Reperfusion treatment of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is one of the medical interventions with the largest potential for saving human lives, independently of age and gender. An attempt to reopen an acutely occluded coronary artery can be done within a wide array of possibilities, from the simple administration of aspirin to the combination of drugs and complex coronary artery interventions. Fibrinolytic drugs and aspirin represent the easiest way to attempt reperfusion and together offer an acceptable compromise between opportunity for treatment and efficacy. Other drugs and the use of invasive revascularization alternatives yield further advantages, and in some high-risk subgroups may be the most rational treatment approach. Beyond investigator's bias and dedication to either form of reperfusion treatment, interventions and/or drugs should be used as needed (and as possible) to increase the overall impact of reperfusion treatment in the community, taking advantage of the best potential of each approach. Most resources have been directed toward the improvement of reperfusion rates with the combination of fibrinolytic and antiplatelet drugs or with angioplasty. These efforts have certainly raised costs, but have not decisively improved clinical outcome nor have they broadened the impact of reperfusion treatment in the community. Indeed, the main shortcoming of reperfusion therapy is that the cohort of untreated patients is still larger than the cohort of treated patients. At a time when mortality of patients with STEMI reaching the hospital and receiving treatment has decreased significantly, the prehospital diagnosis and treatment of STEMI with the objective of enlarging the treated population and shortening the pretreatment delays is likely the best strategy to further reduce mortality. The need for a population approach to treatment of STEMI is even more obvious when considering the expanding patient load that continuously worsens its clinical risk profile, together with the increasing incidence of diabetes, obesity, hypertension, and smoking habits. The target for improving reperfusion treatment of STEMI in the future, and thereby saving more lives, seems now to involve a cultural change and fulfillment of an organizational mission more than an incremental improvement in the current pharmacologic or interventional approach. These epidemiologic and social aspects of contemporary medicine deserve full attention at a time when researchers, clinicians, and health care providers tend to focus primarily on technological advances.