Has anyone seen this Alabama thing?
jules1984
Posts: 439 Member
So apparently in Alabama they are working to start charging state employees for being obese and not willing to change. The jist of the story is, if their BMI is over 35 they can get a free assessment and free help for a year. If their health doesn't improve in like a year's time they will have to pay a per-month charge for their health-care instead of getting it for free.
The complete article is here: http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Insurance/InsureYourHealth/AlabamaHitsObeseWorkersWithFee.aspx
I'd love to hear what my MFPers think of this...
The complete article is here: http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Insurance/InsureYourHealth/AlabamaHitsObeseWorkersWithFee.aspx
I'd love to hear what my MFPers think of this...
0
Replies
-
So apparently in Alabama they are working to start charging state employees for being obese and not willing to change. The jist of the story is, if their BMI is over 35 they can get a free assessment and free help for a year. If their health doesn't improve in like a year's time they will have to pay a per-month charge for their health-care instead of getting it for free.
The complete article is here: http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Insurance/InsureYourHealth/AlabamaHitsObeseWorkersWithFee.aspx
I'd love to hear what my MFPers think of this...0 -
ooh, I will have to read about this...sounds interesting.0
-
Yes, I read that article...in a way I think it's a good idea.0
-
Maybe its just my "get healthy" mentality, but it seems the people who are most against it complain that they are fine the way they are. This isn't about attractiveness and self worth (as very very important as they truly are) its about the fact that they're looking at serious health problems. They are talking about BMI's over 35 only, which has the potential to be dangerous considering obesity starts at 30.0.0
-
On the surface it sounds good, but what about other health issues such as excessive drinking and/or smoking? Shouldn't the same standards apply to these self inflicted health issues?0
-
On the surface it sounds good, but what about other health issues such as excessive drinking and/or smoking? Shouldn't the same standards apply to these self inflicted health issues?
They already charge them for smoking. :smokin:0 -
When I worked at the hospital and they changed our insurance that was what we had to do. The first year we had to work on our health and if we didnt change anything the next year it was going up. In a way I can understand. It gives people a reason to get healthy. OF course I was exempt at the time because I was pregnant and now I dont work there. Before I got pregnant though I lost about 13 lbs when they told us of the new insurance but then a month later I was pregnant.
Connie0 -
Well, my BMI is still over 35 even after all the weight I've lost in the last year (40 pounds.) Even being as obese as I've been my entire life, I've never had any serious problems what-so-ever... or even minor problems. That being said, I think it is unfair to group everyone together. There may be others with my same BMI who suffer heart problems and such, but I don't so why charge me for it???
And I think it's wrong to single fat people out anyway. And that's exactly what it sounds like is being done. It seems to me that as the years go on, the government tends to get more and more say-so in all the details of our own personal, individual lives.
I'm disappointed in my home state of Alabama... but I'm sure all the states will soon follow suit in trying to do something similar.0 -
On the surface it sounds good, but what about other health issues such as excessive drinking and/or smoking? Shouldn't the same standards apply to these self inflicted health issues?
Our life insurance premiums are affected by our health, and smoking is a huge factor.
0 -
This is a tricky situation... I personally think that everyone is entitled to great health care, regardless (I posted earlier, but that was regarding life insurance - not health insurance - my error).
:blushing:
A note on the use of BMI - rating a BMI of less than 25 as "healthy" and a BMI of over 30 as "obsese" are not just arbitrary numbers. Those are numbers that correlate to the big increase or decrease, statistically, as related to the amount of body mass. For example, there is a slight increase in weight related health problems starting at a BMI of 25, and another significant increase starting at a BMI of 30 (or 35 as this insurance company must have found by their data).
An intersting point made by Dr. Mehmet Oz regarding an excess of body fat...
It's not only the strain on joints, tissues, ligaments, and organs caused by excess body fat that puts our health at risk. The real problem in the body occcurs because this excess fat becomes hormone producing, and starts to alter the body's chemistry, contributing to and creating diseases such as diabetes, high cholesterol, heart disease, high blood pressure, etc. It is not just the weight itself, it is that the weight becomes a living "entity" inside your body, and starts to alter the body in very negative ways.
