Brookston Beer Bulletin

Jay R. Brooks on Beer

Socialize

Moderate Drinking Prevents Bone Loss In Women

By

bone
The ABMRF is reporting the results of a new study conducted at Oregon State University published in Menopause, the Journal of the North American Menopause Society. The study, Moderate alcohol intake lowers biochemical markers of bone turnover in postmenopausal women, appears to conclude that “Drinking alcohol in moderation with a healthy lifestyle may benefit women’s bone health, lowering their risk of developing osteoporosis.”

From the abstract:

Objective: Epidemiological studies indicate that higher bone mass is associated with moderate alcohol consumption in postmenopausal women. However, the underlying cellular mechanisms responsible for the putative beneficial effects of alcohol on bone are unknown. Excessive bone turnover, combined with an imbalance whereby bone resorption exceeds bone formation, is the principal cause of postmenopausal bone loss. This study investigated the hypothesis that moderate alcohol intake attenuates bone turnover after menopause.

Methods: Bone mineral density was determined by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry in 40 healthy postmenopausal women (mean +/- SE age, 56.3 +/- 0.5 y) who consumed alcohol at 19 +/- 1 g/day. Serum levels of the bone formation marker osteocalcin and the resorption marker C-terminal telopeptide (CTx) were measured by immunoassay at baseline (day 0) and after alcohol withdrawal for 14 days. Participants then consumed alcohol and were assayed on the following morning.

Results: Bone mineral density at the trochanter and total hip were positively correlated to the level of alcohol consumption. Serum osteocalcin and CTx increased after abstinence (4.1 +/- 1.6%, P = 0.01 and 5.8 +/- 2.6%, P = 0.02 compared with baseline, respectively). Osteocalcin and CTx decreased after alcohol readministration, compared with the previous day (-3.4 +/- 1.4%, P = 0.01 and -3.5 +/- 2.1%, P = 0.05, respectively), to values that did not differ from baseline (P > 0.05).

Conclusions: Abstinence from alcohol results in increased markers of bone turnover, whereas resumption of alcohol reduces bone turnover markers. These results suggest a cellular mechanism for the increased bone density observed in postmenopausal moderate alcohol consumers. Specifically, the inhibitory effect of alcohol on bone turnover attenuates the detrimental skeletal consequences of excessive bone turnover associated with menopause.

The ABMRF report on the study:

Bones are in a constant state of remodeling with old bone being removed and replaced. In people with osteoporosis, more bone is lost than reformed resulting in porous, weak bones. About 80% of all people with osteoporosis are women, and postmenopausal women face an even greater risk because estrogen, a hormone that helps keep bone remodeling in balance, decreases after menopause.

A study by Oregon State University researchers assessed the effects of alcohol withdrawal on bone turnover in postmenopausal women who drank one or two drinks per day several times a week. A significant increase in blood markers of bone turnover was measured in women after they stopped drinking for just two weeks. Alcohol appears to behave similarly to estrogen in that it reduces bone turnover, the researchers said.

Investigators studied 40 early postmenopausal women who regularly had one or two drinks a day, were not on any hormone replacement therapies, and had no history of osteoporosis-related fractures.

Results suggest evidence for increased bone turnover, a risk factor for osteoporotic fractures, during the two week period when the participants stopped drinking. Less than a day after the women resumed their normal drinking, their bone turnover rates returned to previous levels.

“Drinking moderately as part of a healthy lifestyle that includes a good diet and exercise may be beneficial for bone health, especially in postmenopausal women,” said researchers. “After less than 24 hours to see such a measurable effect was really unexpected.”

