If there's a limited amount of money to be spent, "most bang for your buck" is a moral imperative. We do it to some extent -- measures like the "QALY" ("quality

If there's a limited amount of money to be spent, "most bang for your buck" is a moral imperative. We do it to some extent -- measures like the "QALY" ("quality-adjusted life-year") attempt to quantify "bang", though I'm not sure how rigorously we apply them in determining whether to follow some course of treatment. (It's also fairly standard to give a QALY some fixed dollar value. Uncomfortable, perhaps, but again -- necessary from a moral perspective, at least if you're a utilitarian deciding what to spend on healthcare.)