This was SO eye opening - I had never thought of it that way before.
:flowerforyou:0 -
thats crazy
:noway:0 -
I guess the theory is the same as auto insurance. We do not all pay the same thing for auto insurance. If you are an 19 yr old boy you are paying 3x that of a 45 yr old woman.
It has to do with exposure. The 19 yr old is statistically more apt to have an accident than the woman.
In theory that is ok....but as I have said before I have 2 friends who are way under weight-she is 5'4" and if she weighs 100 lbs i would be surprised. We would joke that she and her spouse could eat anything and not gain weight.
he died last year of heart failure and she had a heart attack the year before.
It has to do with diet and exercise. So would it be fair to charge me more money than her?
It is an interesting subject0 -
Well, my BMI is still over 35 even after all the weight I've lost in the last year (40 pounds.) Even being as obese as I've been my entire life, I've never had any serious problems what-so-ever... or even minor problems. That being said, I think it is unfair to group everyone together. There may be others with my same BMI who suffer heart problems and such, but I don't so why charge me for it???
And I think it's wrong to single fat people out anyway. And that's exactly what it sounds like is being done. It seems to me that as the years go on, the government tends to get more and more say-so in all the details of our own personal, individual lives.
I'm disappointed in my home state of Alabama... but I'm sure all the states will soon follow suit in trying to do something similar.
Well the thing is, it isn't about problems you've had or currently have but the ones that will develop later in life, such as cardiovascular issues, arthritis and even cancer which have all been linked statistically to obesity. Whether you develop those problems or not, you're in a high-risk category and insurance companies are good at using statistics to justify raising rates (like being a guy and getting charged more for car insurance, or living in Louisiana and getting charged exorbitant rates for home and flood insurance, or even being denied coverage at all). It sucks, for sure, but I really think it's probably more to do with the way insurance works than with the government really and truly being concerned with your health. They just don't want to pay more. But, that's just me.0 -
Like others before have mentioned, I am not a fan.
Why should being obese create a higher charge for health care than other conditions/ailments?
I had high blood pressure brought on by pregnancy.
I have had asthma (and been hospitalized twice) since childhood.
I have psorasis.
Others may have juvenile diabetes, be chronic smokers or drinkers, eat horrible diets clogging their arteries (but not be obese... like many younger men!), or have a variety of other ailments. I have friends who have high risk pregnancies but still want more children and continue to have them (not criticizing their choice, only pointing out the expense therein).
Why should the obese have to pay extra???
Admittedly, obesity leads to other diseases, ailments, and conditions but it should not be singled out.
While discrimination laws cover age, sex, race, ethnicity, gender, sexual preference, they STILL have not thought to cover a person's size within those constraints. The obese are heavily discriminated against and ridiculed in an unfair manner, in my opinion.
PS--- My BMI is just recently moved out of the obese category into the 'just fat' category, although I never thought I looked 'obese'.0 -
Personally I agree with the idea. However, some could argue, "well it's a problem with my genes." This is something that they claim to not be able to control (an idea I do not agree with). Anyway, according to a bill signed last year, insurance companies/ ect. cannot discriminate against people will poor genes as to avoid higher insurance rates for people with cancer genes ect. as well as discrimination for jobs. I believe it was called the genetic non-discriminitory act or something along those lines.0
-
The only reason why I agree with the charge is because insurance companies and businesses do not want to be basically ruined by people who have health risks. If you have a health risk, such as being overweight, insurance companies are in danger of loosing money, and companies in risk of loosing time, money, and employees.0
-
Also, they make it sound like a huge charge - 25 a month. If you're not employed by the state you probably pay MUCH more than this per month anyway. I pay 67 I believe for moderate coverage. Maybe they should just start making everyone pay like 15 and get it over with - that's like eating fast food twice.0
-
Well, my BMI is still over 35 even after all the weight I've lost in the last year (40 pounds.) Even being as obese as I've been my entire life, I've never had any serious problems what-so-ever... or even minor problems. That being said, I think it is unfair to group everyone together. There may be others with my same BMI who suffer heart problems and such, but I don't so why charge me for it???
