Is non-alcoholic beer healthy?

About beer, the world's most popular and widely consumed alcoholic beverage, there is much to do. Not only has the recent years seen a huge increase in the variety of flavors and producers, it has also proven to be a tall tree that sometimes catches a lot of wind. That is because it contains alcohol: it is a stimulant that, if not enjoyed wisely, can cause health damage and other discomfort. Brewers recognized this long ago and have made huge investments in developing flavorful and high-quality alcohol-free and low-alcohol alternatives. Alcohol-free and low-alcohol beer now makes up nearly 10% of total beer consumption. But now the question remains: is alcohol-free beer healthy?

Supporters and opponents

Let's be very brief: no, non-alcoholic beer is not healthy. It may contain numerous minerals, vitamins and the like, but it remains primarily an enjoyment food that will never make it to the Dietary Five. Many of the reasons why alcohol-free beer is not considered healthy are incidentally, apply to numerous other products. It contains calories and sodium, for example: things you also find in milk, to mention. In all these cases, "too much" is not good. Everyone do agree that non-alcoholic beer is a HEALTER choice than alcoholic beer.

Opponents of alcoholic, and sometimes alcohol-free beer, point out that even drinking alcohol-free beer can invite you to try the alcoholic variety. That's true: the chance exists, but how real is it to use that as a counterargument against "the healthier alternative'? After all, you never hear anyone say that you shouldn't eat right-turning yogurt, because then people might get the idea the idea of trying the left-turned variety, whose lactic acid is less easily and quickly absorbed by the liver. is less easily and quickly broken down by the liver than right-turning lactic acid?

Some facts at a glance

The Trimbos Institute, an independent, scientific knowledge institute for mental health, alcohol, tobacco and drugs reports, "Alcoholic beer contains (many) calories: after all, alcohol is made from sugar. In alcohol-free and low-alcohol beer contains less or no alcohol, so it also contains fewer calories than in the alcoholic variety.

An average alcoholic beer contains 45 kcal per 100 ml; a non-alcoholic beer contains an average of 26 kcal per 100 ml. In terms of calories, alcohol-free beer is thus a healthier alternative.

Another question that often comes up: is non-alcoholic beer healthier than soft drinks? "Soft drinks (e.g., cola) and juices (e.g. orange juice) contain more sugar than non-alcoholic beer or non-alcoholic wine, and thus also more calories. On average, they contain 41 kcal per 100 ml."[1]

In short: generally speaking, alcohol-free beer is not seen as "healthy," but definitely seen as "healthier. And - we think it's also tastier! Take, for example, the world's first alcohol-free Trappist: Nillis, from La Trappe, is best described as an alcohol-free double. Those more of an IPA, can have fun with the low-alcohol Bird ofPrey from Uiltje, or the Wanderlust from Van Moll. Low-alcohol Hefeweizen can be found, for example, at Weihenstephaner; alcohol-free fruit beer from Rodenbach. And of course there is also tasty alcohol-free or low-alcohol lager: the Dutch Swinckels' the Belgian Estaminet or the German Jever Fun. The latter is very special: not only tightly hopped, but also sugar free and sugar-free and with only 16 kCal per 100 ml!

[1] https://www.trimbos.nl/kennis/alcohol/alcoholvrije-dranken/zijn-alcoholvrije-dranken-gezond/