On January 4, 2023, the World Health Organization announced, “No level of alcohol consumption is safe for our health.” It was published as a statement in The Lancet Public Health: “when it comes to alcohol consumption, there is no safe amount that does not affect health.” Well, I missed that announcement for many, many months. It finally caught up with me, though. That made me begin some research and label it as Neo-prohibitionism.
The Frigate Shtandart is the exact replica of the man-of-war built by Peter the Great in 1703 in order to defend Saint Petersburg. Sunset time in Riga Latvia
And, let me begin by saying, it is NEVER going to go away, given that this is a Yin Yang world. The European exodus to the new world, began with Puritans.
Who’s Behind This Neo-prohibitionism?
Both The World Health Organization And Our Right Wing
When I dug deeper for cause, it seemed to all make sense. And, it initially shocked me. I did some researching, because it just escaped me. Who’s behind the World Health Organization’s (Who) effort and what’s the motive? Obviously, they’re all conservatives, or this wouldn’t be happening. And, they’re most likely dry. I’m betting you’re curious, too, or you wouldn’t be here. Turns out it’s not they, completely.
Wine tasting my way through life. It will take more than the World Health Organization. It won’t stop me.
Does the US advocate for 100 percent abstinence?
As the US Department of Agriculture works towards finalizing the 2025 Dietary Guidelines, some lawmakers are pushing for the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) to review alcohol and health evidence. This is without interference from government agencies. The specific lawmakers involved in this committee may change over time. So, we can all take a deep breath. “In response to a congressional mandate in the 2023 Consolidated Appropriations Act, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering has been tasked with studying the relationship between alcohol consumption and health outcomes.” They are still studying it. Nothing is finalized.
Ragtime, prohibition, time marches on…
I first wrote about Neo-Prohibitionism
Well, when I first wrote “neo-prohibitionism” at the beginning of 2024, I never thought I’d see that coming, again. And, it’s really good to know who’s behind an initiative. The WHO is also biting themselves in the butt. The WHO is based in Geneva Switzerland, surrounded by winemaking companies.
This is interesting to note. The EU produced 63 percent of the world’s wine in 2020. They produced 137 million gallons! That is 63 percent of the world’s wine. Just wait until they go after hard liquor. Then there will be some screaming. Meanwhile big wine houses, phlegmatic that they are, while have to circle back later, and I believe that will have a positive effect on growth of the little guys in the US, if they can survive this ridiculous prohibitionism.
Wine is made in the vineyards, and nothings is going to stop it.
I’m back to my own high season of life
I’m back to High Season, High Style Domaine Carneros, Journey Thru Southeast Asia Bubbles & Bites, with no guilty feelings.I’m not giving up my lifestyle. I’ve lived this long and happy life to not get all giggy with it. So have many people for the last – at least – 6,000 years.
I’m dropping the word “neo-prohibitionism.” It’s just politics as usual. Some people enjoy a bit of enjoyment from wine; others have their own opinions, too. Let’s not stepping on each others’ parades. I now realize no one – nothing – is going to stop the flow from 6,000 years of wine. It’s, thankfully, still a Yin Yang world, after all.
I finally got to the bottom of why none of us should even become upset with neo-prohibitionism, because it will never go away. I won’t be writing about it ever again. That ship has sailed.
You are aware that Prohibition was foisted upon us by the “progressives”?
Great mention, Fred. Others may also not know this about our history, political boundaries have shifted over the years.
This: The politics at that time were the Republicans: The Progressive Movement and U.S. Foreign Policy, 1890-1920s, from the US Department of State. “The Progressive movement was a turn-of-the-century political movement interested in furthering social and political reform, curbing political corruption caused by political machines, and limiting the political influence of large corporations. Although many Progressives saw U.S. power in a foreign arena as an opportunity to enact the Progressive domestic agenda overseas, and to improve foreign societies, others were concerned about the adverse effects of U.S. interventions and colonialism.”
And: The religious establishment continued to be central to the movement, as indicated by the fact that the Anti-Saloon League—which spearheaded the early 20th-century push for Prohibition on the local, state, and federal levels—received much of their support from Protestant evangelical congregations. Britannica source.
The National Institute of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism estimates that misuse of all forms of alcohol costs the US ≈ $250 billion per year. The economic impact includes: health care, lost productivity, criminal justice, DUI, outpatient treatments, divorce, abuse, etc. Excessive alcohol use is also a leading preventable cause of death in the United States, with more than 178,000 deaths each year. Everyone who is exposed to alcohol abuse knows these costs all too well.
There are a variety of studies that have addressed the behavioral differences caused by consumption of wine, beer and spirits. All of these studies confirm that excess consumption of spirits is by far the leading cause of the terrible impact alcoholism has on our society.
I believe the wine industry should be much more focused on differentiating itself from the beer and spirits industries. Unfortunately, most of the large alcohol companies and distributors will never get on board with this strategy because they make too much money from their beer and spirit products. The wine industry will have to push this message by itself.
I hear you, David,
All has to be weighed out. Let’s just say, I’ve never seen a beer belly with someone who simply enjoys wine. And alcohol? The percent of alcohol, as opposed wine or beer, is over the top. As the saying goes, “Liquor is Quicker.” I don’t need a speedway, just a simple mellowing, after a long day of paying strict attention.
I believe with all things considered, if each person only has one glass of wine (or one shot of liquor – and whoever just has one?), wine is the beverage of choice for me. I’m going to leave the defending to those more passionate defending out rights to choose. I never wanted to be a Puritan. They get all uppity in other people’s business.
I got a very interesting email from a Neo-prohibitionist who works for a government agency. I told her, “thanks, but no thanks.” Just bringing it up, like I did, gives the trolls air. I’d rather just suffocate it all, while enjoy my wine, at this point.
I appreciate you tackling this complex issue. While I agree that a full-blown “neo-prohibition” is unlikely (and undesirable), the health concerns around excessive alcohol consumption are real. Maybe the key is promoting moderation and responsible enjoyment, rather than complete abstinence.
You know, Krzzsiek, I’ve thought about this a lot. I also understand that people are going to do what they’re going to do. My WW II Vet father never recovered from the war. He was so addicted to tobacco, because cigarettes were handed out like candy during WW II. Filled with tar an nicotine, at that. THAT was a real addition. I followed him and smoked two packages a day, way back when.
I decided on my own to quit, because I didn’t enjoy the fog I was in. It wasn’t easy, but I stayed true to my belief and just did it.
I really believe we are each on our own path, and no one can convince us to stop anything we want to do. People have to come to terms with their circumstances and their life. I’m not going to be that one person to save someone from his or her fate, or his or her circumstances.
We each get to be an adult, warning labels are all over everything. People are in charge of their own lives. I could be an example of moderation, because that’s how I live, but no one would listen me preaching. When people really want help, they make the decision and follow the path.
I’m following mine by living moderately. You probably are too! Cheers!