Preventative medicine is odd like that though. Almost nobody would argue against the State paying to treat sexually transmitted diseases, or life threatening obesity, or smoking/bacon-induced cancer, or people who’ve fallen off cliffs whilst rock climbing.
Maybe we feel that’s OK because the “irresponsible” person is suffering.
But would you want the State to pay for free vapes, or diet pills, or personal fitness trainers, or rock climbing supervision?
I think the only way to process it is to ignore morality and look at pure costs/benefits to the State. If the State is going to have to pick up the resulting bill then it makes sense for effective prevention to be funded, if that preventing returns its investment.