To the editor: With all due respect to Eli Federman, I take subject along with his op-ed article on rethinking the role of wine in religious ceremonies due to alcohol’s severe well being penalties.
In the present day, a lot is claimed to trigger most cancers — preservatives in meals, pesticides in our soil, some even worry cellphones and microwaves. There are additionally lethal medicine that do extra injury to younger individuals than the rest.
A glass or two of wine to me is a pleasure, and immediately I’m very wholesome. I like joyous prayer time elevating that tumbler — it warms my soul and my physique, and sure, there’s something non secular about it.
Elaine Vanoff, West Hollywood
..
To the editor: Had Federman written 20 years in the past, he would have been touting science’s help of reasonable red-wine consuming and explaining how religions akin to Judaism and Catholicism made use of fermented grape juice of their ceremonies.
Over time, the scientific research of food and drinks has yielded wildly totally different — typically conflicting — proof resulting in equally conflicting conclusions.
Caffeine is unhealthy — no, good — no, unhealthy. A glass of pink wine a day extends life, or possibly it shortens life. Eggs elevate ldl cholesterol; no, they don’t. The record is lengthy. All of those declarations must be consumed with a grain of salt.
Science advances, and extra data is healthier than much less. So let’s see whether or not the brand new considering on alcohol will stand the check of time earlier than we throw out a whole bunch and even hundreds of years of non secular rituals.
Lastly, although one could make reference to smoking warnings as a template for the alcohol state of affairs, the 2 aren’t related. Mild and even reasonable consuming impacts nobody apart from the consumer (so long as the drinker doesn’t drive), however secondhand smoke impacts everybody.
Andrew E. Rubin, Los Angeles
