Personal Responsibility for Healthcare?

[2HOTinPHX]

Part of the health problem this country has is the economy's tendency to promote unhealthy, nutritionally unbalanced products. When was the last time you saw a television commercial for kale or broccoli? McDonalds and Burger King, conversely, have a huge ad budget.

Then there's the tendency for makers of processed food to add high levels of sugar or salt to make their product more appealing. Check the sodium content in a can of soup.

People who want or need cheap, convenient dietary options may have little choice but to consume foods that, in the long run, are bad for them. And producers of those products spend big bucks to stimulate that market. It's easy to blame the consumer in this case, but some blame has to rely on the producers of unhealthy products as well.

I totally agree with what you are saying. Go to the grocery store and look at all products that are bad for you verse the good for you products. We are so good at churning out carb and sugar products it's scary and hard to resist.
My wife is admin assistant for a guy who owns a very successful small pizza chain. They make a ton of dough outta selling that artery clogging delicious crap...yet the owner is pretty conscious about his own health...LOL....
We the human race get a big fail when it comes to taken care of our food needs..profit over people

 

[2HOTinPHX]

Wow. You said a mouth full!

When I started to understand nutrition and diet the grocery store became scary!
Walking through wally world was like walking naked through hell!

Seriously where else can you go to buy so many cheap carbs for a dollar? Maybe a large feedstore?

I am scared of the grocery store too especially around the holidays...5 lb bags of candycorn...that's a vegetable right?

 

[Mr._Graybeard]

I suspect some people become psychologically addicted to some of the junk that gets peddled to them as "food..." I worked with a guy who guzzled at least eight Diet Cokes a day. Fortunately he brought his own 12-packs to work and didn't rely on the company soda machine, which dispensed 20-ouncers.

BTW, when did the clarion call rise up from the grass roots of consumerdom that we needed 20-ounce sodas instead of 12-ounce cans? Good thing the soft drink bottlers are looking out for us and caution that each bottle contains 2 1/2 servings...

 

[Luck_Club]

I suspect some people become psychologically addicted to some of the junk that gets peddled to them as "food..." I worked with a guy who guzzled at least eight Diet Cokes a day. Fortunately he brought his own 12-packs to work and didn't rely on the company soda machine, which dispensed 20-ouncers.

BTW, when did the clarion call rise up from the grass roots of consumerdom that we needed 20-ounce sodas instead of 12-ounce cans? Good thing the soft drink bottlers are looking out for us and caution that each bottle contains 2 1/2 servings...

Packaging costs drove the 20 oz movement. The same thing with the 16 oz to 32 oz glass bottles to the 2 liter plastic versions.

 

[joeea]

I worked with a guy who guzzled at least eight Diet Cokes a day.

Are you in government?

I know a government guy who consumes a dozen cans of Diet Coke a day, plus a lot of KFC and McDonald's. He also eats extra desserts at pretty much every meal.

He's overweight. He doesn't work a lot of hours each day, watches a lot of TV, and doesn't exercise at all, but he does play a lot of golf.

He doesn't smoke and never drinks. So I guess he's got that going for him, which is nice.

We all may get to hear of his physical health soon (or more likely he'll keep any bad results to himself).

I wonder how much he pays for his healthcare?

 

[audreyh1]

The lovely illusion that your health is completely under your personal control.

There are plenty of diseases that are not due to lifestyle choices, and there are accidents as well, plenty of which aren't someone's own fault. So it's not an entirely self-controlled system.

And, as other point out, some things that are lauded as healthy are later found out to be bad for you and vice versa.

 

[Mr._Graybeard]

Are you in government?

I know a government guy who consumes a dozen cans of Diet Coke a day, plus a lot of KFC and McDonald's. He also eats extra desserts at pretty much every meal.

He's overweight. He doesn't work a lot of hours each day, watches a lot of TV, and doesn't exercise at all, but he does play a lot of golf.

He doesn't smoke and never drinks. So I guess he's got that going for him, which is nice.

We all may get to hear of his physical health soon (or more likely he'll keep any bad results to himself).

I wonder how much he pays for his healthcare?

No, I was in media, but my former co-worker is now in state government.

One night he was carted out of the newsroom on a gurney with what turned out to be a gall bladder attack. Apparently they gave him an endoscope while he was under medical care and found some polyps in his stomach. He laid off the Cokes for a while, but eventually he fell off the wagon.

 

[razztazz]

I think keeping dr check ups should NOT cost the patient as they spot issues earlier when they are less expensive for the ultimate payer (insurance) to treat. How about a mandatory $penalty for not showing up?

You gonna make sure everybody has the money to do so? If not then people will have to it The American Way and make financial decisions in lieu of mere medical ones which would be theoretical at best since nobody can say how cholesterol or exercise or sleep patterns will affect ---an individual--.

