The point about all these advisory messages is that they have to be notified to the population, once there is any evidence to support them. If they were not publicised, there would be an outcry when it was shown that people had developed cancer, or some other serious illness as a result of doing whatever it is that could be harmful.
It is up to each of us to decide whether we take any notice or not, but parents of young children and/or grandparents surely have a duty of care which makes it important for them to set an example to a new generation.
Today they are telling me I have to give up biscuits and baby food. What's left for me? I am getting more convinced that researchers reach a conclusion first and then decide on the data they need to justify the conclusion. They need to do that to make sure their grants and sponsorship keep coming. It's getting like the boy who kept calling "wolf", in the end nobody believed him.
"I am getting more convinced that researchers reach a conclusion first and then decide on the data they need to justify the conclusion."
I can see why you might think that, but research papers are subject to a peer review process, and that tends to reveal any attempt to misinterpret or manipulate the data before research papers are published.
One of the problems, as I see it anyway, is that Researchers are mostly Grant Funded and the size of their Grant is related to the success of the paper that they have published and the Press Coverage that that Paper receives.
Therefor, it is in their interest to give their Paper a catchy Title and, as with all the best books/novels, the first sentence/paragraph sells the product.