People need to come to a general consensus that alcohol is bad and it needs to go on its own. And you need to come up with alternative supporting measures. For example people use alcohol to work around social pressures, so we would need to find a way to diminish those.
This is not something you let extremists enforce.
I am aware that I'm asking for something close to impossible in the current climate.
I think people would do it.
Take the Covid vaccine: it is clearly shown to reduce the risks compared to getting Covid without it, and still there is no consensus about getting vaccinated, and there never will be. Getting to 100% vaccination rate will be a social trauma.
Another example, climate change: the science is clear and easy to understand. The root cause is known for more than hundred of years, and the effect has been clearly measured since the 1960s. The scale of the issue has been made clearer and clearer these last decades. And yet, even beyond people holding interest in the current status quo, there are still people resisting this consensus, attributing any attempt to make society change there a polarizing and partisan issue.
So no, people would not do it.
There is general consensus on many things (for example murder is banned across the world). There is rarely consensus on the "hot topics" of the day.
General consensus in my eyes doesn't mean that you have absolutely everyone agree, just a super high majority that gives you legitimacy. For example any vote above a super majority (67%, but for big stuff like this I'd say 80%+ )in a referendum could work.
There will always be extremists and for things to move you can't count on 100%.
For example even today, you couldn't pass a law for seat belt usage with 100% support. Even though any sane person in the last 20+ years would say that's ridiculous.
People have always wanted to: a) live forever, b) live forever in good health, c) do whatever they please throughout their hopefully healthy and immortal existence.
a), b) will require advanced medicine and healthier lifestyles while c) kind of requires that we get off the planet if we want close to infinite resources.
We have a million songs and movies and books and we've had tons of people dedicating their existence to the things I've listed above. We've had plenty of people killing and starting wars for them (or at least a hope at getting them).
If anything, I'm underestimating how much they want those things.