Home Mobile Archives Reader Blogs Register Login

Monday, May 16, 2005

Fat, Unhealthy People To Pay More In Insurance

Detroit Free Press - Smoke, eat, sit on the sofa. You'll probably keep your job, but you're likely to pay more for your health insurance.

With health insurance costs rising an average of 12% last year and 8% this year, employers across the country are struggling for some way to continue offering medical coverage without going broke.

That has companies taking a long, hard look at some of their most costly workers -- those who smoke, overeat and don't exercise.

Most businesses have rejected a Michigan company's controversial solution to simply fire all of its smokers early this year. But the idea of requiring employees to change their unhealthy habits -- or pay more for their insurance -- is gaining favor.

At some companies, such as Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance Co. and Navistar International Corp., smokers pay more for health and life insurance. At others, workers who participate in healthy-living programs get discounts.

At Jackson-based manufacturer Orbitform, for example, workers can have their health insurance premiums cut in half if they take a health-risk appraisal and agree to meet with a health coach twice a year on company time to work on monitoring and improving their health.

"They can chose not to take" the appraisal, "but then they pay 100% of their health care benefit," Orbitform President Mike Shirkey said. "There's no one telling you you have to do this. ... We have 100% participation."


I don't have much of a problem with this.

Health insurance is, basically, like a big game made up of lots of little wagers. On every insured person an insurance company is basically making a bet that you will need less money for health care than what you pay into the system. Which, on the face of it, is a pretty good system in the beginning. Everybody, for the most part, paid the same amount into the system. The dues paid by the majority of mostly healthy people offset the money paid out for those who fell ill or got hurt leaving enough money left over to pay expenses for the insurance company and maintain a decent profit margin.

Now, however, the cost of medical care has skyrocketed far above what most people could pay out of pocket. Medical insurance has moved from being a nice fringe benefit to being a necessity for anyone with common sense. The side effect of this is that insurance companies can no longer afford to treat most people the same. In order to keep the system solvent these companies have to start charging those who are more at-risk for health problems more for their coverage.

Granted, the fact that all those Whopper value meals are going to cost you more in insurance down the line is not a fun reality to face, but from a business perspective there just aren't a lot of other options. And really, this could be a good thing for America. Politicians are always complaining about how Americans are too fat and lead unhealthy lifestyles. They even propose laws taxing unhealthy food and other products for the sake of steering people clear of those things, though most would probably say that those laws are aimed more at bringing in tax revenues than having any meaningful impact on the health of citizens.

Maybe this would be an effective way to wake a lot of Americans up to the way they're living their lives.

Radley Balko has more.

Comments

Avatar for Raina

I don’t have a problem with this, but I could see how it could open the door to abuse.  For instance, I have rheumatoid arthritis, which sometimes inhibits my ability to exercise - could this nevertheless be seen as voluntary behavior?

Also, I’m curious as to what they do about offering insurance to family members.  Do they have to do health appraisals too? 

Still, I like the idea of making people more responsible for their costs based on voluntary behavior.  After all, your car insurance goes up if you get a lot of speeding tickets.

Raina on May 16, 2005 at 07:06 am
Avatar for LoadTheMule

I have no issue with this (coming from a guy who’s had 3 heart attacks and bypass surgery).  The company I work for has a perfect right to do this, extant Raina’s caveat.

In the abstract it’s not any different than any other workplace requirement.  In fact, if the state of your health is used to determine how much (if any) of your benefits you must pay for yourself, perhaps your state of health will be less of an issue in the actual hiring process.

Regards…

LoadTheMule on May 16, 2005 at 09:06 am
Avatar for Carl B.

richard is right, although he might disagree with my answer. Greed, and a profit formula that doesn’t allow the people in the big chairs to take a pay cut. Sales may slip, but profit at the top is a must...that’s business school for ya. Space that same formula out over the multitude of companies involved in the process, and you have gross inflation that sticks it to the little guy. People who want to make money through insurance companies or credit card companies are get rich quick mofo’s.

Carl B. on May 16, 2005 at 10:05 am
Avatar for richard

The only issue I see here as that there seems to be no concern as to why healthcare is going through the roof.

richard on May 16, 2005 at 10:05 am
Avatar for WOOF

Insurance companies would prefer to only insure healthy people. HMO’s would prefer to find a way not to treat people.
Heathcare is FUBAR.

WOOF on May 16, 2005 at 10:06 am
Avatar for likwidshoe

richard said, The only issue I see here as that there seems to be no concern as to why healthcare is going through the roof.

On the contrary. This measure is a small attempt at helping the costs.

Carl B. said, Greed, and a profit formula that doesn’t allow the people in the big chairs to take a pay cut.

There is a lot more to our health care woes than just greed and profit.  You forgot to add government meddling, the fact that we effectively subsidize other country’s drugs, the lack of competition, the fact that we are over insured, more government meddling, high medical malpractice costs, and the list goes on.

likwidshoe on May 16, 2005 at 11:05 am
Avatar for Michael

I wouldn’t say greed is all of it. 

It takes money to put into research for new drugs to help us live to 100.  Think of new technologies created and used.  Look how far we’ve advanced over the last 10-15 years.

Michael on May 16, 2005 at 11:06 am
Avatar for richard

Scary as it might seem I agree with Carl. There is another factor that comes into play here. The pharmacuetical companies like it when we are sick and fat especially here where drug cost are double even triple.

Oh and let us not forget our friendly Lawyer.

One more thing(sorry)what about malpractice insurance are the insurance not kind of getting both ends of the money train.

richard on May 16, 2005 at 11:06 am
Avatar for SirRobert

Greed is a double edged sword.  Yes, it ‘rewards’ HMO CEOs with obscenely high salarys.  Greed on the part of patients and lawyers lead to obscenely high medical related lawsuits. 

