Is non-alcoholic beer healthy?

There’s a lot of buzz surrounding beer, which has long been the world’s most popular and widely consumed alcoholic beverage. Not only has there been a huge increase in the variety of flavors and producers in recent years, but it has also turned out to be a tall tree that sometimes catches a lot of wind. That’s because it contains alcohol: it’s a recreational substance that, if not consumed responsibly, can cause health problems and other issues. Brewers recognized this long ago and have made massive investments in developing high-quality, great-tasting non-alcoholic and low-alcohol alternatives. Non-alcoholic and low-alcohol beer now accounts for nearly 10% of total beer consumption. But the question remains: isnon-alcoholic beer healthy?

Supporters and opponents

Let’s cut to the chase: no, non-alcoholic beer isn’t healthy. While it does contain plenty of minerals, vitamins, and the like, it remains primarily a recreational beverage that will never make the cut for the Food Guide. Many of the reasons why non-alcoholic beer isn’t considered healthy apply to numerous other products as well. For instance, it contains calories and sodium—substances you’ll also find in milk, to name just one example. In all these cases, “too much” is never good. Everyone agrees, however, that non-alcoholic beer is a HEALTHIER choice than alcoholic beer.

Opponents of alcoholic beer—and sometimes non-alcoholic beer as well—point out that even drinking non-alcoholic beer can encourage people to try the alcoholic version. That’s true: there is a chance, but how valid 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-handed yogurt because people might then get the idea to try the left-handed variety, whose lactic acid isn’t broken down as easily or quickly by the liver as right-handed lactic acid?

Some facts at a glance

The Trimbos Institute, an independent scientific research institute specializing in mental health, alcohol, tobacco, and drugs, states: “Alcoholic beer contains (a lot of) calories: after all, alcohol is made from sugar. Non-alcoholic and low-alcohol beer contains less or no alcohol, so it also contains fewer calories than the alcoholic version.”

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

Another question that often comes up: Is non-alcoholic beer healthier than soda? "Sodas (such as cola) and juices (such as orange juice) contain more sugar than non-alcoholic beer or non-alcoholic wine, and therefore also more calories. On average, they contain 41 kcal per 100 ml."[1]

In short: generally speaking, non-alcoholic beer isn’t considered “healthy,” but it is definitely seen as “healthier.” And—we think it tastes better, too! Take, for example, the world’s first non-alcoholic Trappist beer: Nillis, from La Trappe, can best be described as a non-alcoholic dubbel. If you prefer IPAs, you’ll love Uiltje low-alcohol Bird of Prey or Van Moll’s Wanderlust. You can find low-alcohol Hefeweizen fromWeihenstephaner, for example, and non-alcoholic fruit beer from Rodenbach. And of course, there are also tasty non-alcoholic or low-alcohol lagers: the Dutch Swinckels’, the Belgian Estaminet, or the German Jever Fun. The latter is truly special: not only is it heavily hopped, but it’s also sugar-free and has just 16 kcal per 100 ml!

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