Middle-aged men dying of cardiovascular problems would have to be attributed to a change in behavioural patterns of the preceding 20-25 years. Hence, can't be attributed to the post-1990 'reforms'. Are you therefore suggesting that the many reports of a severe decline in life expectancy should really be attributed to the fSU period?
I recall reading somewhere there was a drop in life expectancy post 1990, and a recovery in that statistic in more recent times. If that is correct, then the conjunction of those two cannot be accounted for by smoking and boozing unless there was a change in behaviour specific *only* to an age cohort in the 20-25 years preceding the 1990s.
kj