Jim Fixx was credited with helping start America's fitness revolution, popularizing the sport of running and demonstrating the health benefits of regular jogging. Fixx died in 1984 at the age of 52.

Buddy Holly was healthy as a horse and dies at 22 in a plane crash

Natalie Wood was 43, beautiful, healthy, and drowned.

They all appeared to be healthy, happy people. Then life happened.

You are 72, and while you may be healthy at least by your definition, I doubt you are very happy. That comes through in your vibe, even though you don't think so I'm fairly sure.

I do, however, wish you the best.

I'm saying don't punish people because they get sick. You can have a healthy lifestyle and get cancer. You can have an unhealthy lifestyle and not get sick. How do you know the future? This whole thread is ridiculous and unfair by your rules. and I am out of it.

Reply to VillagesPL

Well, so much for running and jogging being a cure-all. Some of my athlete friends have lived very unhealthy lifestyles. They were addicted to overexercising and eating junk food to fuel their workouts.

That's a risk that frequent fliers take. Do airline pilots pay more for life insurance? They should.

Accidents happen and not all accidents can be avoided. This thread is not about eliminating all risks, that would be impossible. Just lifestyle risks that we know of that are very costly to the nation and can be observed by a doctor. A doctor wouldn't necessarilly know how often one goes swimming and under what conditions.

Yes, but obesity and smoking, etc., doesn't just "happen" out of the blue. It's the result of continuously making unhealthy lifestyle choices.


About happiness: I can tell you one thing, being healthy makes it so much easyer to feel a sense of contentment and happiness. I wish more people would try it.

What you're suggesting would be impossible to design/administer/manage. Who would decide what is risky and what isn't? And would they just take people's word for it, that they don't smoke, exercise regularly and eat only healthy food? haha.

Who would set the acceptability bar for those who choose to take higher risks? If someone exercises daily but eats fried food, should they pay a higher premium than someone who doesn't exercise and eats salads? The intricacies would be unmanageable. Who would monitor the "risky behavior" and deem it has been discontinued for a long enough period?

Not only is it an unwieldy and impossible idea, but there is something mean about the idea of penalizing anyone who is less than perfect.

:BigApplause::BigApplause:

Seems everyone should be penalized for something except for one poster..........

:BigApplause::BigApplause:

Search. Obsessive eating disorders. http://www.health.com/health/article...556862,00.html

When our health practices and everyone else's health practices become uppermost in our minds, when we balk at tests that are considered to be important by most doctors and when we spend most of our time thinking about how we can improve other peoples health and worry about how their unhealthy practices will cost us money.. Then something is wrong. It isn't being helpful or altruistic or beneficial, it is living out of balance....for most of us anyway. Life is too short to worry about this stuff all of the time. Making life longer may be the goal....but for WHAT????

I agree. No one is suggesting that.


Yes, that's true. In that case you wouldn't pay a higher health insurance premium.


If you would just think about it, it would work the way that most insurance works. As I said: If you buy a house in a flood zone, you will pay more for insurance to cover the risk of flooding. But the insurance company doesn't know if, or when, the next flood will come. It may never come in your lifetime but you will still pay for the risk you take.

Statistics on risk can be found everywhere. That's how insurance companies decide how much to charge. Whether it's car incurance, house insurance, business insurance, flood insurance, or health insurance, they have statistics. No need to worry about that. About smoking: They would rely on blood tests, just as they are now doing at many hospitals that don't allow newly hired workers to smoke. The other big risk is being overweight or obese. This can easily be checked and backed up by other numbers like cholesterol, blood pressure, blood sugar etc..



The limits have already been set for many years. When you go to the doctor the nurse checks your weight, hight and blood pressure. Then you get a blood test. The blood test checks for many different things and everything has an upper and lower limit.

There are studies that indicate how one's risk increases as BMI increases. As the number goes up from 18 to 19 and from 19 to 20 and so on. But this idea does not expect perfection because you can go all the way up to 25. With a BMI of 25, one may have 20, 30 or more pounds of excess fat. The doctor would check your percentage of body fat in addition to your BMI. Obesity would be even worse, as far as excess body fat. We're not talking about perfection at all. Far from it. And as far as meanness goes, I think there's something mean about making those with healthy lifestyles pay for the unhealthy lifestyles of others.

I guess that would be OK if someone could agree on exactly what "the rules" are. If someone doesn't have much time and they'd prefer to enjoy that time as much as possible by engaging in things that might not be all that healthy would you deny them that choice?
If someone believes that a vegan diet is a healthy choice but another believes that cutting down on sugars and carbohydrates while eating meat who is going to decide who is correct. There are plenty of experts who have plenty of evidence supporting both of these choices.
Health insurance as it exists in America today, by it's very nature shifts the costs from the least healthy to the healthiest of us. I really don't believe that there is anything you can do to alter that other than eliminate health care coverage completely and have everyone pay for their own health care out of their pockets.

In that case, one shouldn't do those things you mentioned above.


Being healthy is the goal and living longer is usually a side effect of achieving that goal.

No, I wouldn't deny someone who was diagnosed with a terminal disease, for example.

It would be impossible to check up on exactly what foods people are eating. That's why I said that this would all be decided by a person's exam numbers. For example, regardless of a person's diet (whether high carb, low carb, vegan or carnivore) being overweight (with high blood pressure, high blood sugar and high cholesterol) is unhealthy and risky.


Years ago I applied for health insurance on my own. The company was Blue Cross and they really asked a lot of questions. I don't remember all of them but I wouldn't be surprised if they asked about my age, height and weight. I answered all the many questions and then I was accepted and told what the monthly premium would be. You can't just get a quote over the phone. You have to answer the questions on paper and sign your name. And when you sign, you agree that false information can result in having your policy canceled. Back then it was only $100. per month but I thought it was a lot of money for being young and healthy. So I never went through with it. I'm not sure but I think they require a physical once you start paying. So, yes, I believe there's no cost shifting with that type of insurance.

If you work for a company that provides group insurance, I suppose it depends on the employer to try to hire healthy people. Otherwise, rates might be much higher because of one or two people.

The Affordable Care Act distinguishes between smokers and non-smokers. Whether or not they distinguish between normal weight, overweight or obese I don't know.

I believe that Medicare could do what I'm suggesting regarding smoking and being overweight. I don't see why not.

:BigApplause:

Sadly some can never recognize their own mistakes and problems, just those of everyone else. Replies just feed this and keeps it going, I am out too..

Me too. I had no intention to hurt but it is now an exercise in futility.

Oh, I just remembered something important. Those who have a poor driving record will also pay a higher health insurance premium. Yes, because they will represent a higher risk for physical injury and may need long term care if they get into an accident. It's all about being an adult and paying for the risks you take.