Yup.
And an ex-colleague of mine, Professor Nutt who is an extremely intelligent, qualified and experienced neuropsychopharmacologist who was appointed as the chairman of the advisory council on the misuse of drugs under the Gordon Brown government was sacked because he published a paper saying horse-riding was statistically more dangerous to the individual and society, than taking Ecstasy.
Which was manifestly true and he had the stats to back it up but it wasn't a popular idea when there was much hysteria around recreational Ecstasy use. Thousands of young people using it on a weekend and the death of Leah Betts a few years previously-which was tragic but due to water intoxication and not being killed by the drug, was apparently going to lead to the collapse of society.
Except it didn't and still hasn't. Because people taking it recreationally generally just have a nice night and might suffer anxiety and low mood a few days later, but they certainly weren't and aren't, getting into fights, being domestically violent to partners or indulging in other violent or sexual offences where alcohol use is heavily correlated and a significant factor; both in perpetrators and victims.
The recent riots and disorder in the UK were abhorrent and dealt with harshly by the criminal justice system but the sheer number of people involved who were pissed out of their minds or at least under the influence was stark.
So..to my main point, Prof Nutt also came up years ago with evidence-driven list of harms, physical, dependence potential, and social harms, which positioned alcohol and tobacco as 5th and 6th, behind heroin, cocaine, barbituates and methadone (a prescribed drug designed to combat opiod addiction) and above cannabis, LSD and ecstasy.
Which also wasn't popular in a society like the UK with a terrible drinking culture but one which benefits the government through duty taxes.