The government should consider making alcohol more expensive and reassess its 24-hour drinking laws to curb serious health problems related to excessive drinking, according to a group of experts.

In a review of public health policy, the Nuffield Council on Bioethics concluded that, left to themselves, people do not choose to live healthy lives, and the state must intervene to control behaviour. Lord Krebs, principal of Jesus College, Oxford, who chaired the council's review, said the government had a duty to help people make healthy choices. "We think it's too simplistic to say that it's all down to individual choice, because individuals often suffer ill health or adopt unhealthy behaviours for reasons beyond their control."

The council gathered doctors, philosophers, economists, lawyers and scientists to look at how far the state should intervene. "We know from medical evidence that many of the big killers in society - cancer, heart disease and stroke - are at least partially preventable by altering people's behaviours," said Krebs. "Our report asks whose job it is to ensure we all lead a healthy life."

The group considered obesity, infectious diseases, and smoking - but singled out alcohol as of most concern. Roger Brownsword, a law professor and member of the group, said: "Alcohol is, on any harm index, a very harmful product. It's estimated that £20bn a year is the cost of alcohol to the country, of which a third is accounted for by crime and public disorder."

Deaths due to alcohol consumption rose from 4,000 in 1991 to 8,000 in 2005. The government's approach to reducing harm has included clearer labelling of drinks and information campaigns. But Brownsword said this strategy was not proven to work and went against advice by the World Health Organisation in 2000.

"In the WHO report, it was suggested the kind of measures required were to increase tax on alcohol, closer control over opening hours, and attend to the density of outlets. The council recommends the government needs to think hard about these more stringent interventions. The policy adopted a couple of years ago on extended opening needs to be revisited."

Krebs said most public health policies over the past 150 years meant government intervening in peoples' lives, with some interventions very much resisted at the time, though he acknowledged the current questions were more difficult "because they're seen as lifestyle issues".