PabloRimp110110

I'm a little at odds with myself and societies possible description of myself.

I know my limits of alcohol, but l can drink heavily. I regularly consume around 30-40 units of alcohol (by UK standards) per week. I experience brownouts and blackouts weekly. However my function in society and family life is completely unaffected. I accept I experience big headaches and sore stomach hangovers at weekends and some tiredness if I drink during the week. My friends and family think I drink too much and that if I drink any alcohol at home alone during the week it is alcoholism. I have experienced harm during drunk episodes but hasn't everyone during a period of chemical influence?

I am a 3rd year medical student and find it difficult to believe I am close to an alcoholic. I have had blood, liver and kidney tests, all which are completely normal. I have no physical or social damage. I may drink more than others, but if you factually describe an addiction or abuse of a drug, it is only the consumption of a drug which is outside of social acceptable boundaries. That doesn't necessarily imply damage. Which is why I don't understand how you can label anybody a highly functioning alcoholic if there is no damage? Which is what, if I had to label myself, I would label myself possibly. I don't understand how drinking coffee, a drink with addictive caffeine is any different to alcohol if the side effects arn't any different?

I'm not looking for excuses, just a desire to know why the definition of what an alcoholic is, is broadening. I view an alcoholic to be socially or physically damaging. I am neither of those yet others would call me an alcoholic based on my consumption?