You cannot use mass data or group aggregate output study results to diagnose and treat individuals.

This "plan" is like a wealth tax. Every year have everybody from Ralph Kramden to Ward Cleaver to George Soros inventory everything they own in this world, then tax it

 

[audreyh1]

Part of the health problem this country has is the economy's tendency to promote unhealthy, nutritionally unbalanced products. When was the last time you saw a television commercial for kale or broccoli? McDonalds and Burger King, conversely, have a huge ad budget.

Then there's the tendency for makers of processed food to add high levels of sugar or salt to make their product more appealing. Check the sodium content in a can of soup.

People who want or need cheap, convenient dietary options may have little choice but to consume foods that, in the long run, are bad for them. And producers of those products spend big bucks to stimulate that market. It's easy to blame the consumer in this case, but some blame has to rely on the producers of unhealthy products as well.

Yep - you've really got a point there. The USDA helps too.

Eating healthy is more expensive, more time consuming, and requires some skill to make it palatable, compared to buying cheap fast food or quickie mostly prepared meals or going for the lowest cost foods and subsisting on beans rice and tortillas with a little chorizo and cheese thrown in.

 

[jimbee]

Well, this thread sure went south quickly.

 

[athena53]

The lovely illusion that your health is completely under your personal control.

There are plenty of diseases that are not due to lifestyle choices, and there are accidents as well, plenty of which aren't someone's own fault. So it's not an entirely self-controlled system.

I would never claim that and I made that clear in my earlier post. Stuff happens and it's partly luck and/or the grace of God, depending on your beliefs, that I'm almost 65, have no noticeable aches and pains, and my only prescription is to alleviate a symptom of menopause. I would not, however, discount the fact that I weigh less than I did in HS, I go to the gym daily and dinner tonight is stir-fried veggies and bulghur in a tomato sauce spiced with cumin.

 

[KenZ71]

Maybe health & life insurance costs and benefits should be combined? If the same company had your info and was trying to keep you healthy and had a big incentive to keep you around they would truly try hard.

Another off the wall thought... some of the internet billionaires ( Bezos, Musk, Zuckerberg, etc ) have floated the idea of universal basic income to replace lost jobs due to automation. Maybe that should be with a heavy dose of healthcare.

 

[Luck_Club]

Ignorance is bliss

So the healthcare debate is an interesting one. I'm of the mindset that financial incentives drive human behavior.

Currently the financial incentives are geared towards cheap crap food, that is cheaper to the consumer, but a higher cost (health care) to society. If you want to eat healthy, the outside perimeter of the grocery store, it is expensive! Apples are $1 a piece, a head of lettuce is $2.50! Go to the protein & you get more expensive the healthier you get.

My DF is a case in point. He is by all measures extremely frugal and a great cost to the healthcare system. I calculated his BMI at over 50 He takes 5-7 pills a day for his type II, stent and other ailments. He never forgets his medicine, and takes it religiously. However, when I brought in a nutritionist, he didn't listen and wouldn't do a single thing she asked. So even though he will go through the painstaking process of switching prescriptions to get a $20 reward for switching a prescription,he stubbornly refuses to change his lifestyle. The medicine and doctors visits along with health insurance offer no financial incentive to change his behavior, so he continues down the same path.

Multiply that out times 10's of millions, and you see where the problem lies.

 

[audreyh1]

I would never claim that and I made that clear in my earlier post. Stuff happens and it's partly luck and/or the grace of God, depending on your beliefs, that I'm almost 65, have no noticeable aches and pains, and my only prescription is to alleviate a symptom of menopause. I would not, however, discount the fact that I weigh less than I did in HS, I go to the gym daily and dinner tonight is stir-fried veggies and bulghur in a tomato sauce spiced with cumin.

All that and you can still suddenly be diagnosed with pancreatic cancer and find out you pretty much only have a year left as happened to my lovely, otherwise robustly healthy and very health-conscious mother at age 62, or the super fit neighbor down the street who could out-zumba everybody in her late 60s, but developed brain cancer and did not survive.

Being healthy helps and is great, but it may still not mean you escape a serious health problem or fatal disease.

