Okay, let's consider the premise...
> I hope that insurance companies do make those who increase the
> healthcare costs for all of us pay for more of their share. It is no
> different than having a different healthcare premium for a smoker
> versus a non-smoker, or expecting those under the age of 25 to pay
> higher car insurance.
How should the classifications be applied, in your view? Will a person who
smokes 2 cigarettes a day be classified the same as a three packs per day
smoker? And how do we deal with the fact that different people have
different ideal weights?
> My family works hard to stay healthy and maintain
> a healthy weight despite our prior family history of obesity,
> hypertension, and heart attacks. Should those who work hard to maintain
> a healthy lifestyle have to pay for those who make poor nutritional
> choices for themselves at every meal?
Good point. It's an issue I cover in my book JUNK, in fact. It really
doesn't seem fair, does it?
> Congress would never support policy to govern what we eat.
I don't know. Look at what they've done with certain drugs.
> They would
> probably do some combination of making the obese pay additional health
> care fees/providing incentives or sudsidies to programs that promote
> healthy weight loss/increasing taxes for businesses that do not offer a
> certain percentage of healthy food choices.
What about employees who work sedentary jobs? Do we charge higher healthcare
rates to secretaries than we do to construction workers, for example?
> I would like to see Americans empowered by taking their health into
> their own hands.
I'm with you on this.
> Certainly a part of this might be changing the media
> that has an influence on our choices.
Could you envision advertising restrictions on junk food?
> Ultimately, we have only
> ourselves to thank or blame for our condition.
Agreed.
Sincerely,
Chris Largen
www.waronjunk.com (turn your speakers on)