Thanks, Jenniann, for your thoughtful comment and for sharing your personal experience.

I empathize with your thoroughly negative experiences with the effects alcohol can have on some people. No doubt, it is a drug, one that is as old as mankind.

I acknowledge that some people are unable to deal with it, while the majority quite obviously can. Now here is a personal view of mine that some might find offensive, but I cop to it. If we were to prohibit everything that a minority of people are unable to deal with in a non-addicted way, we would have to prohibit not only alcohol, but fat and sugar, gaming and social media, and mobile phones and online shopping. In that case, welcome to Taliban country.

The regulators’ alternative of levying discouraging taxes are no solution either. In fact they are blatantly dishonest. Because these measures do not eradicate the consumption, rather do they (a) simply levy a fee on the respective ‘drug dealer’s’ business, and thereby (b) create a two-class society in which all the well-to-do can afford the ‘sinful’ things while those among the less-well-to-do who are capable of responsible engagement with those sinful things can’t afford them anymore.

My article was meant to offer the reader the paradigm of responsible reassurance (as opposed to biased fear-mongering) that enables readers to informed dissent to either side of the debate. Apparently, I have achieved some of my intended goal, as you voice your disagreement with my conclusions, which I totally respect.