Alcoholic Beverage Strength Discrimination by Taste May Have an Upper Threshold Dirk W. Lachenmeier, Fotis Kanteres, and J€ urgen Rehm Background: Given the association between alcohol consumption and negative health conse- quences, there is a need for individuals to be aware of their consumption of ethanol, which requires knowledge of serving sizes and alcoholic strength. This study is one of the first to systematically investi- gate the ability to discriminate alcoholic strength by taste. Methods: Nine discrimination tests (total n = 413) according to International Standardization Organization (ISO) 4120 sensory analysis methodology “triangle test” were performed. Results: A perceptible difference was found for vodka in orange juice (0.0 vs. 0.5% vol; 0 vs. 1% vol), pilsner and wheat beer (0.5 vs. 5% vol), and vodka in orange juice (5 vs. 10% vol, 20 vs. 30% vol, and 30 vs. 40% vol). The percentage of the population perceiving a difference between the beverages varied between 36 and 73%. Alcoholic strength (higher vs. lower) was correctly assigned in only 4 of the 7 trials at a significant level, with 30 to 66% of the trial groups assigning the correct strength. For the trials that included beverages above 40% vol (vodka unmixed, 40 vs. 50% vol and vodka in orange juice, 40 vs. 50% vol), testers could neither perceive a difference between the samples nor assign correct alcoholic strength. Conclusions: Discrimination of alcoholic strength by taste was possible to a limited degree in a win- dow of intermediate alcoholic strengths, but not at higher concentrations. This result is especially rele- vant for drinkers of unlabeled, over-proof unrecorded alcoholic beverages who would potentially ingest more alcohol than if they were to ingest commercial alcohol. Our study provides strong evidence for the strict implementation and enforcement of labeling requirements for all alcoholic beverages to allow informed decision making by consumers. Key Words: Alcohol, Taste Threshold, Organoleptic Classification, Sensory Analysis, Discrimination Test. A LCOHOL CONSUMPTION WITH ethanol as the main active ingredient has been identified as a major risk factor for the global burden of disease, contributing to 3.8% of all deaths and 4.6% of all disability adjusted life years worldwide (Rehm et al., 2009), as it has been linked to many different disease and injury conditions (malignant neo- plasms, neuro-psychiatric disorders, cardiovascular, gastro- intestinal, infectious diseases, and intentional and unintentional injury; Rehm et al., 2010). The risk relations for most alcohol-related chronic outcomes, except diabetes (Baliunas et al., 2009) and ischemic disease (Patra et al., 2010; Roerecke and Rehm, 2012), are monotonic, wherein the higher the average consumption, the higher the risk of chronic disease (Rehm et al., 2010). For injury, risk depends on the alcohol consumed before the injury and the resulting blood alcohol concentration (BAC) (Taylor et al., 2010). Overall, most risk from alcohol consumption results from heavy drinking occasions, either in the form of regular heavy drinking resulting in high average consumption or in the form of irregular heavy drinking resulting in increased risk for injury or ischemic heart disease (Rehm et al., 2013). Given the relationship between alcohol consumption and negative health consequences, there is a need for consumers to be aware of how much ethanol (pure alcohol) they are consuming. This is especially important for heavy drinking occasions as the respective risk curves at this level of drinking are usually exponential or steeper (Rehm et al., 2010). This is even the case for cancer, where the curves are linear in the logarithmized risk functions, but the unlogarithmized risk is exponential (Corrao et al., 2004). For most other diseases, as well as for injury, the risk curves are exponential or otherwise accelerated for the logarithmized functions (Rehm et al., 2010; Taylor et al., 2010). This need for consumer awareness about alcoholic strength is directly in line with the United Nations Depart- ment of Economic and Social Affairs Guideline for Con- sumer Protection (United Nations, 2003, p. 2), which From the Chemisches und Veterin€ aruntersuchungsamt (CVUA) (DWL), Karlsruhe, Germany; Ministry of Rural Affairs and Consumer Protection (DWL), Stuttgart, Germany; Epidemiological Research Unit (DWL, JR), Institute for Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Tech- nische Universit € at Dresden, Dresden, Germany; Independent researcher (FK), Toronto, Canada; Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH) (JR), Toronto, Ontario, Canada; and Dalla Lana School of Public Health (JR), University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Received for publication April 19, 2014; accepted June 12, 2014. Reprint requests: Dirk W. Lachenmeier, PhD, Chemisches und Veter- in€ aruntersuchungsamt (CVUA) Karlsruhe, Weissenburger Strasse 3, D-76187 Karlsruhe, Germany; Tel.: +49-721-926-5434; Fax: +49-721- 926-5539; E-mail: Lachenmeier@web.de Copyright © 2014 by the Research Society on Alcoholism. DOI: 10.1111/acer.12511 2460 Alcohol Clin Exp Res, Vol 38, No 9, 2014: pp 2460–2467 ALCOHOLISM:CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL RESEARCH Vol. 38, No. 9 September 2014