My theory is that there is a resistance to this phenomenon which is defeated at some (higher) alcohol level and that this happens on a curve, not in a linear fashion.
As an experiment, one cool and rainy night I took mouthfuls of 90° rum in my mouth, held it as long as I good and then spit it. After three, I was at least too buzzed to drive and I didn’t swallow ANY up to that point.
I have put on wt. over the last couple of years.
My experiment is to reduce carbs on days I drink.
I’ll let you know how it works, and/or how effective I am at implementing.
It seems clear that I don’t need a big pile of rice etc. if I am having 2+ glasses of wine.
Here’s a web site that allows you to count calories burned vs. various exercise activities, accounting for your weight:
I walk for exercise. Looks like I need to walk about 5 miles per day to balance out my wine consumption.
Better head to the gym this morning.
I have been using the MyPlate app for 1.5 years now. It has the calories of red wine at 25 per ounce as already suggested, and white wine a bit lower. I track my food/liquid/exercise every day and have found thee numbers to be accurate enough as indicated by any changes in weight.
Brut Champagne is going to be dosed to up to 12 grams of sugar per liter, better go with Sans Dosage or other low dosage bottlings.
Yeah, save that 40 or so Cals/bottle.
Absorption is concentration-dependent in a linear fashion. If the rate of absorption is low enough, the alcohol will be metabolized quickly enough to keep the blood alcohol concentration below “buzz” level. Same principles apply whether absorption is through mucus membranes in the mouth when tasting/spitting or via the gut when drinking, though the absorption rates and speed of entry into the bloodstream differ.
I posted this on a similar thread elsewhere. Alcohol has 7 calories per gram, sugar has 4 calories per gram. A liter of wine is close to 1000 gms, a bottle is 3/4 of a liter. So, for an entire bottle of wine (or spirits) the calorie count is:
calories = 7507abv + 0.754rs
where abv is alcohol fraction by volume and rs is in gm/liter. For example, consider a fairly dry California wine at 15% abv and rs of 3 g/L (aka 0.3%):
calories = 787.5 + 9
In a dry wine, there is much more alcohol than sugar, and alcohol has more calories per gram than sugars. So, the alcohol dominates the calorie count. There are some other things in wine or spirits that add calories, but they only add a little compared to the alcohol (or the sugar in a sweet wine).
A sweet wine might have 150 g/L (some have more), the contribution from the rs would be 450 calories, so the sugar matters to the calorie count in sweet wines.
Note that the alcohol is the dominant contributor to the calorie count, except for significantly sweet wines. Also, as mentioned above, the difference between wines isn’t very large unless you’re drinking really high alcohol or fairly sweet beverages.
However, there is some evidence, despite what we’ve been told for years, that not all calories are the same, ie just because something can be burned to produce a certain amount of energy doesn’t mean that your body is able to metabolize it as efficiently as another substance with the same calorie count. The evidence suggest that alcohol calories count less as far as weight gain, while sugar calories count more.
-Al
![[winner.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/0/07ec25c9fd71159fe15d7f1ba5fad64e91238d0e.gif "winner"){kind=small}
Two four ounce glasses equals about one small bag of potato chips. Exercise a tiny bit more or cut a few carbs during the day.
I had someone arguing against that point with me on another forum. Seems obvious and observable.
Try everclear. Just goofing around blowing fireballs you can feel it rapidly being absorbed. What seemed odd was making a mixed drink with it. Using about a third of a shot instead of the “normal” 2 or 3, we were quickly drunk from one drink, then completely sober again in 20 minutes. Maybe you could explain that…?
Wes I think that’s compatible with first order pharmacokinetics of alcohol absorption. High concentration, low volume, short-term consumption should produce a brief spike in BAC, higher than with lower concentration hooch but shorter lasting than if you did 2 or 3 shots in succession.
I would guess that any alcohol absorbed through the oral mucus membranes would get into the bloodstream faster than that absorbed through the gut, but the amount absorbed through the gut would be greater due to larger surface area, etc.
Perhaps the burn of the high alcohol in the mouth adds something subjective to the experience that wouldn’t be reflected in actual BAC?
When one of the competitions I used to judge in stopped paying for a hotel room the night of competition day, expecting us to drive home (100 miles for me) I stopped judging. Absorption through mucus membranes is a definite–and dangerous–phenomenon.
My question is about everclear diluted to a lower concentration of ethanol than a regular mixed drink still having very rapid absorption. In other words, it absorbed at a rate nearer to undiluted everclear than even 100 proof hooch.
Absolutely agree Tom. I was at a tasting yesterday where I went through about 50 wines, all spitting, and could feel it a little and definitely started getting palate fatigue. I’ve been to other tastings where I’ve gone through a couple of hundred wines, all spitting, and had to hang out for a couple of hours before being in the right shape to drive.
That said, I think calorie consumption would be different, because only a miniscule amount is actually ingested through the saliva. So tasting and spitting dozens of wines would yield almost no calorie consumption, IMHO.
You think you’re spitting it all out at tastings, but you’re not. When you spit your mouth stays wet, so some of the alcohol stays behind. It mixes with freshly delivered saliva, which you then swallow. Ergo, you’re swallowing a small part of each taste however assiduously you spit.
Yeah, I doubt calories mount up when you expectorate. I learned that word from reading the Wine Expectorant…
I like it! ![[rofl.gif]](/uploads/db3686/original/2X/a/a7452fcd8e675af869f8da01174474a545b03944.gif "rofl"){kind=small}
No doubt. I’ve experienced it myself. I was responding to Roberto’s comment about there being a threshold alcohol concentration below which this does not occur. My point, perhaps poorly made, was that absorption occurs at any concentration and the rate is dependent on concentration, without a lower threshold. But at low concentrations (e.g. wine at 12%), if tasting at a slow pace, absorption will be slow enough that you won’t get buzzed. A competition setting with multiple tastes in rapid succession is a different story.
It doesn’t matter whether the alcohol gets into your bloodstream through your mouth or your stomach, once it’s in your bloodstream you’ve ingested the alcohol and its equivalent calories. Palate fatigue is different thing, your palate may become fatigued before you’ve ingested much alcohol.
-Al
Hmmm… not sure I buy that. I’m not a doctor or a scientist, but I think it has to go through your digestive system to actually be consumed as calories. I believe the alcohol enters the blood stream through the tissues in your tongue and mouth. It would be good to hear from a doctor on this one.