Dying for a Better Economy?

Apparently with the strengthening and rise in the US economy comes a rise in heart attack related deaths. This is explained by Professor Ruhm at the University of North Carolina by the statement "During that period of time chances are you are working so much you are not exercising, haven't had a chance to join a gym, you're eating out a lot, maybe smoking more,". I find this sort or presumption to be quite inaccurate. While it may be true that the amount of heart attack related deaths does increase during an economic upturn, I am quite shocked that an economics professor would provide a quote to propel the idea that the stronger economy caused the increase in heart attacks. Has this article missed on the key idea that "correlation is not causation"? Does Professor Ruhm need to re-evaluate his assumptions made in his statement? If a stronger economy is associated with more heart attack related deaths, is this opportunity cost worth it for the rest of the nation?