Opinion Drink Champagne, chuck the justification

In 1996, the rarefied world of academia was shaken by a hoax. Alan Sokal, a physics professor at New York University, submitted an article to a cultural studies journal that was replete with jargon but in effect, gibberish. The article was meant to demonstrate that “post-modernism” and its attitude to science lack intellectual rigour. Nearly 30 years later, debates rage on about the Sokal affair and its validity. The idea behind it, not to put too fine a point on it, was for non-scientists to stay in their lane and not pontificate on the nature of science and objectivity. In 2025, though, it might be as important to establish that not everything requires a scientific justification, especially the small joys that make life just a little bit better and merrier — even if they are “bad” for you.

A recent study published in the Canadian Journal of Cardiology finds that drinking the odd glass of champagne — presumably, any sparkling wine — is among the “non-clinical factors” that can help prevent sudden cardiac arrest. This is not, of course, a licence to drink to excess — reducing alcohol intake is undoubtedly beneficial for heart health, as the researchers themselves admit. The reason the study has made global headlines may well be because of the confusion — and hope — around the health benefits of alcohol. For years, quasi-scientific folk wisdom claimed “two glasses of red wine” are good for you. That myth was busted. Now, champagne beckons.

Advertisement

Searching for the health benefits of having a drink, and research that affirms them, is a classic case of category confusion and the obverse of the Sokal affair. Perhaps those who enjoy a glass or two of bubbly are less stressed, less calculating about the pleasures that underline that life is not merely about longevity. Besides, mechanical oppressions sometimes demand the relief of fermented fruit and grain. There’s no need for a study for people to unwind with a stiff one at the end of a long day.