Governments have long tried and continue to attempt to control alcohol addiction from a macro level by banning alcohol. The bans are most effective in controlled economies where the punishment for breaking the law is harsh. Alcohol is difficult to acquire in Muslim nations such as Iran or Saudi Arabia, but even in these nations there have been reports of a black market for alcohol.

When the United States launched its own Noble Experiment, banning alcohol with the 18th Amendment, the nation did not have the nearly unlimited police powers enjoyed by enforcement agencies in nondemocratic states. When Prohibition was launched in the United States the police still had to follow procedures, while enforcing a law that was unpopular and ignored by a large percentage of the population.

The story of Prohibition has been often told in popular culture. Al Capone and the Untouchables make for great drama, but for all that was made about organized crime there were some benefits to Prohibition. Studies show that banning alcohol had a positive effect on public health. There were declines in alcohol consumption, alcohol related accidental deaths, cirrhosis of the liver and crime related to alcohol consumption. Divorce rates also went down. While the immediate impact had positive effects, by 1930 the rates were creeping back up toward pre-Prohibition levels.

As the positives flagged, the negatives grew. The court system struggled to deal with the amount of alcohol related cases it received. The minor infractions caused a dilemma of how to handle people just looking for a drink. Organized gangs became powerful forces that were past the ability of local law enforcement to keep in check.

And after the levels of consumption rose to pre-ban levels a serious health risk was revealed. Without the government mandating and monitoring health and safety standards, the bath tub whiskey people consumed caused damaging effects to drinkers. The anti-Prohibition crowd soon swelled. Alcohol addiction was to remain a problem in the United States, but fighting it with an all out ban proved to be more costly that the drain of combating the disease in other ways.