How have you guys handled insurance?

[Briar Lee]

If you do lie, (or bend the truth) you had better not ever post pictures of yourself with a pipe or cigars in your social media posts. I have heard of insurance companies combing through these looking for reasons not to pay out. Nowadays, they can use AI to scan your entire online activity in the flash of an eye.

One of the worst injustices I ever saw, was a young family buying a new home and taking out credit life.

The father died at 48 of a sudden heart attack the boilerplate in the contract allowed a scan of his checks for doctor visits, and they ruled he had a pre existing condition.

I forgeti forget how it all wound up, but they wound up living in a grandparent’s basement.

The regulators allow the banks to charge outrageous premiums for credit life, because it’s just one per cent more interest.

And if they screw you over, you can have the privilege of trying to fight an insurance company with a net worth more than several little nations. Only large law firms can afford to do that.

If they’d hung the first man who ever sold insurance, we’d not have these problems.

But we lawyers would have to find a more honest way to make a living.

 

[cachimbosergipano]

Quit today. Wait a day or two and fill out the form. Do you smoke? The answer is No. You quit. Now, if you take up smoking later in the month, well, the form never asked if you intend to take up smoking later. Simple questions deserve simple answers. Be serious when you quit. And answer honestly. Do you smoke? Nope. If the question is in present tense, the answer needs to be in present tense as well. Am I missing something?

An inaccurate question deserves an inaccurate answer. I would do this without qualm.

 

[Snook]

Previous and current places of work both impose an extra $25 on top of your premium if you use nicotine. I may or may not have marked myself as a non-smoker in both instances.

 

[sablebrush52]

An inaccurate question deserves an inaccurate answer. I would do this without qualm.

Yes, and if a blood test is required you are fucked. You'll need to quit for a couple of months to pass a blood test.

I'm covered by my union insurance plan, which is funded in part by royalties from the hours of work I do, updated every six months. The industry insurance is a non-profit, so the money raised goes to actual care instead of huge executive salaries and shareholders. Since it's a group plan, the personal foibles and addictions of members are not an issue.

Come the end of June I'll be on Medicare Advantage as my retirement coverage benefit, which I don't have to pay for.

 

[lraisch]

Yes, and if a blood test is required you are fucked. You'll need to quit for a couple of months to pass a blood test.

I'm covered by my union insurance plan, which is funded in part by royalties from the hours of work I do, updated every six months. The industry insurance is a non-profit, so the money raised goes to actual care instead of huge executive salaries and shareholders. Since it's a group plan, the personal foibles and addictions of members are not an issue.

Come the end of June I'll be on Medicare Advantage as my retirement coverage benefit, which I don't have to pay for.

You will be paying for, it as it comes directly out of your social security check.

 

[sablebrush52]

You will be paying for, it as it comes directly out of your social security check.

Only the part B. The rest is covered by the MPIHP including prescription co-pays, which are practically nothing.

 

[lraisch]

Only the part B. The rest is covered by the MPIHP including prescription co-pays, which are practically nothing.

You're lucky then, but be aware that prescription copays vary by whatever tier the drug is placed in. Mine are generally $0, but my wife needs one which gets expensive.

 

[sablebrush52]

You're lucky then, but be aware that prescription copays vary by whatever tier the drug is placed in. Mine are generally $0, but my wife needs one which gets expensive.

It's a lot less than it used to be. When I started out we had out own hospital and retirement campus that paid for EVERYTHING. Bernie Madoff helped kill that when a bunch of big donors got shafted by him.
When my wife needed a hysterectomy, the operation was performed at the Motion Picture hospital and the cost for everything, surgery, medications, hospital room ,etc, was ZERO. That's gone.
You have to have been in the business at least 15 years and accrued a number of hours to qualify. I'm well over the entrance levels for both.

 

[sablebrush52]

Our medical system is a disaster for patients. We pay far more for healthcare and receive far less than other countries. But if you are sufficiently wealthy, then it works for you.

 

[Zamora]

Yea, I just discovered that in Texas “tobacco use” is defined as using ANY tobacco product 5 times in a 3 month period. That’s so absurd. So the 2pack a day guy gets lumped into the same category as the once a week pipe smoker.

