4.3 Article

Red-wine beneficial long-term effect on lipids but not on antioxidant characteristics in plasma in a study comparing three types of wine -: Description of two O-methylated derivatives of gallic acid in humans

Journal

FREE RADICAL RESEARCH
Volume 37, Issue 9, Pages 1021-1035

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/10715760310001598097

Keywords

catechin; gallic acid; plasma; LDL; human

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The purpose of this double clinical study was (1) to evaluate the effect of one single intake (300 ml) of red wine (RW) on the plasma antioxidant capacity (pAOC) and plasma phenolics over the 24-h time period following the intake, and (2) to compare the long-term effects of daily intakes (250 ml/d) of RW, white wine (WW) and Champagne (CH) on the plasma and LDL characteristics of healthy sujects. In the first part, blood samples were collected just before and after wine consumption. In the second part, subjects received the 3 types of wine successively, only at the mealtime, over 3-week periods separated by a 3-week wash out. Blood samples were drawn in fasting condition before and after each 3-week wine consumption period. The peak of pAOC was at 3-4 h following the single intake of RW, that of catechin was at 4 h (0.13 mumol/l) and that of gallic acid and caffeic acid was earlier (less than or equal to1.5 and 0.3 mumol/l, respectively). In plasma, the major form of gallic acid was 4- O -methylated, but a minor form (the 3- O -methyl derivative) appeared. In the long term study, no wine was able to change LDL oxidizability, but some other parameters were modified specifically: RW decreased pAOC (without changing TBARS and uric acid plasma levels), LDL lipids and total cholesterol (TC), and increased plasma apoA1, whereas CH increased plasma vitamin A. The beneficial effect of RW seems to mainly be explained by its action on lipid and lipoprotein constants, and not by its antioxidant one.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available