Greed is also the greatest incentive for innovation in this industry.  If you can figure out a solution to a medical condition, you can start your own company, sell your ideas, or be a respected leader in your discipline.  Greed is what drives people to excel.  Would you work harder and longer at your current job if nobody would notice or pay for your extra effort? Maybe, probably not much.

I think the salary issue could be addressed by having executive compensation accounted as a non-business expense.  (a topic for another day)

Any plan which puts patient responsibility into the equation is good.  The medical savings plan takes this one step further, in that if you are healthy, you spend less (and keep more) on medical expenses, but the patient also searches out the best deals on treatments.  How much was your last visit?  Who knows, insurance covered it.  There is no price competition in the industry, that is why prices are rising.

SirRobert on May 16, 2005 at 02:06 pm
Avatar for Aaron

Greed, and a profit formula that doesn’t allow the people in the big chairs to take a pay cut. Sales may slip, but profit at the top is a must…

Any statistical evidence that shows drug companies raking in HUGE profits lately?  Doubt it…

And even if the top CEOs each made $500 million a year, every employed person would hardly notice the rise of insurance for obvious reasons… the problem is obiously something far bigger than that.

Your answer, Carl, is simply put a copout

Aaron on May 16, 2005 at 04:06 pm
Avatar for Kevin

The biggest problem with the health care industry is that people are far too fat and out of shape now a days.  The system was not set up to take care of so many preventable diseases.  There is a real correlation between the health and weight of Americans and the rise in our health care costs.  As we have gotten fatter and less active the cost has risen as well.  Americans need to take responsibility for their own health.  We need to think of your bodies like we do our cars.  If you only had to pay a 20 dollar co-pay to fix your car every time it broke down you would never get it serviced, because the servicing of your car would cost more than your co-pay to get it fixed.  But this is how we deal with our bodies.  We don’t service it and wait until it breaks down.  Then the only consequence is a 20 dollar co-pay.  I bet if we had to pay the whole bill to fix our health people would start to live healthier.

Kevin on August 8, 2005 at 07:08 am
Avatar for Sphagnum

If you only had to pay a 20 dollar co-pay to fix your car every time it broke down you would never get it serviced, because the servicing of your car would cost more than your co-pay to get it fixed. But this is how we deal with our bodies.

I really like this analogy, I’m going to use it in the future smile

Sphagnum on August 8, 2005 at 11:08 am
Avatar for California Health Insurance

Unhealthy people do have to pay more for health insurance which can be a factor to many. Although health insurance is a major aspect to many.

California Health Insurance on November 8, 2005 at 07:12 pm
Avatar for Blue Cross of California

I think it sure is unfair that unhealthy people would be required to pay more for health coverage.

Blue Cross of California on November 21, 2005 at 11:12 pm
Avatar for likwidshoe

I think it sure is unfair that unhealthy people would be required to pay more for health coverage.

Why? Or did you just comment to get your advertising in?

likwidshoe on November 22, 2005 at 12:11 am
Avatar for Blue Cross of California

I think it is unfair because we live in a nation with freedom. As a free nation we shall be treated equally and not by appearance.

Blue Cross of California on November 22, 2005 at 11:12 am
Avatar for MikeAdamson

I don’t have much of a problem with this.

Me neither.

MikeAdamson on November 22, 2005 at 02:11 pm
Avatar for Sphagnum

Do you also think it is unfair that bad drivers get charged more for car insurance?  What about people with more expensive homes being charged more for homeowners insurance?

It’s not about fairness, you are asking a company in a free contry to insure people of every degree of RISK for the same amount of money.  What will eventually happen is that more healthy people will simply pay more to make up for the less healthy people’s share of insurance costs…

So in essense you advocate screwing the healthy…

Sphagnum on November 22, 2005 at 02:12 pm
Avatar for likwidshoe

Blue Cross of California said, I think it is unfair because we live in a nation with freedom.

Freedom? I support freedom as well and support a company’s freedom to write up insurance policies the way that they see fit. Whether you agree or disagree with the insurance policy, it is your choice and freedom to decide whether or not to sign up with it. You also have the freedom to negotiate the terms of the contract. If either party believes that the terms of agreement are unacceptable, you have the freedom to walk away from it and try business elsewhere.

As a free nation we shall be treated equally and not by appearance.

Says who? And aren’t we talking about actions and not appearance? We’re not all equal in actions. Some people live unhealthy lives. They eat more than they should, eat unhealthy foods, never exercise, smoke, do drugs, take dangerous risks, etcetera. Other people live healthy lives. They eat healthy foods, don’t overeat, exercise, don’t smoke, don’t do drugs, limit dangerous risks, etcetera. You’re telling me that it is against “freedom” for a health insurance company to pay attention to the risk factors mentioned above? Explain that one.

Sphagnum said, So in essense you advocate screwing the healthy…

I’ll have you know: I only screw the healthy. Hahaha…

likwidshoe on November 22, 2005 at 11:12 pm
Rob
Rob
19492 comments
Send a private message

I only screw the healthy.

Me too.


When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

robport.gif border=0

Rob on November 24, 2005 at 08:12 am
Page 1 of 1        

Post a Comment


Before commenting, please recite:

Grant me the serenity to ignore the trolls,
the courage to debate with honest opponents,
and the wisdom to know the difference.

Name   
Email   
URL   
Human?
  
 

Upload Image    

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Note: Notifications will only be sent to confirmed email addresses.

    

By submitting your comment you agree to our terms of service.