They probably don't care if you're exposed to regular second hand smoke even though people have died of lung cancer without ever lighting up

 

[Chasing Embers]

people have died of lung cancer without ever lighting up

As well as never being exposed to second hand smoke.

 

[popeofpiping]

For what it’s worth. I’ve been enjoying cigars, pipes, as well as an abuser of nicotine pouches since I was old enough to do so. I have always answered no and it’s never been a problem. That could be a very stupid thing. Ill blame ignorance, but never had an issue.

 

[anotherbob]

I'm having to renew my health insurance this year, and they ask about tobacco use, and it's simply a YES or NO answer, and there are no qualifiers such as - type, frequency, etc. If I simply select YES my insurance rate almost DOUBLES!?! What bothers me about that simple question is I know what they are concerned about, and rightly so. The 1-2 pack a day cigarette smoking guy, who GREATLY increases their risk in insuring him. However, I am a far cry from that. I average one bowl a day. It isn't fair that none of that seems to matter.
I realize a likely response I'm going to get here is LIE about it. However, that's a conscience issue I'm not interested in compromising. So my attempt here in raising this question is simply to hear feedback from the pipe smoking community at-large on how you all have dealt with this issue. Perhaps there is something I have not rightly considered? Or perhaps there certain insurance companies that are more smoker friendly? Or am I just screwed, and need to bite the bullet? Thank you!

talk to a rep. Let them know you aren't sure how to answer and get the answer in writing. The thing is you'll pay more if caught somehow. The thing is they want money and if you go else where they get none.

 

[anotherbob]

They probably don't care if you're exposed to regular second hand smoke even though people have died of lung cancer without ever lighting up

so. At what rate and at what ages. The difference with cigarette smokers and everyone else is stark. Anyone that thinks cigarettes don't contribute to lung cancer who've seen the numbers are idiots.
And yeah I do mean if they've seen the numbers.

 

[Zamora]

so. At what rate and at what ages. The difference with cigarette smokers and everyone else is stark. Anyone that thinks cigarettes don't contribute to lung cancer who've seen the numbers are idiots.
And yeah I do mean if they've seen the numbers.

I'm not sure but it seems to have usually been people who lived or worked with chainsmokers or worked in places where indoor smoking was allowed, like back when restaurants allowed it. I don't deny that the difference with people who actually smoke cigarettes is astronomical.

 

[cosmicfolklore]

I'm not sure but it seems to have usually been people who lived or worked with chainsmokers or worked in places where indoor smoking was allowed, like back when restaurants allowed it. I don't deny that the difference with people who actually smoke cigarettes is astronomical.

Children as young as 8 years old have developed lung cancer. I don't think they know exactly what causes this. It is fairly obvious that smoking definitely contributes, but there is no way that it is 100% from smoking.

 

[anotherbob]

Children as young as 8 years old have developed lung cancer. I don't think they know exactly what causes this. It is fairly obvious that smoking definitely contributes, but there is no way that it is 100% from smoking.

That's one of the first things you learn in pathology classes when you get to the cancer section. Is that cancer happens when your cells get replaced too often. You have some not determined number of copies before it starts going off.... Something like smoking cigs increases the speed which you make those copies. So it's more like if you have 50 times before it's bad and it replaces once every two years but smoking makes it happen .75 times a year then it does make a huge difference.

 

[Zamora]

Children as young as 8 years old have developed lung cancer. I don't think they know exactly what causes this. It is fairly obvious that smoking definitely contributes, but there is no way that it is 100% from smoking.

Very true, environmental issues are often at play. Hell I wouldn't be shocked if some smokers got lung cancer but it was a coincidence

 

[warren]

Don't forget heart disease. Also not 100% smoking caused but it certainly is a contributor. But, smoking is simply an indicator that one is a risk taker. Many factors are at play when an insurer is determining risk. The insurer is betting you'll live a long, healthy life and you, the insured, is betting he/she won't.

 

[Briar Lee]

Children as young as 8 years old have developed lung cancer. I don't think they know exactly what causes this. It is fairly obvious that smoking definitely contributes, but there is no way that it is 100% from smoking.

In 41 years of practice I saw about 8 clients get lung cancer. Four smokers, all older men, and four farm wives, also up in years, nonsmokers. The women lived for years, a different type of lung cancer.

The four men also were the veterans of many a hard fought bottle.

Smoking is dangerous. The actuaries are good at what they do.