You are not wrong in your assessment of some of the unfairness of the stigmatization, but alcohol does have some advantages that led to this position.
A) It's "more than just a drug", it's a food. It's actually a food that can taste quite good to be honest. Many other things (especially synthetics) in contrast taste very nasty (usually very bitter).
B) Alcohol has a pretty good dose-response curve. In contrast, dose-response issues are a problem with most synthetics and even injection oriented drugs like heroin -- it is usually "all at once" being difficult to dose any other way. As a result, it is more difficult to build up to a desired level of effect without going overboard.
The stimulant of choice in most of the world is not meth, it is either coffee or tea. These have similar advantages that alcohol does (moreso actually since neither are as damaging or addictive). Consequently, coffee or tea is actually far more socially integrated, and less regulated than alcohol!
I have heard of people using synthetic stimulants in a kind of similar way one would have a few beers at a party (eg as a pep up, to get through a cram or all nighter etc.), but usually when I hear about that it's something like Adderall (aka government regulated, mg clearly stated, etc. amphetamine). Using such off-label is the same sort of illegal in a way, but it seems to have far less social stigma.
Meth has medical uses at lower dose, but stimulant abuse (which due to stuff like Adderall is probably the main case for meth) is all about the "euphoric" dose. That dose is less like someone is having a few beers at a party and more like going for an entire fifth of hard liquor in short order. At that level, damage occurs for any drug pretty fast.
But certainly, there's some additional social / class issues that exaggerate the impact of many recreational chemicals in people's minds. Cannabis after all has a pretty good dose/response curve, and is not terribly offensive in taste, yet for a long time it had a huge stigma as well.
Taste is very subjective, and sometimes acquired. Most children do spit-takes upon a first sip of whiskey or beer, so alcohol being tasty is debatable.
The drug effects of alcohol certainly seem to be a large part of it given how few non-alcoholic beers sell, although kombucha has very low alcohol and is popular amongst healthy eaters.
I don't ever view beer as "more than just a drug, it's a food", since those are empty calories, and the damage done by drinking just 3 or 4 drinks at a time is not worth it for me.
The body tries to rid itself of alcohol as fast as it can. Surprisingly, the blood alcohol level of somebody who has 1 2oz. shot of whiskey each hour for 4 hours (8 ounces) is around 0.10%, and if you drink it all at once it is 0.15%, so even drinking over a longer time isn't 'the right way to drink' as some profess.
Ask yourself when was the last time you went out for a social occasion and drank 4 or more sodas in an hour, or 12 to 20 on a weekend night out? Or substitute orange juice, milk or even water into that thought experiment.
The body cannot keep up with the alcohol dosing. Over time, the liver becomes more and more damaged and cannot as efficiently handle it, but unlike a car filter, you can't get your filters changed that often. The damage is accumulative. It cascades from a failing liver, stomach and other tissues over time like cancer.
When studies or people claim the benefits of 1 to 2 drinks of wine per day, I always wonder why there isn't such a push for other healthier options of lower alcoholic fermented foods. Or simply eating grapes, or drinking an occassional grape juice.
Maybe it's my age or sober bias, but I find that I have wandered away from watering holes, and watching people get drunk, or laughing at things that just aren't funny to me unless you're intoxicated. As a side-effect, I have more money and sober time to enjoy the things in life I like like skating, swimming, climbing and reading.
Right, I understand the personal opinion. I'm just explaining why I feel alcohol has less stigma (aside from obvious historical class / race bias) and probably always will.
By "more than just a drug, it's a food", I mean in usage. It's made with food. People cook with alcoholic beverages all the time. A large part of some alcohol culture is pairing alcoholic beverages with food. When cooking with alcohol, a large percentage of the intoxicant is boiled away, so there is something to the flavor contribution as well. It makes sense given that it's a fermented food. (I do feel it is somewhat acquired, but a lot of foods are to be honest.)
Some people do binge on 4 or more sodas at a time. Some American stores sell 100-128 oz to-go soda containers after all. :) Even the "smaller" 7-11 Double Big Gulp, at 64 ounces, is over 5 standard serving (12 ounce) soda cans. Account less for ice, but still I bet it's over 4. Soda binging may not quite be as bad for your health as ethanol binging, but it's not exactly healthy either. On the other hand, there's nothing really wrong with a standard size soda every now and then. It is "empty calories" (like ethanol) but there's room for treats in life.
Many alcohol watering holes aren't exactly dens of moderation (4 drinks in a night really isn't). I am personally wonder if the "benefits of 1 to 2 drinks" is more the benefits of a moderate lifestyle in all aspects of life.
A) It's "more than just a drug", it's a food. It's actually a food that can taste quite good to be honest. Many other things (especially synthetics) in contrast taste very nasty (usually very bitter).
B) Alcohol has a pretty good dose-response curve. In contrast, dose-response issues are a problem with most synthetics and even injection oriented drugs like heroin -- it is usually "all at once" being difficult to dose any other way. As a result, it is more difficult to build up to a desired level of effect without going overboard.
The stimulant of choice in most of the world is not meth, it is either coffee or tea. These have similar advantages that alcohol does (moreso actually since neither are as damaging or addictive). Consequently, coffee or tea is actually far more socially integrated, and less regulated than alcohol!
I have heard of people using synthetic stimulants in a kind of similar way one would have a few beers at a party (eg as a pep up, to get through a cram or all nighter etc.), but usually when I hear about that it's something like Adderall (aka government regulated, mg clearly stated, etc. amphetamine). Using such off-label is the same sort of illegal in a way, but it seems to have far less social stigma.
Meth has medical uses at lower dose, but stimulant abuse (which due to stuff like Adderall is probably the main case for meth) is all about the "euphoric" dose. That dose is less like someone is having a few beers at a party and more like going for an entire fifth of hard liquor in short order. At that level, damage occurs for any drug pretty fast.
But certainly, there's some additional social / class issues that exaggerate the impact of many recreational chemicals in people's minds. Cannabis after all has a pretty good dose/response curve, and is not terribly offensive in taste, yet for a long time it had a huge stigma as well.