I'm not after you. I'm after them.

I think what Pete Brown¹ is doing, whacking on those ropey neo-prohibitionist "facts 'n' figures" with his mallet-o-truth is great. He's putting in loads of work and I find it really interesting. But I suspect that this is not about the facts, and a point-by-point rebuttal is not necessarily a good play. (Did you see "thank you for smoking" on the TV the other day? Top film.²)

I can't see there's any point trying to "win the argument" and expecting the people to rise up against the new puritans.

And anyway, we're aware of the negatives of alcohol misuse. Anyone who's had a hangover knows that alcohol can be bad for you. We all know alcoholics, have seen fist-fights, car crashes, etc. Precisely how much of this is down to the booze? Who knows? Do we care? Do we need to know more?

We've already decided it's worth it. We've been on the sauce for thousands of years. Far longer than we've been listening to medics or funding science.

The cost of cars on the roads is worth it (we've decided). The cost of free access to guns and heroin isn't worth it (we've decided). We're grown-ups, and we've made our minds up. We'll keep the booze thanks.


1. Here et seq.

2 Thank You for Smoking