<p>My impression is that support is very important for some people but I know a lot of people that prefer working out alone and they will workout every day, usually around the same time of the day, every day.</p>
<p>On privacy - the intent by the company may be to encourage a healthy lifestyle but data in computerized form is not secure if it is to be usable. I’ve gone to the paradigm that there is no privacy - you just operate understanding that there is no privacy and do what you can to minimize information leakage. We have police cars in the state next door that drive on roads with license plate scanners. There are all kinds of tracking issues with mobile phones. Living off the grid is getting harder and harder.</p>
<p>We have a visibly anorexic woman at work. She is painfully, dangerously underweight. People were really surprised she was hired three years ago. I guess we all expected that she would have been discriminated against based on her appearance! Should I be happy she was not discriminated against or bothered that I am pooled with her for medical costs? I think we should bear some responsibility for our health given that we are all sharing costs either though a pool at work, through taxes that support medicaid/medicare, or through higher private pay rates subsidizing the uninsured.
I don’t know the right answer and share many of the concerns listed here, but I strongly believe health insurance should be decoupled from employment.<br>
I am fine with higher risk people paying more (smokers, morbidly obese, etc.) but do fear the slippery slope.</p>
<p>Sax, it’s been said over and over that if you don’t want your privacy invaded, then don’t participate. See my #118 on this matter. </p>
<p>With freedoms come responsibilities, what is so hart to understand? You want to be free to make this choice, then be responsible for more of your health care costs.</p>
<p>My good friend is an internist. She tells me that her day is spent urging non-compliant patients to follow her advice on diet and exercise, taking their meds, etc. Then they come back for the next appointment and they have excuses on why they have not done anything and the medical condition is worse. For the doctor it is extremely frustrating and she feels like she is wasting her time. Maybe a monetary penalty will work for some people.</p>
<p>dstark,
Private employment by definition does not offer the “freedoms” we are entitled to from the government. Employers need to save money or they will have to fire or not hire employees and cease to exist! If encouraging good health in its employees means CVS will save thousands in health insurance premiums, which could go to hiring more employees, saving some jobs, raising wages or providing other benefits, why would you be against it?</p>
<p>Tatin - I agree. At some point, for some people, the incentive (carrot or stick) is the only one that works. I admit that I hit the gym more because of an arguable trivial financial incentive to do so!</p>
<p>Dstark, I absolutely get your point. Yet, I said it over and over again - there is no free lunch. You want something, you need to give up something in exchange. I do get your point though - the choice is really crappy for these employees.</p>
<p>"I think you confusing an issue a bit. Participation in the screening is voluntary. Unless you want a discount (or not pay a penalty). You have every right of privacy of your health records. You just have to pay for it.</p>
<p>Companies are asking you to surrender your right to privacy in exchange to a health insurance subsidy. You are free to choose what is more important to you: privacy or health insurance subsidy."</p>
<p>It’s nice in theory but most people cannot afford to do this. So the reality for the vast majority is there isn’t a choice.</p>
<p>sax,
I am very much a private person, so I agree with your concerns, but at this point I don’t believe an employer will ever have the legal right to fire an employee for his/her medical condition. The employer may be able to fire an employee for not complying with the on-the-job rules, such as getting a physical, but not for his/her actual condition unless it results in the employee becoming unable to perform the functions required for the job even with accommodation, and that would make sense.</p>
<p>Will we all be expected to become vegetarians because meat is known to be bad for us?</p>
<p>Will they demand that you don’t grill your food because charred steak is a known carcinogen?</p>
<p>Will those who live in high smog areas be penalized because of poor air quality leading to breathing problems?</p>
<p>Bay. This is certainly the direction we are headed. </p>
<p>The insurance companies are thrilled to have the companies look like the bad guys.</p>
<p>The reality is the insurance company wants to only insure healthy people but is also more than happy to continue to raise your rates. I don’t believe for one minute that companies will see any financial benefit to their health care costs by demanding employees be perfectly healthy.</p>
<p>Look at everyone here who believes they are being rewarded for being healthy. Have their policy costs actually gone down??? No, they have just gone up less than the fat smokers.</p>
<p>It is a scam and we are all falling for it…</p>
<p>Our son is under our policy so he gets some money back in flex credits from his employer. I’d guess that whether or not you get money back depends on your employer.</p>
<p>First they force the employers to provide insurance.</p>
<p>Then, they force you to buy insurance.</p>
<p>Then, the people paying start to tell you what to do.</p>
<p>No different than living at home as a teenager. Eat your broccoli. No you can’t have that kind of car. No you can’t smoke or drink. No you can’t have soda. Clean your room and do your homework (get to the gym.)</p>
<p>Yes, I am going to check on where you were last night. As long as you live under my roof, you are going to play by my rules.</p>
<p>Much of the research shows that “voluntary wellness programs” at the worksite do not really impact health risks of the employees (or healthcare costs of the employers). In general, people who engage in wellness at work are already healthy, already concerned about their health, or already motivated in some way to get better/maintian their health. </p>
<p>The real trick is to engage the people who really NEED to change their habits. There’s no easy solution for that and no easy way to motivate that segment of the employee population.</p>
<p>I’ve heard all those anecdotal stories about how Bob in accounting lost 40 pounds through Weight Watchers at work, and that’s great when it works, but in most cases it’s the familar story: it’s very hard to change bad habits, especially in a “voluntary wellness” situation. Most people who lose weight gain it back. Most people who quit smoking start up again.</p>
<p>But don’t the longer lived people die quickly (and less expensively) when they encounter what kills them? Of course, they will have been on the dole (Social Security) for longer…</p>
<p>Our state uses the EZ-Pass system for tolls. You can get a transponder and get tracked electronically and get a toll discount and get through tolls faster or you can pay cash where they “only” take a picture of your license plate or you can use local streets instead of using toll roads. At night, since toll booths aren’t manned, you can go through the EZ-Pass lane if you don’t have a transponder and you will be billed three times the toll for the billing process, you can deposit exact change or you can take an envelope and mail in twice the toll amount (and pay for the stamp). Yes, we have the honor system in NH for paying taxes.</p>
<p>We don’t have license plate scanners (yet) so the picture provides relatively more privacy but it’s only a matter of degrees.</p>
<p>I think that employers, insurance companies and the government will want more and more information to manage healthcare costs. Whoever pays the bills will want to decrease the bills.</p>
<p>Of course if we all worked voluntarily to live healthier lifestyles, this would be less of a problem.</p>
<p>heres an interesting look at a study on weight watchers and its long term results. It is a bit dated. Im not sure how well their numbers hold up but you get the idea…</p>