[WoodenChair]

Yes I stopped reading there after checking the source myself and seeing the same discrepancy. I had also noticed earlier in the article she wrote, "This finding was great news for Napoleon. The French were losing money, and perhaps more alarmingly, their reputation, exporting wine to the British – the wine would “spontaneously” go bad during shipping."

Pasteur was born after Napoleon was exiled. Maybe she is referring to Napoleon III, but then it's misleading to just write "Napoleon." Two factual mistakes in the first couple pages and I can't trust the rest. Especially on a topic I know little about so I can't be discerning regarding.

[micr0bi0l0gist]

Thank you for pointing this out! I added the following correction and footnote to my piece. I tried to be as rigorous as possible but am definitely better-versed in biology than French history. "This finding was great news for Napoleon III<2>. The French were losing money, and perhaps more alarmingly, their reputation, exporting wine to the British – the wine would “spontaneously” go bad during shipping." Footnote: "<2> Author correction 7/28/26: Changed from “Napoleon” to “Napoleon III.” A commenter on another site correctly pointed out that Napoleon I was exiled before Pasteur was born. According to the Pasteur Institute, “in 1863, Napoleon III asked [Pasteur] to study diseases in wine.”"

[Aachen]

There seems to be some original research in the post as well though. I'm not assuming they faked their test results or anything at all. I think the article is worth the read, just yeah this (if the replies and I are not reading it wrong) seems like a strange error to make so maybe the not-really-relevant background facts are just not as rigorous. And to err is human