<p>“At what point will we say enough and get out of my life!!!”</p>
<p>I think as long as it’s not being done by <em>big bad government</em> people are just going to bend over and take it.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Where I work, these people get the same benefit as those who are not healthy but follow the improvement plan. Basically, they do not get penalized.</p>
<p>That’s interesting lerkin. So does the “improvement” counseling type of thing simply not apply to people who don’t need to change any numbers?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Things that were a reductio ad absurdum 20 years ago are now public policy proposals. </p>
<p>I wonder if it is still possible as an intellectual exercise to draw a line of intrusion that people to agree is too far? A shared risk pool has become the equivalent of the Commerce Clause and can be expanded to mean anything you want.</p>
<p>I hate the use of BMI, it is a false guideline, all it is is a ratio of height to weight, it does not take into account basic size & body structure. MY BMI is fine, but I work in the insurance industry, I see small boned people with too much body fat who have a better BMI than larger boned people who are muscular. Does it even compare men to women? If you are going to charge people based on being overweight, do the old float in a tub and get teh actual percentage of body fat.</p>
<p>But mainly, get out of my personal life. I read medical records as part of my job, you have to be so careful what you say to a medical professional, people just chatter on and they write it all down, maybe what gets noted it accurate, maybe it is not.</p>
<p>Oh, and I don’t like the annual physical asking me if I “feel safe in my relationship” or “have a gun in my house”</p>
<p>Zoosermom,</p>
<p>Yes. Basically if there is nothing wrong with you, then you don’t have a plan to follow and automatically get $1000 in your HSA (that’s our benefit). We only had to go through screening once - 2 years ago, and they just use that data for people who had nothing wrong with them. I believe people who had something wrong with them only had to show that they did what they were told, not to actually show improvement.</p>
<p>By the way, their definition of overweight was very generous. I weigh a lot, and if you use BMI formula I am overweight. However a lot of my weight is muscles (people don’t believe I weigh as much as I do). Anyway, even though BMI said I am overweight, they did not assign any improvement plan for me. I was worried their definition of overweight would be based on BMI. I guess they were only concerned with obese people. </p>
<p>We also have health insurance surcharge on smoking and on making too much money (by their definition). But we had it for at least 4 years.</p>
<p>This is nothing new. For a couple if years my company has an option for screenings and coaching. If you opt out you have a higher annual deductible. Though they phrase it that you are getting a bonus in initial expenses covered before the deductible kicks in.</p>
<p>Remember when you did not have to pay for TV.
Cable came along and said if you pay us a small fee then we won’t have any commercials. So people paid.</p>
<p>Now we pay more and more and we have many more commercials. </p>
<p>This is what health care is doing. You will pay for being unhealthy and living an unhealthy lifestyle.</p>
<p>First the smokers, now the obese, now the lazy people…then who?</p>
<p>Healthy blood pressure: these numbers are falling…
Good/bad cholesterol; these numbers are getting stricter
Healthy ideal weight: who determines this?</p>
<p>Before you know it your numbers will not be ideal either. </p>
<p>Skinny people with diabetes…lets go after them. </p>
<p>Hey, you have a family history of colon cancer. You have to adhere to this diet or else…</p>
<p>Lots of companies essentially do this - i.e. if you don’t participate in their program you don’t get the ‘extra benefit’ of the $600 (or $1000 or whatever). That’s fine with me. I choose not to participate because of the privacy aspects and don’t need a company to tell me about or try to coerce me as to healthful lifestyle or into doing blood tests, etc. (that’s already taken care of by going to a normal doc).</p>
<p>I think it’ll only get worse as we head towards government controlled health care (it’s bad enough what NY’s mayor is trying to do in controlling people) but that starts to get political so I won’t go there.</p>
<p>[The</a> Lies We Buy: Defining Health at Women’s Expense | BEAUTY REDEFINED](<a href=“http://www.beautyredefined.net/the-lies-we-buy-defining-health-at-womens-expense/]The”>http://www.beautyredefined.net/the-lies-we-buy-defining-health-at-womens-expense/)</p>
<p>"To further prove the differe between the BMI and actual health, the National Cancer Institute and CDC reported that individuals who are overweight but not obese have a lower risk of death than those of the BMI’s “normal weight” category. Accordingly, a report from the International Journal of Obesity states: “BMI may lead to misclassification of persons with normal levels of fat as being overweight, a fact that could cause unnecessary distress and prompt unnecessary and costly interventions.”</p>
<p>also from the above article</p>
<p>“Despite extensive evidence proving the BMI lacks accuracy for calculating an individual’s body fat or healthy weight, the government defends it as the national standard due to the fact that it is “inexpensive and easy for clinicians and for the general public” (CDC, 2010). Thus, the financial interests of those who diagnose, define and profit from the definition of “health” in this country were prioritized over individuals’ accurate understandings of their own health. By upholding and enforcing a faulty measure, the insurance industry, medical industry and federal health agencies save a significant amount of money that could otherwise be spent on diagnostic tools and procedures that are reliable indicators of health”</p>
<p>Sheehs, the old pinch an inch test is better than BMI! Or a good hard look in a mirror, for me, too. I am neither skinny, nor fat.</p>
<p>Sax, I love your link. Thanks for posting it. The BMI is ridiculous.</p>
<p>People with elevated/overweight BMI have a lower mortality rate according to a meta study. </p>
<p><a href=“Study Suggests Lower Mortality Risk for Overweight People - The New York Times”>Study Suggests Lower Mortality Risk for Overweight People - The New York Times;
<p>CVS share price is doing great on the news.</p>
<p>I am “forced” to use CVS by my company’s health insurance policy which will cost me $1200 more annually if I choose to get my prescriptions elsewhere. We also have one of those plans where a health professional calls to offer counseling periodically.</p>
<p>Unless a company requires YOU to tell THEM your information, they cannot access any personal information collected in the “wellness” type insurance programs. Insurance companies are required by law to protect the personal information, and I know from working in the industry that they absolutely do so. If your plan costs more because you either do not meet the standards for a discount or do not meet the standards by virtue of choosing not to be checked, your company knows this only from the standpoint of the fact that your policy costs more. They do not know why … not that you choose not to participate, not that you are a smoker, not that your BMI is too high. So if your employer does not require YOU to tell them, they will not know.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No, they don’t, dstark. I don’t get the Canadian comment either.</p>
<p>Alwaysamom, I guess it was just another nonsensical comment.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>We ALL pay for those who choose to be unhealthy and live unhealthy lifestyles. The increased costs to society due to diabetes and other complications from obesity are well documented. My company offers discounts on CSAs, yoga classes, and gym memberships, and many of us gladly take advantage of them. What is wrong with that?</p>
<p>And by the way I am a big supporter of universal healthcare that is NOT related to employment.</p>