State to hit obese workers with 'fat fee'

[martinss01]

Alabama hits obese workers with fee - MSN Money

The state of Alabama has given its 37,527 employees until 2010 to start getting fit -- or they'll pay $25 a month for insurance that otherwise is free.

and so it begins. i said in the smoking thread that legislating diet would be the next step. looks like we're already there. it won't be long before the company you work for can tell you where you are allowed to go to lunch and what you are allowed to order. for those of you happy about the new no smoking laws... hope your happy.

 

[MolGenBuckeye]

Alabama hits obese workers with fee - MSN Money



and so it begins. i said in the smoking thread that legislating diet would be the next step. looks like we're already there. it won't be long before the company you work for can tell you where you are allowed to go to lunch and what you are allowed to order. for those of you happy about the new no smoking laws... hope your happy.

I am, thanks!

They're not legislating diet, they're legislating covering certain conditions. You can still eat all you want as long as you're not obese. My question would be whether they single out other "high risk" conditions. If so, I don't really have a problem with this.

It would be nice if they gave an option to opt out, with the understanding that no conditions caused by weight would be covered, but it's probably too tricky to determine causality on most cases. Another possibility would be to allow medical exemptions for people with true genetic disorders causing obesity, but that could certainly get abused.

Would you have a problem with them charging extra for other conditions? Is obesity different (morally/medically/some other way)?

 

[Dryden]

I am, thanks!

They're not legislating diet, they're legislating covering certain conditions.

Exactly. And since everybody has some condition of some sort, it's only a matter of time before 'they' get to one of the ones you've got.

 

[scooter1369]

The slippery slope we all warned about has begun...

 

[OCBuckWife]

The slippery slope we all warned about has begun...

It's slippery because of the lard.

 

[MililaniBuckeye]

Alabama hits obese workers with fee - MSN Money



and so it begins. i said in the smoking thread that legislating diet would be the next step. looks like we're already there. it won't be long before the company you work for can tell you where you are allowed to go to lunch and what you are allowed to order. for those of you happy about the new no smoking laws... hope your happy.

The Science Channel had a show about health care in 2057, and in it they showed that health insurance "police" had digital access via the web of what was in your refrigerator and other shit, and they'd determine based on that whether they'd pay for your treatment....scary shit.

 

[martinss01]

I am, thanks!

They're not legislating diet, they're legislating covering certain conditions. You can still eat all you want as long as you're not obese. My question would be whether they single out other "high risk" conditions. If so, I don't really have a problem with this.

you can eat what you want today, sure. but then 2 years ago you could smoke wherever you wanted as well. pandora's box has been opened. insurance companies are going to jump all over it. an extra 25 bucks per month per customer for being overweight? they don't have to do anything. no increased benefits, no larger network. just add an extra fee onto your bill.

how long will it be before insurance companies can start telling you what you can eat and where you can go to get it. while its not "law" persay, if you don't do what we tell you to we drop your insurance.

Would you have a problem with them charging extra for other conditions? Is obesity different (morally/medically/some other way)?

speaking of, your family has a history of heart disease. thats an extra 50 a month. oh and cancer... thats an extra 75. you don't have either? doesn't matter, your genes are predisposed to those conditions so you gotta pay extra. a history of alcoholism in your family? mandatory aa and your not permitted to drink at all.

The Science Channel had a show about health care in 2057, and in it they showed that health insurance "police" had digital access via the web of what was in your refrigerator and other [censored], and they'd determine based on that whether they'd pay for your treatment....scary [censored].

pffftt! its even easier than that. just partner up with cc companies and restaurants/stories and monitor your purchasing. [censored], other than paper currency they have the ability to do that today.

oh, you broke your ankle playing bball and need medical care? well, we show you bought 1 box of 36 count beef patties last month. we only permit 2 beef patties per week and you have exceeded that. as a result we have dropped your coverage and will not reinstate it until you have had 3 complete physicals over a 6 month period to ensure that this purchase has not negatively impacted your health. you'll have to pay for this accident out of pocket. oh, it was for a cookout? well, its company policy. sorry about that. you're going to have to pay yourself or not receive treatment. in the mean time you can sign up for cobra if you need insurance. just fill this out and your coverage should kick in roughly 1 month from now. if you would like, we can schedule you to come back in and rebreak your ankle after your insurance kicks in. thank you and have a nice day.

