Not long before last week’s sparkling wine Cyber Circle offering, we received a question that I thought was fascinating, since virtually all of us are interested in our waist lines these days.
It was impossible to provide a definitive answer, as you’ll see in a moment, but it certainly provided some… uh… food for thought.
QUESTION: I have a bet with a friend. She says there are more calories in my occasional glass of Champagne than in her daily latte from Starbucks. I find that hard to believe, and we’ve bet a glass of Champagne against a latte. Is she right?
ANSWER: Wow… there are a lot of variables to deal with here, including the size of the Champagne flute, what type of Champagne, the size of the latte, whether you use 2% or nonfat milk, and so on.
Fortunately, around here, we drink almost as much Starbucks as we do wine, so we feel qualified to weigh in on this diet debate.
Let’s begin with the Champagne, and let’s go with the driest designation of all: Brut Natural. A 6-oz. serving will have 120 calories. Now, let’s turn to our morning jolt of caffeine. At Starbucks, a tall (meaning small) latte made with nonfat milk and sugar-free vanilla syrup will have… 120 calories. So, it’s a tie!
We suggest getting together tomorrow morning at Starbucks to discuss your diet goals, and then reconvening after work to toast your friendship with a glass of Brut Natural or other sparkling wine.