Beer Fights Obesity

By

health
Here’s an interesting one, if I’m reading it correctly. A new study published in the journal Cell Metabolism with the inscrutable title The NAD+ Precursor Nicotinamide Riboside Enhances Oxidative Metabolism and Protects against High-Fat Diet-Induced Obesity appears to suggest that beer (and milk) contain a molecule that helps fight against weight-gain, especially in high-fat diets. The wonder molecule is known as nicotinamide riboside, or NR. Here’s the abstract. See if you can get through it without your head spinning:

As NAD+ is a rate-limiting cosubstrate for the sirtuin enzymes, its modulation is emerging as a valuable tool to regulate sirtuin function and, consequently, oxidative metabolism. In line with this premise, decreased activity of PARP-1 or CD38—both NAD+ consumers—increases NAD+ bioavailability, resulting in SIRT1 activation and protection against metabolic disease. Here we evaluated whether similar effects could be achieved by increasing the supply of nicotinamide riboside (NR), a recently described natural NAD+ precursor with the ability to increase NAD+ levels, Sir2-dependent gene silencing, and replicative life span in yeast. We show that NR supplementation in mammalian cells and mouse tissues increases NAD+ levels and activates SIRT1 and SIRT3, culminating in enhanced oxidative metabolism and protection against high-fat diet-induced metabolic abnormalities. Consequently, our results indicate that the natural vitamin NR could be used as a nutritional supplement to ameliorate metabolic and age-related disorders characterized by defective mitochondrial function.

A mouthful, to be sure, but Jenny Hope, at the UK’s Daily Mail, who presumably had access to the full text, valiantly makes more sense of it in The miracle molecule: Hidden vitamin found in BEER and MILK can make you stronger, slimmer and healthier, and the story starts out very promisingly:

If you were planning on having a quick pint tonight, then this will be welcome news.

Beer may contain a vitamin which can fight obesity and improve muscle strength, scientists claim.

The ‘miracle molecule’, which has been found in milk and may also be present in beer and some foods, has no side effects and could even lengthen lifespan, they say.

The bad news — why does there always have to be bad news? — is that NR is found in vanishingly small quantities, so infinitesimal that you couldn’t really drink enough beer (or milk) to take advantage of NR’s positive effects. Oh, you could try, but such immoderate drinking would no doubt land you on MADD’s most wanted and possibly lead you to an early grave, as well, thus defeating the purpose.

Nonetheless, the results were impressive. In addition to fighting weight gain and improving muscle strength, NR also helped combat diabetes and improved endurance. And did I mention no side effects were found, not even in high doses? Apparently, NR “works by becoming trapped in cells where it boosts the metabolism, much like resveratrol, which is found in wine.”

In a statement, one of the study’s authors, Carles Canto said. “It really appears that cells use what they need when they need it, and the rest is set aside without being transformed into any kind of deleterious form.”

The next steps, besides human testing, will be figuring out how to better detect it and, more importantly, discovering if it can be synthesized economically so that sufficiently large quantities can be taken. I sure like the idea of Vitamin Beer. Flintstones chewable beer vitamins, anyone?

Moderate Elderly Beer Drinkers Less Prone To Dementia

By

health
The Foundation for Alcohol Research (ABMRF) recently highlighted a study that appears to show that elderly persons who drink moderately are at a lower or reduced risk of “cognitive decline or dementia and provide cardiovascular benefits.” The study, Alcohol and Cognition in the Elderly: A Review, was published in Psychiatry Investigation. Here’s ABMRF’s report of the study:

Alzheimer’s disease and other types of dementia are most common in the very elderly, and are associated with huge health costs. With a rapidly aging global population, factors influencing the risk of cognitive decline and dementia are important.

A review of the association between alcohol consumption and cognition in the elderly suggests alcohol may have both a neurotoxic and neuroprotective effect, depending on the dose and drinking pattern. Longitudinal and brain imaging studies in the elderly show that excessive alcohol consumption may increase the risk of cognitive dysfunction and dementia, but regular low to moderate alcohol intake may protect against cognitive decline and dementia and provide cardiovascular benefits.

Investigators reviewed studies published from 1971 to 2011 related to alcohol and cognition in the elderly. At present, there are no proven agents to prevent cognitive decline or dementia, although a number of prospective epidemiological studies have shown a lower risk of such conditions among light to moderate drinkers in comparison with non-drinkers.