And I think it's wrong to single fat people out anyway. And that's exactly what it sounds like is being done. It seems to me that as the years go on, the government tends to get more and more say-so in all the details of our own personal, individual lives.
I'm disappointed in my home state of Alabama... but I'm sure all the states will soon follow suit in trying to do something similar.
Well the thing is, it isn't about problems you've had or currently have but the ones that will develop later in life, such as cardiovascular issues, arthritis and even cancer which have all been linked statistically to obesity. Whether you develop those problems or not, you're in a high-risk category and insurance companies are good at using statistics to justify raising rates (like being a guy and getting charged more for car insurance, or living in Louisiana and getting charged exorbitant rates for home and flood insurance, or even being denied coverage at all). It sucks, for sure, but I really think it's probably more to do with the way insurance works than with the government really and truly being concerned with your health. They just don't want to pay more. But, that's just me.
Yea, I thought about this approach to the issue, as well, but here's my thing...
I'm overweight, so I'm prone to all kinds of possible future problems. Diabetes, cancer, back problems, heart problems, etc....
However, I'm also prone to some of these simply because my mother and grandmother and great grandmother (and let's not forget all the fathers, uncles and aunts in the scenario) have experienced some of these problems.
MANY people are at a high risk of cancer and diabetes despite their weights/BMIs/lifestyles simply because it runs in their family.
So, I don't think it would be very fair to charge a perfectly healthy woman more simply because their grandmother had breast cancer. She is at a much higher risk of developing breast cancer than someone whose family it doesn't run in, but she should not have to pay the price for that.
Just my thoughts, I guess.0 -
agreed, wasn't there an issue with airplanes doing this a while back?And I think it's wrong to single fat people out anyway. And that's exactly what it sounds like is being done.0 -
I live in Alabama and I read something about that, but I have not actually talked to anyone who is dealing with this issue.
As with everything there are pros and cons. Will this help the fat guy who eats big macs everyday want to make a change? Maybe so, maybe not.
People have to want to change. Putting a higher tax on cigarettes didn't make people quit. I don't think that making them pay more for their insurance is going to all of a sudden make them want to quit eating unhealthy things.
It will be interesting to see the results of this in a few months. My guess is that this plan is not going to have a high success level.0 -
My fear is that today obesity, tomorrow just carrying the gene for???? It's the old saying.....'you dump a frog in hot water he'll jump out, raise the temperature very slowly....you'll have frog soup.
Problem is we keep enjoying the perceived increased safety/lowered prices (yeah right...)/better care and then suddenly find out WE'RE the one with.......whatever the next 'degree of warmth' is, suddenly we want out of the pot!!
Ez0 -
Ezzie -calling fallacy on this one- if this than that.... one does not lead to the next but agree you have to be careful what you allow to happen however --
I agree with this type of insurance plan-- smoke, yes you do pay more, preexisting health problems you betcha pay more. So why not obesity?? If I have HIV -- can I get health care cheaply?? Nope. And obesity is treatable and they aren't refusing health care just giving premiums related to risk. Why should we all have to pay a blanket cost to absorb other people's higher risk? If I smoke and it costs more per year (it does!!) should you a non-smoker pay for my indulgence??Think of it that way.
Just my two cents which prob aren't worth that much.0 -
Yea, I thought about this approach to the issue, as well, but here's my thing...
I'm overweight, so I'm prone to all kinds of possible future problems. Diabetes, cancer, back problems, heart problems, etc....
However, I'm also prone to some of these simply because my mother and grandmother and great grandmother (and let's not forget all the fathers, uncles and aunts in the scenario) have experienced some of these problems.
MANY people are at a high risk of cancer and diabetes despite their weights/BMIs/lifestyles simply because it runs in their family.
So, I don't think it would be very fair to charge a perfectly healthy woman more simply because their grandmother had breast cancer. She is at a much higher risk of developing breast cancer than someone whose family it doesn't run in, but she should not have to pay the price for that.
Just my thoughts, I guess.
Okay one is controllable and the other is not -- that is the premise. I know others will argue that there is a gene for carrying extra weight - but that does not mean you can't do preventative or corrective actions to change your circumstance.
