Health Hazard? Lead in Wooded Port & Madeira

[Barry Sunderland]

I was quite intrigued by Adrian Bridges' comments re: Scion Tawny. Especially what curbed my interest was the testing of lead that took place for that wine. According to Bridges, the Scion has 208 ppb of lead, yet he also added that some 'old' wooded ports may have much more lead than that specimen. My question is this, is there a governing board (FDA or Prop. 65) which tests lead levels in wooded ports and Madeira, in particular 'old' Madeira that has seen, potentially, many vessels over the years, as well as having been exposed to now outdated/bygone era pest control in the vineyards using lead or arsenic? I love tawny port and Madeira, but I'd enjoy them much more knowing that my body is not being exposed to a health hazard.

[Andy Velebil]

Barry,

Personally I am not worried about it. An old range master ( the head shooting range guy) where I worked was exposed to lead everyday in the ammo being shot (primer, bullets, etc). He got tested regularly and was always below the limits. It was something he was always concerned about being around it so much. So if he can be around it that much and be ok, a little here or there in Port of Madeira doesn't concern me in the least.

But here is some info from the FDA as it relates to small children who frequently injest certain products.. I admit to being shocked because after reading this from the FDA I ate a lot of lead as a kid (it was in chocolate milk, candy, and all sorts of things at fairly high levels back then). I turned out ok, I think

FDA first recognized the need to control potential lead exposure from food in the 1930s. The earliest actions of the agency focused on limiting the potential for lead to become a component of food as a consequence of intentional uses of lead containing substances in agriculture and food processing, e.g., lead-based pesticides and lead containing solder in food cans. (Ref. 1)

Raisins are used as candy ingredients. During the period mid-1991 through 2002, FDA collected and analyzed 40 samples of raisins as components of market baskets in its TDS. FDA did not detect lead in 20 of the 40 raisin samples. The other 20 samples contained trace levels, with a mean lead level of 9 ppb, and a maximum estimated value of 31 ppb.

(in 1995) FDA advised manufacturers, importers, and distributors of imported candy, that where frequent consumption of candy products by small children could be anticipated, the agency would consider taking regulatory action against candy with lead levels that exceeded 0.5 parts per million (ppm).

That's .5ppm In other words, 500ppb

That older max has since been lowered in 2006 for kids to 100ppb in candy, chocolate, etc. Now from my reading, and if I understand it correctly, I believe that is for one serving of candy (as defined on the package). How many kids eat just one "serving" of candy and other things in a day?

Oh and careful kissing someone with lipstick on...

FDA scientists developed and validated a highly sensitive method for the analysis of total lead content in lipstick and applied the method to the same lipsticks, that were still available on the market, previously evaluated by the CSC. FDA scientists found lead in all of the 20 lipsticks tested, ranging from 0.09 ppm to 3.06 ppm, with an average value of 1.07 ppm. The detection limit was estimated to be 0.04 ppm. FDA concluded that the lead levels found are within the range that would be expected from lipsticks formulated with permitted color additives and other ingredients that had been prepared under good manufacturing practice conditions.

OK, now that you're primed, lets talk about lead in wine and what the FDA says

We are advising that we believe that the available evidence would support regulatory actions against table wines containing lead at greater than 300 ppb. We are willing to advise you on a case-by-case basis in this regard. Last Updated: 08/24/2011

So still well under the safe limit. Bring on the Port

[Llyn Strelau]

On this topic, the Ontario Canada liquor board LCBO rejected some Sherry a few years ago for what they diagnosed as high levels of ethyl carbamate (urethane) which is apparently a carcinogen. The Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA)then set limits for this compound. (it is a bi-product of fermentation and also shows up in tiny traces in bread and other fermented products). In the past month the LCBO rejected two sherries again for levels of this substance AND copper. The agent is appealing to the CFIA but not sure what will happen. Worst case the two wines will be destroyed. The horror!
It appears that the old sherries and by extension Madeira and Ports (probably tawnies rather than vintage are likely to be similar. Need to sort this out or we will have more issues in future. Don't know how much one would need to drink to actuallyl be an issue though. Any thoughts?


---
I am here: http://tapatalk.com/map.php?jjszmj

[Peter W. Meek]

Two points to consider:

Lead is most harmful to developing children (not heavy port consumers) and to fetuses (who MIGHT be harmed by mothers who drink).

Metallic lead, and its inorganic compounds are much less likely to be absorbed by the body than the organic lead compounds. Metallic lead is relatively inert. (However, we rarely see lead capsules anymore; much more likely to see expensive tin, or cheap plastic or aluminum.)

[Roy Hersh]

Here is some basic info I found, but nothing conclusive:

From the article: Study of heavy metals in Madeira wine by total reflection X-ray fluorescence analysis
M. L. Carvalho1,
M. A. Barreiros2,
M. M. Costa2,
M. T. Ramos3,
M. I. Marques3

The suitability and high sensitivity of total-reflection x-ray fluorescence analysis (TXRF) were used for multi-element analysis of several species of Madeira wine taken directly from the usual glass bottles. In addition, the uptake of lead by Madeira wine kept in a crystal vessel (30% lead) as a function of time was also studied. The detection limits were in the range 0.001–0.10 mg 1−1 and the precision was in the range 5–10%. The organic matrix of the wine was removed by wet digestion in nitric acid.


In another article I found this:

Benjamin Franklin’s medical history shows that he suffered from repeated
attacks of gout and a large bladder stone. These conditions
caused him considerable pain, markedly decreased his mobility, and
likely contributed in indirect ways to his decline and eventual death from
a pulmonary disorder. This article examines Franklin’s risk factors for
gout and stones, both as Franklin understood them and as we know
them today. Signifi cantly, both of these disorders are associated with
high blood levels of uric acid, a metabolic by-product. Franklin’s risk
factors included his gender, genetics, diet, drinking, advanced age, psoriasis,
and exposure to lead. Although it is impossible to assign a weight
to each of these factors, it can be shown that a number of factors, each
capable of raising uric acid levels, converged and conspired against him.

[Moses Botbol]

What about using a uranium glass decanter?

[Andy Velebil]

What about using a uranium glass decanter?

Trying to Huh? Shame on you Ok just kidding, but I did have to google this to see. Here is what I found

Simply put, uranium glass is glass that contains uranium. Usually uranium is added to glass before it is melted as a diuranate oxide. Modern uranium glass is about 2% uranium, by weight, although some 19th century pieces contain as much as 25% uranium. The glass comes in shades of yellow and green, although other colors are possible if additional metals have been added. A Geiger counter will register radioactivity from some uranium glass, although it is not sufficiently radioactive to pose a health hazard.