<p><a href=“Wearable Tech Is Plugging Into Health Insurance”>Wearable Tech Is Plugging Into Health Insurance;
<p>I’m not sure how that’s going to work. I used to get a substantial discount on my health insurance for having an extremely healthy profile. That policy, and those kinds of risk-based pricing schemes, were no longer allowed in Obamacare compliant policies. Ilke my plan with its risk-based healthy discount. I was not allowed to keep my plan.</p>
<p>Hey at least then more people can be discriminated against, not just the fatties. Yep, we will know how much you drink and just how high that blood pressure and cholesterol really are.ding…ding… ding. No more looking healthy and getting away with those hidden gems. We will be able to see if your Xanax has kicked in or not. Ding…and hold on now… What’s that… Oh, a little morning weed. Well we can’t have that. Dngdingdingdingdingdingding</p>
<p>Hey , you on the couch. You have been home from work for an hour and you haven’t run your mile yet. Ding.</p>
<p>Pretty soon those fitbits will be little shock rings that zap you when you haven’t reached your 3000 steps.</p>
<p>Lots of a new money to be made now. Healthy me can wear your fit bit too…for a price. Ooooo I can so write a program to give you an extra 3000 steps and drops your bp by 50 pts. For a price…</p>
<p>Aaarrrggghhhhhhh…get out of my life</p>
<p>Insurance companies are going to be able to charge daily rates…</p>
<p>Seems a little over the top…</p>
<p>On another front…biotech companies are working on products that reduce the aging effects. So a 60 year old can feel like a 30 year old. (I don’t know of people will live longer).</p>
<p>My mother-in-law went to a talk with a bunch of elderly people. They were told if they could hold on 5 more years, they could benefit from these products. Many of these people were in their 80’s so living another 5 is going to be tough.</p>
<p>Interesting that merely handing out devices at one test company brought glucose levels down to a healthier level. If people think they are being monitored closely they conform their behavior accordingly, apparently. </p>
<p>But with the ACA rates based on nothing more than age, these devices won’t produce incentives to reduce insurance costs. There would have to be some other incentive. Monetary ‘prizes’ from the insurers? A better, larger network of physicians and hospitals? </p>
<p>TatinG, private companies are going to monitor you. Then the government is going to monitor you. You are ok with this?</p>
<p>And who gets to set the standard for what’s healthy? The “experts” have gotten it wrong so often, it’s laughable.</p>
<p>My DH, who is usually very private about a lot of things, was more than willing to give his health info to the insurer for their “wellness” to save a few bucks. I, who am usually pretty open, but am in healthcare, refused this past year to provide it even though I am healthy and relatively fit, because I dont want them making any decisions based on info I volunteer to them. There was some suspicion that they might deny coverage for something due to “lack of necessity” based on the healthcare profile. No thanks. </p>
<p>@blankmind. Not only is it about who sets the healthcare guidelines it is also their ability to continually increase the standards and up the game.</p>
<p>We know for sure if there is money to be made in any way it will happen. We also know that they will continually push people until there is massive pushback. </p>
<p>Well, this is disturbing.</p>
<p><a href=“Bloomberg - Are you a robot?”>Bloomberg - Are you a robot?;
<p>That is disturbing Flossy. I can’t wait to see where this goes.</p>
<p>Well, blankmind, re: your earlier post - maybe whoever makes the monitoring system will automatically plug in some Pubmed search feature that would adjust the coverage rates based on what is currently being cited. (Where is that rolleye smiley when I need it?)</p>
<p>As far as health monitoring via wearables goes, even such big dogs as Apple, who try to introduce watches that monitoring this and that, are finding out that the FDA is watching (pun intended). Trying to monitor glucose in sweat? Niiiice, but not so fast! Where’s the 510(k) application? I hope the FDA does not hand them a fast pass ticket!</p>
<p>I prefer not to have my cupcake intake monitored, thank you very much!</p>
<p>I owned a fitbit . I liked it but I kept losing it so I gave it up. I would probably be a few pounds lighter if I still had it. It was my choice to own it and it was my info.</p>
<p>Now insurance companies are interested. Insurance companies have a lot of data on us…But constant monitoring? </p>
<p>Its the new pay based on outcome that is to blame. Hospitals and doctors are going to be financially penalized if a patient is re-admitted within a certain amount of time after being released from the hospital. </p>
<p>So let’s say a doctor has done a microvascular procedure re-attaching a finger. But the doctor has warned the patient that the re-attachment will fail if the patient smokes. The patient loses the finger because he smokes. Maybe he denies smoking, but the records show he bought cigs. Why should the doc or the hospital be penalized in a situation like that? </p>
<p>Or a doc has warned a patient that the medication prescribed will have bad side effects if alcohol is consumed. Patients ignore warnings; they do the exact opposite of the doctor’s advice. Doctors and hospitals have no control over this. These monitoring systems are a defense/reaction so the medical providers can make their case to the regulators as to why they should not pay the financial penalty and be paid for the second admission. </p>