BTW - read that everyone has cancer in their body just whether or not it gets triggered -- so that is another theory to think about.0 -
Roll Tide!!!
As far as BMI goes, it's far from an accurate representation of health. It gives a decent window, but for many people, it's not even close.
for example, I stand 6'0" tall and weigh 220. My BMI is something like 30.1, what is considered Obese. I wear 33/34 inch pants, and I have about a 40% Body Muscle percentage. My chest is a 48, and my waist to hip ratio is .90 or so. Blood Pressure is 122/80, and my resting heart rate is 57 BPM. My doctor tells me that I am almost a perfect weight for my height (I'm within 10-15 pounds of where I *want* to be) yet, BMI tells me I am at Obese because I don't weigh 175 pounds (which I haven't weighed since the 7th Grade).
I'm sure 'Bama has some plan to take this into consideration, it would worry me if they did not. Still, BMI isn't entirely arbitrary, but for many people, it's not even close. I understand Alabama wanting to make it's citizens more healthy, (I think they may have been the heaviest state in the US, if not they were close) but I think they may be approaching it the wrong way. Punitive measures usually work to otivate short term, but a better plan might have been a reward program...why not give discounts or something like that. Reward instead of punish?0 -
Everyone on this topic has perfectly valid points. Obesity does lead to health risks, but it may or may not be entirely within our control (probably only partially controlled by us, at least) and it isn't fair to be singled out because of one's size.
That's why I'm in favor of universal healthcare, personally. Get rid of the stupid insurance companies who have millions of strategies for making money and not many for keeping us healthy in the first place, and just make sure everyone gets the healthcare they need BEFORE they develop serious health problems. That's how they do it in France, anyway - and they do live longer than us.
But that's just my opinion and sadly, I don't see this happening anytime soon. :ohwell:0 -
I have to say that with the increase in health care costs and the fact that they are relating more and more diseases, physcial problems and over all bad health with obesity that it is a great thing to do. I'm sure some civil rights activist will get his little heart rate up over this, but his clients should too!
I don't know about the rest of you, but we are all overweight because of choices we made, with rare exception to those with a true thryoid or medication problem. I am sick of hearing about people suing food companies to make their food healthier when the fatso doing the suing CHOSE to eat the product knowing full well it most likely was of no nutritional value, loaded with crap and a heart attack waiting to happen.
So, if you choose to eat unhealthy, processed foods, or giant portions at your local restaurant or have that one oreo a day over your calorie allowance and you continue to do so with disregard to your health or worse yet, teaching your children to do the same then your payment is to take on a larger burden for health care costs, since your big butt is the reason why health care costs are increasing.
Ya, I know, your healthy but big, well big catches up to everyone. Whether is asthma brought on by your fat belly and chest being so crushing to your lungs that you can't breathe properly, or joint problems because your over sized body is putting too much pressure on your feet, knees, hips and lower back or you are giving yourself liver disease from a fatty liver because of the need to eat fatty foods or whatever, it all catches up!
Just my opinion
Maybe a strong one, but true. I have plenty of family members that have been over weight a significant portion of their lives and they have all had many health problems, especially after 40. These range from asthma to breast cancer to colin and bladder cancer. And yes, I am overweight, but the difference is we are on this site for support and to lose that weight and when we do and we keep it off for a length of time then our health insurance costs will decrease too, just like smokers! 0 -
Quite frankly I disagree with it on principle. The more you try to force something on people the more they pull away from it. Great the end goal is to help people get healthier but the way they are going about it is wrong. If they dictate how much you can weigh what will they dictate next and charge you for. I am first to agree that health is a huge factor however if we continue to follow the insurances lead on only seeing the bottom line of their pocket book none of us will be covered.
How about taking a serious look at how cafeteria lunches are seriously lacking in nutrition and creating an obesity issue in kids. Not to say parents don't have a role in that also but seriously. I think their are better ways to help people than this.0 -
How about taking a serious look at how cafeteria lunches are seriously lacking in nutrition and creating an obesity issue in kids. Not to say parents don't have a role in that also but seriously. I think their are better ways to help people than this.
