The future of wine labels? Nutrition facts
Moscato–or mosc-HOT-oh–is barely wine. In fact, the one above has a nutritional analysis as foods do–the first time I’ve seen that on wine. According to a representative at the importer, Boisset America, because this wine is less than 7% alcohol, it falls under FDA regulation rather than the TTB and thus had to place the “nutrition facts” on the back label.
This type of labeling may become the norm for all wines. What do you think? Have your say in the latest poll. And thanks to the young man about town, @corkhoarder, for supplying the picture.
[poll id=”23″]
Related: Counting wine’s calories
Bonny Doon’s labels bare all
Jun
28
2012
On June 28th, 2012 at 11:36 am ,Eric wrote:
0% unfermented juice? With 18.7 g of sugar per 5 oz there’s some unfermented juice me thinks!
On June 28th, 2012 at 11:54 am ,David Savory wrote:
I say nay, for many reasons, foremost of which is plain old aesthetics. If a wine drinker is an ‘enthusiast’ and wants to know, they can find out. Otherwise, this sort of labeling may be a turn off to those who aren’t knowledgable about common wine production ‘additives’. Finally, the increased TTB red tape will increase the cost of a bottle for everyone.
On June 28th, 2012 at 2:47 pm ,Keith wrote:
Wine is not really food. Generally anything used in its production except sugar and sorbate at the end is not the same as what is put in the fermenter. In other words nothing that goes in to wine comes out in the end product. The unfermented grape juice is gone. Even if you stop fementation it is not the same as adding grape juice as a susse reserve. Any additions of yeast, nutrient, sugar, acids, pretty much are all altered or gon in the finished product prety much making ingredient labeling a bunch of nonsense. Wine is a beverage unlike any other in that it is living product that life and in that life it changes in taste and flavor profile. Even fininf agents that are added are settled or filtered out and there is no scientific basis that the parts per trillion residual proteins from a fining agent actually does cause any allergic reactions. It is only an opinion held by people with a ulterior motive in there objectives that is not honest. Time for real science to be employed not the political slanted science that is over popular today and almost always untrue.
On June 28th, 2012 at 2:57 pm ,Cameron Hughes wrote:
What Keith said.
We import our Lot 319 Moscato d’Asti (winner of Best Moscato at SF INTL Wine Comp incidentally) that has the same nutrition label. I just released it because the additional label requirements threw us off by three months…Cameron
On June 28th, 2012 at 3:39 pm ,Dave Erickson wrote:
Before anyone gets too upset about aesthetics and nanny states, Just a reminder of what you can add to wine without having to disclose on a label:
Approved Wine Additives.
(Thanks, Alice, as always)
On June 28th, 2012 at 3:54 pm ,John Kelly wrote:
What Keith said, +1.
Eric: the carbohydrate/sugar content includes the alcohol, as well as the sugar added after the juice is fermented out.
I don’t have time just now to research this, but if being under 7% alcohol triggers regulation by the FDA does that mean beer is regulated by the FDA? Pardon my ignorance, but I don’t recall ever seeing any nutritional labeling on beer.
On June 28th, 2012 at 4:15 pm ,Keith wrote:
Yes, the prime word difference is “additive” for alcoholic beverages and not “ingredient” as in food. Very little of these additives either remain in the wine or remain same after additon. Even a sugar(sucrose) addition results in inversion to glucose and fructose. A sulfite addition (KMBS) results in free so2 dissociation. “Contains sulfites” may be a misnomer as you have free SO2 and bound sulfates and very little sulfite in the wine. There is very little honesty in an ingredient label for wine. Leads me to believe the concept of ingredient labeling is absurd in alcoholic beverages, even wine below 7%abv. Why wine is included for that for FDA is nonsense also and not really a true concept.
On June 28th, 2012 at 4:17 pm ,Eric wrote:
John: My understanding was that fermentation of Moscato was interrupted by chilling leaving residual sugar and the result is lower alcohol relative to completely fermented must. I do not believe that they add sugar following fermentation (if they need to chaptalize the sugar would be added prior to initiating fermentation).
On June 28th, 2012 at 4:21 pm ,Keith wrote:
Alcohol isn’t food either it may have caloric content but it is not a carbohydrate. It is also not a protein or fat either so it is not food. Alcohol has some elements in similarity to both foods and drugs, but in reality is neither. In a diebetic diet it is considered a fat replacement, as the liver will metabolize the alcohol before it will fats. So in addtion another error is evidnt when considering the alcohol as a carbohydrate for labeling. There is no honesty to this labeling in the slightest.
On June 28th, 2012 at 4:31 pm ,Keith wrote:
It is true then, that there is 0% unfermented grape juice in the wine. But ingredient labeling it as “Fermented Grape Juice” may be understandable to most, but when it is fermented having the word juice in the description is not accurate.
On June 29th, 2012 at 7:18 am ,Dermot Nolan MW wrote:
I voted Yes for a reason no-one else has considered: I am diabetic and so need to have better information about such things as carbs, fats etc. A lot of people have genuine dietary issues and find this labelling very helpful.
On June 29th, 2012 at 8:01 am ,Terroirist: A Daily Wine Blog » Daily Wine News: Decanter Moves wrote:
[…] we “really want to know” what’s in our wine. Dr. Vino, meanwhile, asks his readers if wine labels should include nutrition […]
On June 29th, 2012 at 10:35 am ,Laura wrote:
Absolutely no to the nutrition facts–wine isn’t a food, and to a certain degree I think putting that labeling on the bottles takes away from the craftsmanship behind great wine. It starts with a few nutrition facts, and then next thing you know “100 Calorie” packs of wine will be on shelves.
On June 30th, 2012 at 8:21 am ,Keith wrote:
No to nutrition labeling. It really means nothing in wine. As I mentioned before, alcohol is a fat replacement in a diabetic diet and if you stick to dry wines they tend to drop the sugar levels. Infromation you need is on the label already. Alcohol level and if it is dry, semi, or sweet. Generally from what I find only, an O/C minority pays attention to the nutrition labeling anyway. Why feed their sickness.
On July 1st, 2012 at 6:00 pm ,Alessandra Branco wrote:
I loved the idea! I don’t know why this has not been shown yet. Wine, just like any other alcoholic beverage, should have this labeling based on the fact that a lot of us consume it often, and it is important to understand the information and applications related to this consumption. Thanks for sharing!