 

[Dryden]

speaking of, your family has a history of heart disease. thats an extra 50 a month. oh and cancer... thats an extra 75. you don't have either? doesn't matter, your genes are predisposed to those conditions so you gotta pay extra. a history of alcoholism in your family? mandatory aa and your not permitted to drink at all.

Don't forget to add $5 for each inch over six feet a person is, since studies have suggested taller people have shorter lifespans and carry a greater risk for developing skeletal and circulatory problems versus shorter people. While we're at it, we should probably go another $5 per inch the other way, for each inch under about 5'4", due to increased risk for internal organ failure due to your overcrowded stomach/chest cavity.

Make sure you schedule your mandatory six-month Wellness Visit with your doctor to maintain your coverage, and it would probably be for the best if you just hid your fondness for contact sports, extreme/fringe sports, and the fact that you own a boat and a motorcycle.

 

[Wingate1217]

I am, thanks!

They're not legislating diet, they're legislating covering certain conditions. You can still eat all you want as long as you're not obese. My question would be whether they single out other "high risk" conditions. If so, I don't really have a problem with this.

It would be nice if they gave an option to opt out, with the understanding that no conditions caused by weight would be covered, but it's probably too tricky to determine causality on most cases. Another possibility would be to allow medical exemptions for people with true genetic disorders causing obesity, but that could certainly get abused.

Would you have a problem with them charging extra for other conditions? Is obesity different (morally/medically/some other way)?

I wonder what the definition of "obese" that they will use. The current BMI index is a joke. By that definition a majority of football players would be either overweight or obese. Heck, Beanie Wells according to the BMI chart would have a BMI above 30 (which is considered obese).....

 

[Jake]

They shouldn't be getting free health insurance in the first place. Rest assured the taxpayers who bear the cost of that insurance aren't getting coverage for free.

Everyone should pay for part of their health insurance, because it makes them care how much it cost. When you care about the cost, you'll think about that before running to the doctors office every time you sneeze.

 

[MolGenBuckeye]

speaking of, your family has a history of heart disease. thats an extra 50 a month. oh and cancer... thats an extra 75. you don't have either? doesn't matter, your genes are predisposed to those conditions so you gotta pay extra. a history of alcoholism in your family? mandatory aa and your not permitted to drink at all.

Don't insurance companies already do this? Why is this case different? Unless you're going to force health insurance premiums to be equal for everyone regardless of condition, I guess I don't see the issue.

Do you have the same problem with other types of insurance? Should I pay the same premium as a guy parking a Lamborghini on a downtown street in Detroit every night? Why should I have to pay extra if I want a house in a flood plain?

To me, a premium for obesity is more similar to those cases than a lot of the other conditions that jack up health insurance rates. (Things like being born with two X chromosomes, or having the gall to age.) I'm not saying this rule is something I'd enact, but it doesn't seem any more unfair to me than the status quo.

Edit - Wingate, I totally agree. This will be a hard battle to win for the insurance companies, I think.

 

[martinss01]

I wonder what the definition of "obese" that they will use. The current BMI index is a joke. By that definition a majority of football players would be either overweight or obese. Heck, Beanie Wells according to the BMI chart would have a BMI above 30 (which is considered obese).....

from the article:

The board will apply the obesity charge to anyone with a body mass index of 35 or higher

so yes, they will be using the bmi.

Why should I have to pay extra if I want a house in a flood plain?

if you own a house in a flood plain you can't get insurance. period.