Cafeterias have been serving the same crap up for generations and I know for my generation that the vast majority of children were not obese.
As a self insured person I can tell you I totally agree with this. Did you know that your insurance rates go up based on the number of people in your zip code that went to the hospital or sought medical care of any kind. If there is a large majority of people in your zip code with obesity related problems you have to spend more money on your health care to help keep it affordable for those that are not taking care of themselves. Did you know that if you happen to live near a hospital or urgent care those cases are also linked to your zip code?
When I purchased health insurance I had to pay extra and have a rider put on my plan for me because for a woman my height and age I was in too high of a BMI. I am the one that is overweight and I have to pay extra to stay that way. Once I get to a healthy BMI I have to go to a doctor and get weighed in, once I have maintained a healthy BMI for ONE YEAR my insurance rate will DECREASE! If I have to pay extra as an individual then why should an employee not be responsible for the increase in their personal insurance cost over that of normal healthy weight collegues? Employers should not have to pick up the tab for lifestyle choices made by their employees. Many already do not pick up the additional tab for smokers, why not overeaters?
Most employers now have reward systems in place for employees that maintain a healthy weight and don't cost the company an increase in costs. Many employers are now joining up with the health insurance companies to creat wellness plans, offering fee reduction in gym memberships, discounts on training and nutrition counseling. Unfortunately, unless you ask, you may not know about such offers. The point to that is they have discovered that people who maintain a healthy weight are more productive and take less sick time than those who choose not to take as good care of themselves as they should.
I once thought that this was like an unspoken discrimination issue but the truth is those of us that are overweight weren't born that way, most of us were either fed wrong as children or as adults we made poor choices. Choices have consequences.0 -
Everyone on this topic has perfectly valid points. Obesity does lead to health risks, but it may or may not be entirely within our control (probably only partially controlled by us, at least) and it isn't fair to be singled out because of one's size.
That's why I'm in favor of universal healthcare, personally. Get rid of the stupid insurance companies who have millions of strategies for making money and not many for keeping us healthy in the first place, and just make sure everyone gets the healthcare they need BEFORE they develop serious health problems. That's how they do it in France, anyway - and they do live longer than us.
But that's just my opinion and sadly, I don't see this happening anytime soon. :ohwell:
I agree!!! Not to oversimplify the situation, but in Canada (I'm in Ontario) we all have health insurance - even emergency dental. And most employees have health coverage - if you work at Tim Horton's (like your Dunkin Donuts) making $8 an hour, you most likely have a drug plan.
When my baby has a fever - we go to the doctor - covered. Annual physical - covered. Well baby appointments - covered. I work in health care, and I often speak with American health care proffessionals who are fed BS about our system, saying that people are dying of cancer and are on long waiting lists. My aunt was diagnosed with uterine cancer yesterday (Sept 5) and will be having surgery next week. Our system is not perfect, but we do have health care for everyone.
:flowerforyou:0 -
It's a problem of economies of scale guys.
Universal health care is great in theory, but you would have to restructure our whole government to do so, france has 60 million ppl, canada has 33 million. the US has 300 million.
In relative terms, 16% of canada is below the poverty line, that means they have to account for 5.2 million people who don't pay into it at all.
France has a 2.6% poverty rate which means 1.5 million people
The US has 36 million people that wouldn't pay into it. (not including the illegals that would most likely get the free care as well)
The model for economies of scale dictates that things that work for smaller groups, don't necessarilly work for larger ones. Do I like insurance companies? No, not even a little, but I don't like having to pay for someone elses medical bills either. And anyone who thinks we wouldn't be paying higher taxes for universal health care is fooling themself. I read the proposals that Obama and Clinton put out, they all include tax increases, and neither of them adequately address (IMHO) the administration problems that would inevitably occur when trying to provide healthcare for 300 million LEGAL residents (not to mention the 30 plus million illegals in this country).
And if your argument were true, why does Japan have the highest life expectancy of any country? They don't have universal health care.
I'm sorry guys, the cause is noble, but it's a pipe dream as far as I'm concerned.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions