from smoking. "Science has shown that there is no safe level of tobacco smoke inhalation," NAWR argued.
Classification vs. Risk Assessment The statement addresses Fenske's citation of the World Health Organization's Group 1 carcinogen classification, which places alcohol alongside tobacco and asbestos. NAWR clarified that the International Agency for Research on Cancer evaluates hazard, not risk—the potential for harm versus the likelihood of harm at typical exposure levels. "A Group 1 classification simply means there is sufficient scientific evidence that a substance can cause cancer in humans under certain circumstances or at certain doses," the statement read. The Group 1 list also includes processed meats, wood dust, and solar radiation. "A person smoking a pack of cigarettes daily faces an exponentially higher absolute risk of developing lung cancer than a person consuming one alcoholic beverage daily faces of developing breast or liver cancer."
Health Data Cited NAWR cited recent research acknowledging trade-offs in moderate consumption.
The National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine reported that moderate drinkers showed lower all-cause mortality than abstainers. The American Heart Association confirmed reduced heart disease risk among moderate drinkers compared to non-drinkers. The National Institute of Health meta-studies showed associations between moderate alcohol consumption and reduced rates of stroke, diabetes, Alzheimer's disease, dementia, and kidney disease. The group acknowledged that newer studies have challenged the long-held "J-shaped curve" suggesting cardiovascular benefits from moderate drinking, noting the "sick quitter" effect may have skewed earlier data.
Secondary Smoke Distinction NAWR emphasized a critical difference in stigmatization mechanics: tobacco was successfully stigmatized largely due to secondhand smoke harm to bystanders, violating others' bodily autonomy. "There is no such thing as second-hand moderate alcohol consumption. A person enjoying a glass of wine with dinner does not passively impair the liver function of the person sitting at the adjacent table." The group acknowledged that severe alcohol abuse—drunk driving, domestic violence, and public intoxication—causes measurable harm and is already heavily stigmatized and criminalized.
Why It Matters
For beverage retailers and hospitality operators, the statement underscores a broader debate over public health messaging and regulatory pressure. As health authorities reassess alcohol's health profile, the industry faces potential policy shifts based on how risk data is framed and communicated. Accurate risk assessment—distinguishing absolute from relative risk—will shape future regulatory approaches to labeling, taxation, and market access.
For more insights and trends in the food and beverage sector, check out more articles in The Food & Beverage Magazine family of publications.
Written by FBM Publications Editors
