The Chicago Sun-Times did a courageous thing last week: It suggested in an editorial that the legal drinking age be lowered from 21 to 19.

In an editorial on Aug. 21, the paper responded to a report that at least 100 university presidents “are open to the idea of lowering the minimum drinking age to 18.” The paper said that lowering the legal drinking age would be realistic in view of the fact that society allows those 18-to-20 the right to do a lot of other things, not to mention fight in a war.

 The newspaper quoted Stephen Schutt, president of Lake Forest College:

 “I feel to some extent like my hands are tied in terms of how I can educate students about how to behave and act. What happens at hundreds of places is that many students below the age of 21 do drink. And because of the law, they do so often irresponsibly.”

 Unrelated to all of this controversy is the fact that literally hundreds of studies have shown the healthful benefits of wine consumed regularly and in moderation. Included are studies that say you are less likely to die of a heart attack through such a regime, not to mention the reduced risk of Alzheimer’s disease, and at least a dozen other ailments.

 And yet the federal government, the same government that mandates (through economic threats) the 21 drinking age minimum, also says wineries, wine retailers, wholesalers and other industry personnel are forbidden from telling the public of any of the healthful benefits.

 Instead, since 1991 all wine, beer and spirits packages have had to carry a health warning.

 The Sun-Times never mentioned health when it suggested lowering the drinking age, but did note that the legal drinking age is 18 throughout Europe.

The reasons for the American obsession with alcohol goes back centuries and includes a Calvinistic point of view. It prompted Dr. R. Curtis Ellison, an epidemiologist at Boston University, to observe a decade ago, “It’s really too bad that the Puritans got here before the Italians.”

The reality is that those age 18 through their 20s are already drinking (mostly beer, but a growing number are seeking wine), unaware of the health benefits. But they are doing so surreptitiously and without the oversight of adults. This includes a fair bit of binge drinking, which is not healthful.

 And the warning label? In 2003, the Washington-based Center for Science in the Public Interest, a private organization, said it had conducted a poll of 801 Americans on the subject of the warning label, and 63 percent said they never read the warning label.

Few doctors want to weigh in on this subject, even though physicians, as a profession, probably consume more wine than any other job-linked group.

One doctor who’s happy to speak out is Ellison, who once wrote that “it’s not the amount [of wine we consume], it’s the regularity. The benefits only last for about 24 hours, so you have to consume wine daily.” He said that with as little as one glass per day “we begin to see positive benefits.”

Ellison has gone public about this, arguing that the U.S. government owes the truth to Americans.

 And since the man is the former chief of Preventative Medicine and Epidemiology and a professor of medicine and public health at Boston University School of Medicine since 1989, his words have substantial meaning.

In 2004, he wrote this in a letter to the American Heart Association: “In a culture where cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death, telling people to avoid any alcohol consumption because of potential dangers or unproven theories is not in the best health interests of the public. Let us not be afraid to just tell the truth.”

Now a number of college presidents and an influential paper want that message delivered to an age group that the newspaper says needs it: those under 21.

The Sun-Times concluded its editorial: “ ‘society’ pays a price for a legal drinking age that ignores reality — underage Americans are drinking all the same, just in more dangerous ways.”

 Wine of the Week: 2007 Chateau Ste. Michelle Riesling, Columbia Valley ($9.50) — A stylish, delightfully fresh-fruit aroma and a succulent taste, but with enough acidity to match with a lot of seafood dishes and Thai food.

Dan Berger lives in Sonoma County. Berger publishes a weekly newsletter on wine and can be reached at danberger@VintageExperi ences.com.