 

[socca]

The Affordable Gym Act (AGA) - 2022

Highlights:
• beginning in tax year 2023, all Americans older than 18 are required to be a member of a gym providing minimum essential services
• Americans with less-than-median modified adjusted gross income (MAGI) will receive subsidies to help pay their gym membership dues (this includes high-net-worth and very-high-net-worth people who cleverly reduce their MAGI with the expressed purpose of receiving subsidies)
• the costs associated with upgrading gym facilities and services to comply with the AGA will be passed on to consumers in the form of higher membership dues. For example, under the AGA all gyms are required to have an on-site Olympic-sized swimming pool, which could be challenging for gyms located on the top floor of a skyscraper. The lucky folks receiving massive gym membership subsidies will be largely spared the effects of these higher dues.
• to enforce compliance, each year gyms will report to the IRS the months in which their members were enrolled in good standing. All Americans will receive a Form 1095-GYM from their gym to be filed with their annual tax return as proof of compliance with the AGA.
• failure to enroll in a qualified gym in any given year will result in a 'shared responsibility' tax surcharge
• there is no requirement to actually set foot in a qualified gym - membership alone is sufficient to satisfy the AGA

Coming soon to a government near you!

 

[athena53]

People who want or need cheap, convenient dietary options may have little choice but to consume foods that, in the long run, are bad for them. And producers of those products spend big bucks to stimulate that market. It's easy to blame the consumer in this case, but some blame has to rely on the producers of unhealthy products as well.

I know- I live in a blue-collar area and the displays that I encounter as soon as I walk into the grocery store sadden me- fatty meats, pop, energy drinks and bakery goods. The deli section's ready-to-eat foods heavily emphasize pizza, fried chicken and Chinese food (which can be healthy if you're careful but can have a lot of deep-fried ingredients). I see the same types of merchandise in the carts in front of me in line. It's striking how different selections are in the wealthier suburbs- more fresh produce, better variety at the salad bar, etc. I know the stores emphasize what sells in each area, but it's a sign of how much we need to change.

 

[easysurfer]

I want my freedom of choice to go up to the all you can eat buffet table as many times as I wish. Because I can .

 

[Aerides]

This is one of those "sounds good" ideas that falls apart with the details. Sure there are some binary things like Smoking, but beyond that, what looks like a lifestyle choice often can be genetic.

There are also some significant correlations between "poor lifestyle choices" and low income/low education populations. So the financially poor would get more of a double whammy - those least able to pay for care would get higher prices.

Or for me, eating higher fat/protein w/Low carbs and sugar is great - but someone else might not respond to that. I certainly can't eat the way the current food pyramid recommends and be healthy.

Slippery Slope, overreach potential on this one would have me voting, nope:
"Ma'am, you ordered the 10oz steak and had 2 glasses of wine, your premium will be double next month"

 

[easysurfer]

The author of that piece probably should have read why previous nanny soda taxes failed. Folks don't want to be told what they can and can't consume. Plus, why single out one deemed unhealthy product and not others just as or even more unhealthy?

 

[LOL!]

Yep - you've really got a point there. The USDA helps too.

Eating healthy is more expensive, more time consuming, and requires some skill to make it palatable, compared to buying cheap fast food or quickie mostly prepared meals or going for the lowest cost foods and subsisting on beans rice and tortillas with a little chorizo and cheese thrown in.

I disagree that eating healthy is more expensive and more time consuming. White rice, tortillas, chorizo and cheese are not healthy by many standards.

Chipotle will serve you a fast food burrito of beans and brown rice with other veggies, so it is not that fast food is all bad.

One could open a can of cooked beans which are incredibly cheap. I like black beans myself. Use them in a salad (no cooking needed) and you are done with a nutritious dinner. Oatmeal with additives (walnuts, flaxseed, berries or dried dates) is incredibly simple to make in a microwave. Popcorn (made in a microwavable bowl or air popper) and an apple is all you need for lunch.

Of course, the meat producers, soda producers, bread bakeries, potato farmers, and all the rest of the USA would be pissed if the government tried to put everybody on a plant-based nutritional menu.

 

[LOL!]

But some well-thought-out nudges need to be tried in various places in order to find out what might work. Suppose, for instance, that public schools were incentivized to provide a plant-based (beans, rice, salads, veggies, fruits) to students and no meat, what would happen? Would kids grow up used to such a diet? Or would they refuse to eat anything at school?

Anyways, a long range plan starting with [-]education[/-] indoctrination of children might have a chance.

 

[Huston55]

This is one of those "sounds good" ideas that falls apart with the details. Sure there are some binary things like Smoking, but beyond that, what looks like a lifestyle choice often can be genetic.

+1

While I personally believe in incentivizing healthy behavior, that’s simply nibbling around the edges of the USA’s health care problems. And, the article linked by the OP says as much.

It never ceases to amaze me that we have this debate in our country. Frankly, it doesn’t make us look very smart because, it’s pretty clear what the major fixes are; they’re being practiced by multiple countries around the globe. Unfortunately, this seems like just another “problem” for which there is clearly a technical solution which is not implemented because of partisan politics.

OK...I’m off my soap box

 

[Midpack]

Part of the health problem this country has is the economy's tendency to promote unhealthy, nutritionally unbalanced products. When was the last time you saw a television commercial for kale or broccoli? McDonalds and Burger King, conversely, have a huge ad budget.

