Overweight people being charged more for insurance
Options
Replies
-
I just want to add my 2 cents: offering services like nutritional advice/personal trainers and stuff like that would be very costly because almost everybody would want those, overweight or not. It is the same reason they don't ofer therapists for everyone (except patients with a history of proven mental health issues). It is very easy to exploit the system specially with services as popular as these so they only offer them for extreme cases.0
-
I'm not clear on why one needs someone to pay for losing weight when it doesn't really take money to change eating habits and increase exercise. You can find great free nutrition advice on MFP blog and other internet sources - you just have to spend the time reading. We all buy groceries, regardless - spend that same money on food that promotes weight loss and healthy goals. You can even save money by not eating fast food. Walking is free. I can't walk because I'm on oxygen so I bought an exercise bike on Amazon for under $200. I know you don't have to throw money at weight loss because I live on a very tight budget but have managed to lose 40 lbs by utilizing the free tools here on MFP, educating myself about nutrition, shopping and eating with intention and exercising the best I can.6
-
You DON'T have to go with who your employer offers. There are outside services too. Yes, there's no guarantee but if half of the people were successful at keeping it off then that would be a start. Also, if the parents are obese the kids are usually obese. At least, that is what I have noticed. Which means another generation of obese people. Obesity really has become an epidemic. Just a side note. I didn't have a weight issue until I got older.[/quote] People getting fat is due to HABITUAL BEHAVIOR. Fat kids because of fat parents is because the kids follow the parents behavior of eating. That can be CHANGED without need of medical or health insurance.@ninerbuff
Actually, I don't get much choice on who I get for insurance. My choice is what my employer provides. Which I pay premiums.
Drug addiction not only affects the person, but also others around them. They could unintentionally hurt someone, stealing, burglary and other forms of obtaining money illegally comes into play, etc. I don't disagree about doctors looking to mostly solve the symptom and not always address the real problem.Yes, insurance is a business and will always make money. There are plenty of sick people. But, if they did a little more to help people get healthy then they would make less money. Most times they just want to throw pills at you instead of addressing the issue. Hence, is why I say insurance companies/doctors are just in it to make money. Yes, there are times and ailments for which people do need the medication.
Sometimes even running unnecessary test.
I'm not saying all Dr's are like this, but from my personal experience I dealt with this.
I've seen a few good Dr's that actually listen to what you are saying.
They have programs for drug addiction but there's no guarantee that they won't do drugs again. So what's the difference?
The reality in life is that the medical business in America really don't want people to get healthy because it's a booming business.
In my business, I work with people daily to help them get fit and lose weight. My GOAL is to get rid of them because then I know I've hopefully given them the information they need to do it right the rest of their life and also helped them reach a goal. And people are consistently coming in so I pretty much have an endless chance at income. If people were fit and healthy and knew how to do it, I'd not have a PT job. I think the difference is though is that I enjoy and look forward to actually helping people succeed, whereas many in the health care business just want to get people in and get them out as fast a possible.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
0 -
The insurance provided by my employer actually does charge a higher premium if you don't meet certain requirements such as being under a certain BMI (or at least losing 5% of your weight each year if over that BMI), being a nonsmoker, and other requirements. It irritates me, but I also understand it since being obese does make a patient higher risk for many expensive medical conditions in the long run. You might not fall into the category of people that have any of the conditions that are normally associated with obesity, and that's great. I don't either. Unfortunately, there's data to support obesity being a risk factor for certain health conditions.
Our insurance will help pay some of the cost of dietician visits; however, the coverage is for a limited number of visits, and most people I've met have not had much (if any) success with visits with a dietician. I have noticed that people who pay a large sum of money for services such as Metabolic Research Center plans do seem to lose a large amount of weight (though they don't seem to keep it off long-term), and I have to wonder if it's because they've invested so much money. When insurance helps to cover the cost of services such as dietician visits, I'm inclined to say that we might not be quite as invested because we're not losing as much financially, and I suspect some of that may be taken into account on the part of the insurance industry.2 -
Since when did Business Trump being good people...
Yeah insurance companies should help people struggling to lose weight... I don't care what that means for profits and no one else should either...
How is this even debatable...
People just want to deny others something they have so they can feel somehow superior.2 -
Mr_Healthy_Habits wrote: »Since when did Business Trump being good people...
Yeah insurance companies should help people struggling to lose weight... I don't care what that means for profits and no one else should either...
How is this even debatable...
People just want to deny others something they have so they can feel somehow superior.
Since business became business, as far as I can tell.1 -
Mr_Healthy_Habits wrote: »Since when did Business Trump being good people...
Yeah insurance companies should help people struggling to lose weight... I don't care what that means for profits and no one else should either...
How is this even debatable...
People just want to deny others something they have so they can feel somehow superior.
