The narcan epipen/chemo memes.

What are the logical fallacies in these?

Since these are questions and no argument is being made (or not even clearly implied - at least for the first one) I would not say that they are fallacious.

If Narcan is free to addicts because they have a disease, why isn't chemo free for cancer patients?

This could:

• be an honest question where one is looking for an answer
  imply that narcan should not be free
  imply that addiction is not a disease
  imply that chemo should be free

At this point, I would ask the poster of the meme what they meant. They might respond:

"Since people have to pay for drugs they need to survive (or not die) they should also have to pay for drugs they don't need or need because of their own poor self-control."

This is begging the question , where the assumption is that paying for drugs that one needs to survive is something that should be done. This "should" is clearly implied as it makes no sense otherwise, since the obvious alternative would be to claim that necessary drugs should be free, too.

To be more nit-picky, it is also begging the question that this is a result of their "own poor self-control." Arguing this, however, would get you into the messy area of freewill and biological influences.