Would it be ethically justified to have a trial of aspirin to patients, administered only during episodes of p A broad array of randomized trials have demonstrated the benefits of low doses of aspirin for both the primary and secondary prevention of CVD. Most trials demonstrate a 15% to 40% reduction in cardiovascular events with chronic aspirin use. 
Unfortunately many of our patients don't consume based on that information. A few who don't relish it much have been innovative to the point of swallowing aspirin only during brief episodes of chest pain maybe once or twice a week. That has had generalist physicians (who weakly boast of belonging to a problem solving specialty)thinking. Is the aspirin effect related to its preventing thrombus formation during acute plaque fissuring in acute coronary or cerebral syndromes or does it have any effect on the chronic stable plaque? If the effect is only on the fissured plaque, which is a one time event does it justify consuming it daily? Would it be ethically justified to have a trial of aspirin to patients, administered only during chest pain?

Summarized question: What are the ethical considerations involved in human trials for sporadic aspirin use to prevent CVD complications?