Most of the responses concerning my HRO medical repeated and reinforced the AA philosophy that alcohol misuse is an incurable life sentence, that the DVLC subscribe to that view, and that I should therefore deal with it on those terms. Fair enough, question answered. But whilst respecting that advice I happen to disagree with it's central premise. My view, based both on a lot of personal experience of AA, rehab, therapy, drink-driving, the courts, the probation service et al and supported by extensive peer-reviewed research, is that AA (and the rehab facilities that follow the AA template) don't work for everyone. Research also suggests a low rate of success that gets nowhere near tackling the underlying causes of alcohol misuse (indeed, there's some suggestion of the opposite effect occuring). Other approaches to dependency may lead to better outcomes, including responsible alcohol use (also known as 'a cure'). I thought it possible that some of this more scientific evidence could be informing DVLA decision-making.
Now I might be completely wrong, deluding myself, and obviously you disagree, which I respect. Your ad hominem attacks, however, do not reflect well on you.