To the editor: With all due respect to Eli Federman, I take issue with his op-ed article on rethinking the role of wine in religious ceremonies because of alcohol’s serious health consequences.
Today, so much is said to cause cancer — preservatives in food, pesticides in our soil, some even fear cellphones and microwaves. There are also deadly drugs that do more damage to young people than anything else.
A glass or two of wine to me is a joy, and today I am very healthy. I love joyous prayer time raising that glass — it warms my soul and my body, and yes, there is something spiritual about it.
Elaine Vanoff, West Hollywood
..
To the editor: Had Federman written 20 years ago, he would have been touting science’s support of moderate red-wine drinking and explaining how religions such as Judaism and Catholicism made use of fermented grape juice in their ceremonies.
Over the years, the scientific study of food and drink has yielded wildly different — often conflicting — evidence leading to similarly conflicting conclusions.
Caffeine is bad — no, good — no, bad. A glass of red wine a day extends life, or maybe it shortens life. Eggs raise cholesterol; no, they don’t. The list is long. All of these declarations should be consumed with a grain of salt.
Science advances, and more information is better than less. So let’s see whether the new thinking on alcohol will stand the test of time before we throw out hundreds or even thousands of years of religious rituals.
Finally, though one can make reference to smoking warnings as a template for the alcohol situation, the two are not similar. Light or even moderate drinking affects no one other than the user (as long as the drinker does not drive), but secondhand smoke affects everyone.
Andrew E. Rubin, Los Angeles