Other studies suggest that beneficial effects are seen only among certain sub-groups of subjects. A recent meta-analysis by Peters et al of subjects over the age of 65 in longitudinal studies concluded that light-to-moderate alcohol consumption, in comparison with abstinence, was associated with approximately 35-45% lower risk of cognitive decline or dementia.

They also found that heavy drinking has the opposite effect, so that too much alcohol may increase such risks, so it appears that moderation is the key.

And here’s the abstract from the published paper:

Consumption of large amounts of alcohol is known to have negative effects, but consumption in smaller amounts may be protective. The effect of alcohol may be greater in the elderly than in younger adults, particularly with regard to cognition. However, the drinking pattern that will provide optimal protection against dementia and cognitive decline in the elderly has not been systematically investigated. The present paper is a critical review of research on the effect of alcohol on cognitive function and dementia in the elderly. Studies published from 1971 to 2011 related to alcohol and cognition in the elderly were reviewed using a PubMed search. Alcohol may have both a neurotoxic and neuroprotective effect. Longitudinal and brain imaging studies in the elderly show that excessive alcohol consumption may increase the risk of cognitive dysfunction and dementia, but low to moderate alcohol intake may protect against cognitive decline and dementia and provide cardiovascular benefits. Evidence suggesting that low to moderate alcohol consumption in the elderly protects against cognitive decline and dementia exists; however, because of varying methodology and a lack of standardized definitions, these findings should be interpreted with caution. It is important to conduct more, well-designed studies to identify the alcohol drinking pattern that will optimally protect the elderly against cognitive decline and dementia.

And here’s their conclusion, from the full text of the article:

Evidence suggesting that LMD in the elderly protects against cognitive decline and dementia exists. The present review of evidence-based research may help determine the optimal alcohol drinking pattern to prevent cognitive decline and dementia in the elderly and provide an alternative to existing therapeutic interventions, which have limited effectiveness. However, the varying results of several evidence-based studies of the benefits and risks of alcohol on cognition should be interpreted with caution. Furthermore, the cognitive benefit of LMD may vary from person to person; thus, it is difficult to make a clinical recommendation for abstainers to drink alcohol. Nevertheless, it is important to conduct well-designed studies to determine the optimal alcohol drinking pattern for the elderly as the alternative against cognitive decline and dementia.

It sounds like the key is finding the right dosage for each person, the alcohol sweet spot or goldilocks amount. I’m certainly open to experimentation. Because that’s some seriously tasty medicine I can get behind, especially as I age ever closer to my dotage. I think when I have grandkids, I’m going to teach them to call the refrigerator in the garage, stocked with beer, “grandpa’s medicine cabinet.”

My Home County Healthiest In State Despite Higher Than Average Binge Drinking

By

health
My family and I live just north of San Francisco, in Marin County. We moved here a number of years ago to be closer to my wife’s family, who live in Sonoma County. When she was working in San Francisco, Marin was in the middle of work and family, so it made sense. There’s a lot of good things to recommend here, though it is a very expensive place to live, and in fact a few years ago I saw that it was the third-most expensive county for real estate in the United States.

Our local newspaper, the Marin Independent Journal (or I.J.) — which in the interest of full disclosure is part of the Bay Area Newsgroup, the group I write my newspaper column for — had an interesting headline today about the health of Marin’s residents. In Marin County ranked healthiest county in state for third year in a row, despite residents’ love of alcohol, the author reports on a new study recently released by the neo-prohibitionist Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, along with the University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute. This is the third year of the survey, which ranks the health of America’s counties. For the third straight year Marin County was declared the most healthy California county. For an equal number of years, Marin also has the dubious distinction of a higher than average level of binge drinking.

The percentage of Marin residents who told the pollsters they had engaged in binge drinking within the past 30 days — 24 percent — exceeded the state average of 17 percent and the national benchmark of 8 percent. The survey defines binge drinking as consuming more than four alcoholic beverages on a single occasion, if you’re a women, and five drinks if you’re a man.

