@ David Evans
I entirely agree with your sentiments that we should be able to figure out the best way to live our lives without some bureaucrat spelling it out in big letters. I think there is a place for public health warnings, particularly when the proverbial man on the Clapham omnibus would have thought that a particular practice was previously safe, but is no longer.
If the government spent more effort treating the causes of problems like heart/liver disease and obesity (such as fast food being dirt cheap and designed to addict rather than satisfy), rather than the symptoms (fat kids and adults), we may actually get somewhere. It's probably a little divisive, however the smoking ban may actually be an example of something done right.
On the specific point of the article, one comment I read, which is frequently omitted, is that the recommended number of units is dependent on several variables and has to cater for the worst case scenario. The analogy given was of engineers designing a bridge to cope with the heaviest possible traffic, even though loading would be far less than this for the vast majority of the time. In the same way, the recommended number of units is based around a small, light, pre-menopausal female, who hasn't eaten before drinking and who metabolises alcohol slowly.