Don't insurance companies already do this? Why is this case different? Unless you're going to force health insurance premiums to be equal for everyone regardless of condition, I guess I don't see the issue.

Do you have the same problem with other types of insurance? Should I pay the same premium as a guy parking a Lamborghini on a downtown street in Detroit every night?

To me, a premium for obesity is more similar to those cases than a lot of the other conditions that jack up health insurance rates. (Things like being born with two X chromosomes, or having the gall to age.) I'm not saying this rule is something I'd enact, but it doesn't seem any more unfair to me than the status quo.

this is why:

"A recent study suggested that about half of overweight people and nearly a third of obese people have normal blood pressure and cholesterol levels, while about a quarter of people considered to be of normal weight suffer from the ills associated with obesity."

heres a thought for you. a man who stands 6'1 would be considered healthy if his weight were between 150 and 190lbs. 6'1 and 150lbs is healthy. think about that for a second. if said person weighed 191 lbs, they would be considered overweight. so say if this person weighed 210 lbs and was considered by their dr. b to be 100% healthy. this would mean nothing. they could potentially have to pay an extra premium for being "overweight".

the bmi is at best junk science. i don't know of any dr. b's that use it to determine the health of their patients.

Edit - Wingate, I totally agree. This will be a hard battle to win for the insurance companies, I think.

what battle do you forsee? your going to get your paycheck and you will see a payroll deduction for your insurance that is 25 bucks higher per month than it used to be, or more. you having to go through this insurance provider is company policy. not state, not federal. theres no law that says you have to have medical insurance. well, accept for the fact that the company you work for won't allow you to not have insurance. the closest your going to have to a "battle" is an e-mail from hr saying your insurance is going up and they fought their hardest to get you the best deal possible, suck it up and deal with it.

 

[MolGenBuckeye]

from the article:

so yes, they will be using the bmi.

I missed that part...my bad. Like I said, I agree that BMI by itself isn't a good measure. Rather than "junk science", I'd call it a measure that's generally correlated with health, but certainly not in all cases.

"A recent study suggested that about half of overweight people and nearly a third of obese people have normal blood pressure and cholesterol levels, while about a quarter of people considered to be of normal weight suffer from the ills associated with obesity."

So 25% of "normal" weight people have those symptoms, as compared with 67% of "obese" people? I think that makes a pretty good case for increasing premiums...that's a huge difference.

what battle do you forsee?...well, accept for the fact that the company you work for won't allow you to not have insurance.

That's exactly what I meant. If they're using BMI, someone is bound to challenge it on the grounds of its inaccuracy.

 

[martinss01]

I missed that part...my bad. Like I said, I agree that BMI by itself isn't a good measure. Rather than "junk science", I'd call it a measure that's generally correlated with health, but certainly not in all cases.

no big, i kind of trailed off towards the end of the article the first time i read it too :p. the problem i have is with the statement "generally correlated with health". you are absolutely increasing my insurance rates based on something that is "generally" correlated. that doesn't seem right to me.

i sort of paid attention while i was doing your taxes. its probably cool though.

So 25% of "normal" weight people have those symptoms, as compared with 67% of "obese" people? I think that makes a pretty good case for increasing premiums...that's a huge difference.

what happens when 50% of the obese people who are displaying symptoms drop their weight to the "normal" category and continue to display symptoms associated with obesity? we just arbitrarily raise insurance for everyone because they "might" start showing signs of obesity at any moment?

That's exactly what I meant. If they're using BMI, someone is bound to challenge it on the grounds of its inaccuracy.

so you think the company you work for is going to go to bat to keep your premiums down? the only part of your premiums your company cares about is the part they pay. not the part you do. just like in the example from alabama. if "you" are obese the fee will be placed 100% on "you". not split between you and your employer. they won't go to bat for you. they won't care.

 

[LoKyBuckeye]

It's slippery because of the lard.

and the fudge.