But maybe that’s the case because there’s little or no correlation between the two, or at least not the correlation that the neo-prohibitionists who funded the study would prefer. They assume, for primarily political and philosophical reasons, that binge drinking is unhealthy. But what if it’s not? What if it has more to do with the way it’s now defined, which again has more to do with politics than reality. The way “binge drinking” is defined has greatly narrowed over the past few decades which is at least one reason why anti-alcohol groups keep insisting that binge-drinking is such a growing societal problem. But at the same time, several recent studies and meta-studies have revealed that people who drink moderately tend to live longer than those who abstain, an inconvenient fact that is rarely mentioned by neo-prohibitionist groups because it doesn’t fit with their agenda. But even worse, from their point of view, some of these same studies have concluded that even people who binge drink tend to be healthier and live longer than the total abstainers. So perhaps binge drinking and health are more closely associated than we think, just not in the way that neo-prohibitionists would prefer. The least healthy county for which there’s data, Del Norte, has a lower rate of binge drinking (10%) than the healthiest.

But as even the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation makes clear in the own press release about the survey, “healthier counties are no more likely than unhealthy counties to have lower rates of excessive drinking.”

Here’s the top counties in states, followed by the county’s “excessive drinking” percentage, followed by their state’s average, with the “national benchmark” being 8%:

  1. Alabama (Shelby): 13%/12%
  2. Alaska (Southeast Fairbanks): 13%/19%
  3. Arizona (Santa Cruz): 18%/19%
  4. Arkansas (Benton): 12%/12%
  5. California (Marin): 24%/17%
  6. Colorado (Pitkin): 30%/18%
  7. Connecticut (Tolland): 17%/18%
  8. Delaware (New Castle): 21%/19%
  9. Florida (St. Johns): 21%/16%
  10. Georgia (Fayette): 18%/14%
  11. Hawaii (Honolulu): 18%/19%
  12. Idaho (Blaine): 23%/15%
  13. Illinois (Kendall): 23%/19%
  14. Indiana (Hamilton): 17%/16%
  15. Iowa (Winneshiek): 19%/20%
  16. Kansas (Riley): 22%/15%
  17. Kentucky (Oldham): 16%/11%
  18. Louisiana (St. Tammany): 19%/15%
  19. Maine (Sagadahoc): 17%/17%
  20. Maryland (Howard): 14%/15%
  21. Massachusetts (Dukes): 29%/19%
  22. Michigan (Leelanau): 20%/18%
  23. Minnesota (Steele): 18%/19%
  24. Mississippi (DeSoto): 10%/11%
  25. Missouri (St. Charles): 24%/17%
  26. Montana (Gallatin): 22%/19%
  27. Nebraska (Cedar): 23%/19%
  28. Nevada (Douglas): 20%/19%
  29. New Hampshire (Merrimack): 16%/18%
  30. New Jersey (Hunterdon): 18%/16%
  31. New Mexico (Los Alamos): 11%/13%
  32. New York (Putnam): 21%/17%
  33. North Carolina (Wake): 15%/13%
  34. North Dakota (Griggs): 19%/22%
  35. Ohio (Delaware): 20%/17%
  36. Oklahoma (Cleveland): 16%/14%
  37. Oregon (Benton): 15%/16%
  38. Pennsylvania (Union): 16%/18%
  39. Rhode Island (Bristol): 17%/19%
  40. South Carolina (Beaufort): 20%/14%
  41. South Dakota (Brookings): 20%/19%
  42. Tennessee (Williamson): 15%/9%
  43. Texas (Collin): 13%/16%
  44. Utah (Morgan): 9%/9%
  45. Vermont (Chittenden): 20%/19%
  46. Virginia (Fairfax): 20%/16%
  47. Washington (San Juan): 21%/17%
  48. West Virginia (Pendelton): 12%/10%
  49. Wisconsin (St. Croix): 31%/24%
  50. Wyoming (Teton): 22%/17%

