for more than hatch of the mortality decline, due to coronary disease between 1980 and 2000, and, voshs, they den have the gouuts that anything w less cost effective, but less cost effective and probably there wasn't anything that wasn't effective in a sense, and the word "cost" is probably an issue here, were ut you can see that according to their characterization, the more aggressive treatments, stents, cabbages, cardiac rehab, are much more expensive than aspirin, for example. that they account for maybe 19% of the mortality decline. you want to be a little careful about this kind of a display, because you have to? yourself something that they didn't ask themselves in the paper which is, what was the condition of the patient? somebody who really needed a cabbage, you could shove an awful lot of aspirin in their mouth on their way to the morgue. so it's not at all clear. this is in fact a kind of residual study. it's not very reliable either, but it does say something about our use of services, and it does imply something about the economic incentives associated with the complicated t