Yes you are quite right Chris.
It is quite unrealistic to assume that all the drivers who wish to obey the law will adopt a "nil alcohol" approach (which is the only one sure to be a success). The problem with all the "guideline amounts" is that, as you point out, they are very rough and ready and will vary even for a single individual at different times. This can lead to drivers having a false sense of security and they may drive when they are above the limit. In connection with some of the work that I do I see a number of drivers convicted of drink-driving. It is not at all unusual to hear them explain what they had drunk (a statement that would be of no benefit to them to falsify) and that they were flabbergasted to find themselves failing the test.
Personally for various reasons a criminal conviction would have a profound effect on me and I probably take greater steps than most people to avoid one. For this reason (and I that do not want to endanger others or myself) I adopt a "no alcohol" approach to driving. If I drink I don't drive and vice versa. There is, of course, the "morning after" problem and this is an issue for me a few times each year (as it will be next Tuesday morning). I do make the calculation you mention but recently have taken to using the breath test kits which are now mandatory to carry when driving in France. They're quite cheap and said to be reasonably reliable.
As you mention, there are limits for various professions (railways and aircrew spring to mind) which are considerably lower than the UK driving limit. People in those jobs manage perfectly well. Despite being an avid real ale drinker and enjoying most other drinks, I manage perfectly well. (In fact I now prefer no booze at all rather than do what I used to some years ago - have one or two, leave wishing I could have more, and drive home constantly fretting that I may get pulled over).
It can be done. It's just a matter of how you approach the problem.