In every single case, for the healthiest county in every one of the 50 states, their “excessive drinking” percentage is above the national benchmark, and in many cases well above it. 38 of the 50 states’ healthiest counties are at least twice the national benchmark and six are within a point, or more, of tripling it. Every state’s binge drinking average is well above the national average, which seems strange. And in 35 of the states, the healthiest county also has a binge drinking percentage that’s the same or higher than the state average, too. But the obvious takeaway is what you’d expect given total mortality studies, which is that there’s an inverse correlation between binge drinking and health. The counties with the healthiest residents also have higher numbers of binge drinkers. That much is obvious and is supported by the data, despite the story being spun being very different, even the opposite of what conclusions can be drawn from the numbers. Not that they’re making it easy to see. I had to look at each state and then each county’s records to make a chart of this somewhat damning data.

Of course, part of this is how meaningless our definition of binge drinking has become. Including people who drink five or more drinks in a single setting once a month or even once a year distorts the real issues of problem drinkers. It inflates the numbers, which is good if your agenda is to make false accusations about how bad alcohol is for society but terrible if you really want to adress those problems.

Here in California, the five healthiest counties are:

  1. Marin
  2. Santa Clara
  3. San Benito
  4. Placer
  5. San Mateo

Every single one of the ten healthiest counties in California have an excessive drinking rate above national benchmark, too.

Larry Meredith, director of the Marin County Department of Health and Human Services, is quoted in the IJ’s article, saying. “Our strategy must continue — to eliminate health disparities, and conditions that undermine a long and happy life.” Except that he keeps insisting that binge drinking, as defined by the study, “continues to be an issue,” despite the fact that the same study’s numbers seem to indicate the opposite. In the healthiest counties across the nation, binge drinking, as they define it, is higher in every instance.

Real binge drinkers, the more undefinable people who simply keep drinking and rarely ever stop, are not really captured by this type of survey, because they’re lumped together with responsible people who on occasion drink a little more than usual, whether in celebration of something or to drown their sorrows. As long as we keep drawing more and more people into the category of “binge drinkers,” we dilute the real problem. When that mistake is obvious even by a study conducted by an anti-alcohol organization, and then those results all but ignored, it exposes the propaganda and dishonesty of their agenda.

It’s almost funny to see Marin County’s own anti-alcohol organization, Alcohol Justice (who until last year were the Marin Institue) try to distance themselves from this. Their public affairs director, Michael Scippa, says AJ “shouldn’t be faulted for not being more effective in reducing Marin County’s alcohol consumption.” He lists a number of excuses, such as “availability and Marin being a mostly affluent community” and that “[they’re] constantly battling an industry that has enormous resources.” But what is he apologizing for? That Marin County has the state’s healthiest people living in it, despite ignoring his group’s propaganda? Maybe it’s not the people, but the propaganda that’s wrong? Because people all over the country are ignoring his advice and are all the healthier for it.

The Great Beeramid Of Calories & Carbs

By

food-pyramid
Here’s an interesting infographic, though for most craft beer drinkers it won’t be of much use. It’s a pyramid — or beeramid — showing many of the most popular mainstream beers with their calories and carbohydrates shown, ranking them with the lowest in both at the top of the beeramid and the beers with the most calories and carbs as the foundation on the bottom.

beeramid
It’s hard to read at this size, but you can see it full size at HellaWella.

It was created by HellaWella, a health-oriented website. And while I realize they mean well, I’ve never been convinced that calories or carbohydrates should ever be part of the decision-making process for choosing a beer. I realize other people feel differently, but watching the caloric content necessarily means sacrificing flavor so you can drink more. I say drink less, but better.

They believe that with their chart “you can figure out ahead of time how to keep the calories and/or carbohydrates to a minimum.” But by that criteria, Budweiser’s Select 55 is the best choice. The Top 10 include two non-alcoholic beers (which frankly shouldn’t even be here) and the other eight are low-calorie light beers, not one of which would I voluntarily drink or ever order at a bar or restaurant. But that’s the problem with these health suggestions. When you stick to the numbers, health means giving up what makes beer a great choice in the first place: flavor. If I have to give up beer that tastes of anything to be healthy, to my way of thinking there’s just no point. Except that beer is already healthy (even though the anti-alcohol folks have seen to it breweries aren’t aloud to say so) and since moderation is already the best course to take, why anyone would ever choose a beer with the lowest calories is beyond me.