Then there's the tendency for makers of processed food to add high levels of sugar or salt to make their product more appealing. Check the sodium content in a can of soup.

People who want or need cheap, convenient dietary options may have little choice but to consume foods that, in the long run, are bad for them. And producers of those products spend big bucks to stimulate that market. It's easy to blame the consumer in this case, but some blame has to rely on the producers of unhealthy products as well.

That’s a little too easy. It’s an iterative process between customer and provider, IMO ultimately customer “drives the bus.”

There are healthier choices at McDonalds and Burger King, but most people don’t order them. Whose fault is that? The calories are right there on the menu these days, and we all know better.

And some people do choose those healthier options, obviously not due to any “promotions.” If more people demanded healthier foods and avoided double bacon cheeseburgers, how long do you think it would take McDonalds and Burger King to totally revamp their menus?

The double bacon cheeseburgers tend to be the most expensive choices, so people are choosing to pay a premium for unhealthy. I’ve seen lots of places roll out and promote healthier options, only to have most customers ignore them. It’s no wonder fast food places aren’t keen on “promoting” healthier options, they’ll keep trying, but they’ve tried before without success.

And more sugar and salt cuts both ways too. People buy the sugary and salty stuff more often. As you note, we’ve had nutritional info for decades, we could choose better tomorrow. People have been educated on healthier eating, and that information is more available now than ever. And just like fast food restaurants, the processed food manufacturers will give us what we actually buy and phase out what we don’t.

You can blame fast food and processed food, but we could change them very quickly.

We get what we deserve. There’s personal responsibility again...

 

[Mr._Graybeard]

That’s a little too easy. It’s an iterative process between customer and provider, IMO ultimately customer “drives the bus.”

There are healthier choices at McDonalds and Burger King, but most people don’t order them. Whose fault is that? The calories are right there on the menu these days, and we all know better.

Yeah, healthy choices are on the menu, but what do their commercials show? A burger with cheese and sauce oozing out of the bun. Food porn.

And some people do choose those healthier options, obviously not due to any “promotions.” If more people demanded healthier foods and avoided double bacon cheeseburgers, how long do you think it would take McDonalds and Burger King to totally revamp their menus?

People are conditioned to place high value on certain foods -- sometimes through generations of culture. On the Ken Burns Vietnam series, there was a Japanese-American veteran who recalled how a family cooking rice in a village caused him to stop and ask for some, he missed rice so much while in the Army.

Burgers are an American tradition, no doubt about it. But again, some of the burger creations the big franchises offer up to capture market share have -- again -- a vaguely pornographic quality. Are sales flat? Add bacon to that double cheeseburger. Want to sell more? Throw some onion rings on top. Some of the deluxe burgers have well over 1000 calories per sandwich.

McD's, BK and others are not just in business to feed people -- their goal is to bring in more diners than the restaurant down the street. So they'll keep on rolling out that bigger, fattier, piled-higher creations in a kind of fast-food arms race. I think I've noticed Mickey backing away from this, but then you have Carl's and others raising the ante.

One of the primary themes of the ad world is, "go ahead -- indulge. You're worth it." It attaches consumption to personal worth. Ad agencies are skilled at wielding the power of suggestion, and they use it to promote indulgence, in food as well as other consumer products. If you're watching commercial TV for any length of time, you'll get that cue to indulge over and over. It can be hard to resist even (especially?) if you're barely aware of it.

 

[Scuba]

The Affordable Gym Act (AGA) - 2022



Highlights:

• beginning in tax year 2023, all Americans older than 18 are required to be a member of a gym providing minimum essential services

• Americans with less-than-median modified adjusted gross income (MAGI) will receive subsidies to help pay their gym membership dues (this includes high-net-worth and very-high-net-worth people who cleverly reduce their MAGI with the expressed purpose of receiving subsidies)

• the costs associated with upgrading gym facilities and services to comply with the AGA will be passed on to consumers in the form of higher membership dues. For example, under the AGA all gyms are required to have an on-site Olympic-sized swimming pool, which could be challenging for gyms located on the top floor of a skyscraper. The lucky folks receiving massive gym membership subsidies will be largely spared the effects of these higher dues.

• to enforce compliance, each year gyms will report to the IRS the months in which their members were enrolled in good standing. All Americans will receive a Form 1095-GYM from their gym to be filed with their annual tax return as proof of compliance with the AGA.

• failure to enroll in a qualified gym in any given year will result in a 'shared responsibility' tax surcharge

• there is no requirement to actually set foot in a qualified gym - membership alone is sufficient to satisfy the AGA



Coming soon to a government near you!

[emoji23]