It took me forever to realize the capitals weren't supposed to mean anything, so I was trying to parce that with Trump as a name. LOL.
Having resolved that interpretation issue, my answer:
For real people, hopefully it has not.
For insurance companies (which ARE businesses), what do they have to do with being "good people"? They aren't charities. They have to be concerned with profits. You don't like it? Maybe it's not a great idea to give insurance companies such a key role in health care policy.
However, this actually is arguably one of the win-win situations that can come about in that insurance companies WANT to reduce long-term costs (as it's in their own self interest if they are limited in what they can charge riskier insureds). Thus, if treatment actually reduced long-term costs (by reducing obesity), they would have a strong reason to encourage it (that's the argument for preventative care in general as a policy focus).
It probably doesn't work that well, that's the problem.
And I have no clue whether I have access to medical weight loss treatment through my insurance or not, it never crossed my mind to check, as I figured I could lose weight without it (and did), and did not think I would be better able to lose weight by relying on someone else's plan rather than figuring it out for myself. It's not exactly that complicated.1 -
Mr_Healthy_Habits wrote: »Since when did Business Trump being good people...
Yeah insurance companies should help people struggling to lose weight... I don't care what that means for profits and no one else should either...
How is this even debatable...
People just want to deny others something they have so they can feel somehow superior.
There are all manner of ways to feeling superior, such as dictating what business should and should not do.
Put your money where your mouth is and start up an insurance company with this business model.
Warning - You will likely have to debate your position to your investors, partners, clients, and shareholders.
3 -
@csardiver "Would you expect insurance to pay you to stop speeding? Or send a speed limit counselor? Desired behavior results in rewards. No one is going to preemptively reward you for good behavior - at least no successful business would."
They do have driver education. So your point?
People do drugs and they have rehab. Insurance pays for substance abuse. It was their choice to do drugs. (I'm not saying that they shouldn't be able to get help)
As, far as a business preemptively rewarding. That is not I was saying. Most people have illnesses from being overweight. Or, are close to having diabetes for example. It's a known fact by losing weight will prevent diabetes or allow somene to get off medications for diabetes and blood pressure.
Some do reward, there was another member stating their company gives out gift cards. Some insurance companies will pay or give you a discount on a gym membership. Some insurance companies will pay for a nutritionist.
What? "No successful business would"
People are overweight for various reasons.
You don't know what is causing the person to be overweight. So just leave your judgemental comments out. I think most people know that being overweight causes a variety of problems. Nobody is lying to themselves. My point was not
everyone is the same.
If you can't see the bigger picture that prevention is more cost effective then treating several illnesses then maybe you should educate yourself. I'm sure the insurance industry is aware of the cost effectiveness. But, just like most things, it doesn't work like it should. Insurance companies are in business to make money.
My point of the post is if someone reaches out for help it would be great for the insurance company to provide the service. I am paying for it. Maybe, people need help with what and how much to eat. Maybe, some people need
counseling for underlying causes.
There's no predetermination of what illness someone may get. Someone that is healthy can get Cancer. Some people smoke for all their lives but don't get lung cancer. Some people exercise regularly and have a heart attack. You can't single out a group of people and charge them more for insurance.
People are overweight for one singular reason - eating more than their caloric output allows.
Don't confuse judgment with facts.
Your point reinforces a victim mentality, which does not lead to success. Taking control over the actions you have control over reinforces a mentality of personal accountability and responsibility, which leads to success.
I work everyday in the bigger picture and what you are recommending reinforces a victim mentality which has led to our current obesity crisis. Time to implement a new change.5 -
since losing weight is free I'm really not sure how you expect them to do that.4
-
Mr_Healthy_Habits wrote: »Since when did Business Trump being good people...
Yeah insurance companies should help people struggling to lose weight... I don't care what that means for profits and no one else should either...
How is this even debatable...
People just want to deny others something they have so they can feel somehow superior.
Do you own any stock in a 401k? If you do, I'm pretty sure you want to see the companies in your portfolio making a profit. Insurance companies do too.2 -
All I have to say is that there are so many free resources online, and I know that our health insurance company pays $20 on each member of my families gym membership as long as we go 12 times a month. Which then for my husband and I is about $20 we each pay a month! Eat home more, do to the gym more, comes out pretty even. Our insurance company also has links in their website for healthy living resources. People need to make the change for themselves and they'll see the rewards.
People just need to take the reigns of their health, people can only tell you what to do so much (dieticians/doctors/ect), you have to want it! You could have a month free with a world renowned dietician but it's not going to matter unless you want it. There's so much on the internet, and people CAN ask their doctors questions at appointments. There are free walking/running/yoga/boxing/whatever groups. People don't need their insurance companies, they need themselves! And if they need someone else, there's ALWAYS people ready to have a workout buddy.4 -
Call me idealistic then...
Kaiser does offer many free resources to help you lose weight, others should as well...