So I’m a sucker for infographics, and this one is very well done, but in the end its flaw is in the intention, which is to steer people to the blandest possible beers imaginable, supposedly in the interest of health. That’s a mistake, I believe, and not part of a healthy lifestyle. Health also includes mental, as well as physical, health. If drinking responsibly and moderately means (according to the most recent dietary guidelines) having no more than 4 beers in a singe day (3 for a woman) and no more than 14 in a week (7 for women) then you should make them count. Choose the most flavorful, best-tasting beer you can. The difference in calories or carbs just isn’t worth the sacrifice. Skip the piece of cake and go for the better beer. To me, that’s a healthy choice.

10 Healthy Reasons To Drink Beer

By

catholic-vatican
I may not always see eye-to-eye with the roman catholic church, but I’m with them all the way on this one. While many religious denominations forbid their followers from drinking alcohol and others preach against it, it’s nice to see at least one take a more rational approach. Not only does Catholic Online tell everyone: “Have a beer. Really, go ahead and have one.” They even go so far as to encourage you to spread the word to your fellow man (and woman): “Tell everyone we said it’s okay to pop a cold one.” Talk about a great beginning.

The article published today on the catholic website is entitled 10 healthy reasons to have a beer! and also carries this subtitle: “Beer outperforms wine as a healthy beverage in several categories.” After detailing beer’s long history and its changing perception today, they get to the meat of their thinking:

Several years ago, it became understood that wine had a surprising number of health benefits. Since then, beer drinkers have had to endure a litany of praises about how great wine was for health as opposed to beer. But now, it turns out that the wine drinkers needn’t be so smug when comparing their beverage to beer.

Researchers from around the world have spent years studying one of our favorite beverages in detail, and there’s some good news. The latest collection of studies from around the world reveals that if the beer is enjoyed in moderation, meaning one for women, and no more than two for men, per day, then it can yield a surprising number of health benefits.

Below is the list of their ten reasons to drink a beer, but check out the original story to read the background for each of these ten.

  1. Strong Bones
  2. Strong Heart
  3. Kidney Stone Prevention
  4. Dementia Prevention
  5. Reduced Cancer Risk
  6. Taking Your Vitamins
  7. Stroke Prevention
  8. Diabetes Prevention
  9. Blood Pressure
  10. Long Life

I’ve seen, read and even written about most, if not all, of these health benefits from drinking beer in moderation, but it’s nice to see them all in one place. The article ends with this appropriate suggestion. “So the next time you decide to have a beer, you can enjoy it without the guilt.” Amen to that.

Hangover Cure News

By

hangover
If you’ve ever looked at the science behind hangovers or endured enough of them, you probably already know that time is really the only cure for one. But when you’re feeling that bad, hope tends to spring eternal; and so hangover cures represent a pretty healthy business, bringing in untold millions of dollars. A hungover fool and his money are soon parted.

We all have our own preferred remedy. Mine is entirely preventative. Before going to bed, I take three Advils and a B-vitamin. More often than not, I wake up feeling fine. I also drink a lot of water, both during a drinking session and before retiring. I don’t think of it as a cure — indeed, I don’t believe there can actually be a cure — but for me it tends to head off the symtoms before they manifest themselves as discomfort or downright pain.

But companies keep taking P.T. Barnum’s prophetic words and proving them true, playing on our desire to do just about anything to speed up the recovery from a bad hangover. And in fact, two new ones are in the news today.
blowfish-tablets

Blowfish

Several news outlets, such as the NY Daily News, have the story that Blowfish tablets, recently approved by the FDA, is on the market, available for sale over-the-counter. The effervescent tablets “combine 1,000 milligrams of aspirin, 120 milligrams of caffeine and a stomach-soothing agent” which you dissolve in water the morning after. “Once dissolved in water, the remedy claims to knock out multiple hangover symptoms in just 15 to 30 minutes.” So far, it’s only for sale in New York City or at ForHangovers.com, and sells for $2.99 for a single dose, or $11.99 for a six-pack. Hmm.
hangover-patch

The Vitamin Patch

The Daily has a story today regarding a patch that you wear on your arm — like a nicotine patch — that time releases B vitamins. “Bytox Inc., has created a hangover patch that slowly releases a complex of B vitamins over eight hours — from the hour before you start drinking to the morning after. The idea, said Dr. Leonard Grossman, is that nutrients are immediately delivered into the bloodstream and stay there instead of being depleted.”

Maybe, but that still seems like a lot of work when taking one pill before bedtime is so simple. Plus, you’d still need to keep drinking a lot of water, too. I continue to think that moderation is the best method, and when that fails, as it inevitably will on occasion, time is your only friend.

Beer In Ads #489: For Pure Drink Get Rainier Beer

By


Thursday’s ad is another ad for healthy beer, somewhat similar to yesterday’s Budweiser ad. This one is just a few years later, from 1907, and was sent to me by fellow blogger Lisa Grimm from WeirdBeerGirl (thanks Lisa). The ad is for Rainier Pale Beer, from Seattle Brewing & Malting Co., and shows a group of children using a giant beer bottle as a Maypole. Mother can be seen in the background, arriving on the scene with a tray full of beer bottles and glasses. Again, can you just imagine that ad today? The copy is equally interesting.

Pure Air, Pure Food, Pure Drink are essential to healthy growth … for Pure Drink get Rainier Pale Beer

Another beautiful sentiment.

Rainier-1907

Beer In Ads #488: The Ladies Home Journal Endorses Beer As Opposed To Patent Medicines

By


Wednesday’s ad is a Ladies Home Journal (LHJ) ad from 1904 for Budweiser. It’s an interesting ad. First of all, check out the cage and cork on a Bud bottle. That’s not something you see every day. And the endorsement by LHJ is priceless. Can you imagine this today?

Mr. Edward Bok, editor of the Ladies’ Home Journal, in a page article in the May issue gives a list of 36 medicines, with official analysis, asserting them to contain 12 to 47 per cent. of Alcohol!

The ad goes to suggest the reader think of beer, with a mere 2 to 5 percent, is nothing compared to many of the medicines that mothers might give their child, some of which are “stronger than whisky.” At this point, Budweiser suggests that their beer is much healthier even than water with its low alcohol content.

Budweiser contains only 3-89/100 per cent. of alcohol. It is better than pure water because of the nourishing qualities of malt and the tonic properties of hops.

Budweiser is pre-eminently a family beverage; its use promotes the cause of true temperance—it guards the safety of health and home.

Now that’s a beautiful sentiment.

1904Budweiser

High Alcohol, Low Calories: Bud Light Platinum

By

abib
This is a bit of a head scratcher. Though it’s been rumored for a while now, apparently it is coming, as AdAge is reporting that the TTB has given label approval for Bud Light Platinum. Though thought to be somewhere between 6% and 8% a.b.v., AdAge indicated the new low-calorie beer will weigh in at 6% and have 137 calories. Regular Bud Light is 4.2% a.b.v. and has 110 calories. And as regular Budweiser is 5% and 145 calories, it’s hard to see the point. Apparently, the idea is “to tap into the rising popularity of craft beers, which tend to be fuller bodied with more alcohol.” Sure, just throw in some alcohol, that should fool people. Apparently they’re missing the point that craft beer drinkers want flavor, not just higher octane. But given how successful the big brewers have been at convincing people to drink low-calorie light beers, I have little doubt this couldn’t work, too, however illogical I find the very notion of light beer.

ABI has also apparently registered the domain name budlightplatinum.com, but it’s not yet an active website. There’s not even a placeholder there so it may be some time before we see the actual beer. ABI has also not yet made an official announcement or sent out a press release.

Bud-Light-Platinum