More scare mongering, this time on the evils of drink from that well known bon viveur Sir Ian Gilmore, and backed up by Prof John Rhodes and Sir Richard Thompson. The article predictably is full of words such as “could”, “predicted”,”up to”,”if”. In other words lots of speculation padded out by phrases such as “wider harm”, and including the usual “how many have to die” from Thompson. (All of us actually, idiot) I think there should be a rule that anyone using that phrase should automatically lose the argument.
The usual stupid statistics are rolled out. Alcohol related liver disease now kills 1 in 10,000 of us, yes 1 in 10,000. I’ll drink to those odds.
In the league of alcohol consumption Britain ranks 16th from the top. Now I know that there is a tendency in reporting major sporting events to portray 16th as nearly at the top, but it isn’t really is it.
I met one of the three named above once. I quickly gained the impression that he was the sort who would burn heretics at the stake if it was still legal. The three of them have really lost site of reality with phrases such as “The regulation of population-level alcohol consumption is a duty of responsible Government.” Jawohl.
This is not to say I condone heavy habitual drinking. When I come across people who frequently drink for the sole purpose of getting drunk I think of the line from Blazing Saddles, “Why you do that to yourself”. But these people are mostly adults and while we have a duty to educate people, the urging of Gilmore et al to impose legal controls on what people legally consume should be resisted.
After all, if it were not for drink some of us would never get laid.