If you have your choice of providers and one offers this and the other does not, go with the provider that does...
All insurance companies should offer this, it's in their financial interest.1 -
I wonder whether it's in an insurance company's interest to pay for free weight loss programs for its members or not?
Losing weight can and should be free. All it takes is eating less, which costs less than eating more. This app is a powerful tool to help people do that, and there's no cost.
Weight loss takes work and dedication, and insurance companies can't buy that for people. All the nutritional counselling in the world won't make a person lose weight if they eat too much. Counselors don't work for free.3 -
NorthCascades wrote: »I wonder whether it's in an insurance company's interest to pay for free weight loss programs for its members or not?
Losing weight can and should be free. All it takes is eating less, which costs less than eating more. This app is a powerful tool to help people do that, and there's no cost.
Weight loss takes work and dedication, and insurance companies can't buy that for people. All the nutritional counselling in the world won't make a person lose weight if they eat too much. Counselors don't work for free.
Yes, prevention does tend to cost less than dealing with a full blown problem. So it is in an insurance company's interests to offer preventative care. I believe they have figured this out in the NHS - UK peeps on this thread have indicated they can get services.
Also, some US insurance companies do offer this as well. Sounds like the OP just doesn't have a lot of benefits.0 -
My husband's company does pay for a weight loss program/coach for people over a certain BMI. I'm quite sure it's not altruism but lower claims cost. It's not the insurance provider per se, so it's a little different than OP's proposition, but the idea is the same -- people with healthy BMI cost less. They do the same for smoking cessation.
Since this is a debate board, I'll also throw out birth control. It's a lot cheaper than having a baby, especially for employers. Many insurance providers decided to make birth control coverage easy and cheap because actuaries showed providing BC made the insurer more profitable. That is without the employer requesting it. But employers have even stronger incentive for providing it. (Well, smart employers, anyway.)2 -
kshama2001 wrote: »NorthCascades wrote: »I wonder whether it's in an insurance company's interest to pay for free weight loss programs for its members or not?
Losing weight can and should be free. All it takes is eating less, which costs less than eating more. This app is a powerful tool to help people do that, and there's no cost.
Weight loss takes work and dedication, and insurance companies can't buy that for people. All the nutritional counselling in the world won't make a person lose weight if they eat too much. Counselors don't work for free.
Yes, prevention does tend to cost less than dealing with a full blown problem. So it is in an insurance company's interests to offer preventative care. I believe they have figured this out in the NHS - UK peeps on this thread have indicated they can get services.
Also, some US insurance companies do offer this as well. Sounds like the OP just doesn't have a lot of benefits.
I don't think anybody knows. Certainly if it was as much a slam dunk as you make it sound, all insurance companies would be offering free weight loss and paying people to use it. How many people take this kind of service up? How many of them benefit and how many use the services but don't put what they learned into effect? What's the break even point for this to make sense?
Maybe the people who can benefit from this are people who are highly motivated, and those people will find another way like using MFP if one isn't provided.
I generally agree with the idea that preventing is better than fixing. But that saying is for one person and health insurance is for everybody, so these are very different things. I mean this whole condition is preventable to begin with.2 -
NorthCascades wrote: »kshama2001 wrote: »NorthCascades wrote: »I wonder whether it's in an insurance company's interest to pay for free weight loss programs for its members or not?
Losing weight can and should be free. All it takes is eating less, which costs less than eating more. This app is a powerful tool to help people do that, and there's no cost.
Weight loss takes work and dedication, and insurance companies can't buy that for people. All the nutritional counselling in the world won't make a person lose weight if they eat too much. Counselors don't work for free.
Yes, prevention does tend to cost less than dealing with a full blown problem. So it is in an insurance company's interests to offer preventative care. I believe they have figured this out in the NHS - UK peeps on this thread have indicated they can get services.
Also, some US insurance companies do offer this as well. Sounds like the OP just doesn't have a lot of benefits.
I don't think anybody knows. Certainly if it was as much a slam dunk as you make it sound, all insurance companies would be offering free weight loss and paying people to use it. How many people take this kind of service up? How many of them benefit and how many use the services but don't put what they learned into effect? What's the break even point for this to make sense?
Maybe the people who can benefit from this are people who are highly motivated, and those people will find another way like using MFP if one isn't provided.
I generally agree with the idea that preventing is better than fixing. But that saying is for one person and health insurance is for everybody, so these are very different things. I mean this whole condition is preventable to begin with.
For certainties - a resounding yes. An obvious example would be the vaccination program.
For weight loss/management there is no certainty as this involves the element of personal responsibility. A large percentage of the population takes no responsibility for their weight and believes their weight is a result of genetics.
Prevention is nearly always a preferred option for many reasons; however the medical community knows that few people will actually take preventive measures.3
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 390 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 922 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions