Obamacare and Smoking

[Bubbahotep]

I would have no problem with it at all if there wasn't a law forcing me to get insurance.

You know what I'll do, I'll just lie. Let them prove I smoke.

 

[wintermile]

It is reported 50,000 individuals die per year due to secondhand smoke. These individuals may have needed the same respiratory treatment as smokers diagnosed with COPD: nebulizer breathing treatments and/or oxygen therapy.

I have read reports linking SIDS to smoking (neural damage).

Smoking cigarettes is a threat to anyone in their path.

However, how will someone with COPD cope without oxygen therapy or nebulizer breathing treatments, especially if, for maintenance purposes, briefly removing a cannula from a concentrator to a portable tank causes a patient to purse their lips together like a fish? Smokers and their victims are big time patients. They need healthcare.

If you smoke, rethink it.

http://images.onlinenursingprograms.com.s3.amazonaws.com/nursing-your-lungs.jpg​

 

[Vylo]

Lot of irony in this thread. Apparently conservatives want people to be responsible for their own actions, unless those actions are smoking. Some of the same people here were complaining that smokers would ruin healthcare if we went to national or single payer.

Newsflash, smoking has high health costs. If we went the opposite direction and did away with insurance and simply paid as we went; smokers would still pay a massive amount more.

 

[kermit]

Then you must go really nuts when people abuse emergency rooms for non-serious medical issues.

Yep

And people who over-eat

Yep

People who over use tanning booths

Yep

People who don't practice good oral hygiene (dental costs)

Yep. Poor oral hygene causes many more health problems and costs than merely dental costs.

People who drive small cars (greater chance of injury in accidents)

There is little correllation between vehicle size and safety. The 2012 Subaru Impreza has the highest possible crash rating yet many SUVs and trucks do not.

People who don't wear helmuts when driving motorcycles

Yep

Etc, etc, ad infinitum....

People who live lifestyles that disprortionately burden the system should pay more. I find it hilarious how quickly the right-wing claims of personal responsibility break down when put into practice.

For my last 2 employers there was a $1200 and $600 additional cost for insurance if you were a smoker. Actually, they offered a discount to non-smokers and smokers who agreed to enter a smoking cessation program.

 

[dogs4thewin]

Lot of irony in this thread. Apparently conservatives want people to be responsible for their own actions, unless those actions are smoking. Some of the same people here were complaining that smokers would ruin healthcare if we went to national or single payer.

Newsflash, smoking has high health costs. If we went the opposite direction and did away with insurance and simply paid as we went; smokers would still pay a massive amount more.

While this is true, if you do it this way then maybe people will quit smoking if they KNOW that just choosing to do so we cost out the nose, as opposed only costing out the nose when and if they get sick then between the cost of the insurance and the cost of the cigarettes many will either get them on the black market ( which may well cost more than buying it legally) or be forced to go through withdrawal for a short time when they quit, because other wise they will go on public assistance and still will not be able to afford it. Not to mention, they will HAVE to get it on the black market at that point, because you are not supposed to use food stamps and other public assistance money to buy cigarettes alcohol ECT/

 

[iluvatar5150]

Lot of irony in this thread. Apparently conservatives want people to be responsible for their own actions, unless those actions are smoking.

No kidding, though I wouldn't call it irony so much as I'd call it hypocrisy.

Here's an idea: if you're worried about smokers being gouged, tell them to stop dropping $8+/pack on cancer sticks.

Coincidentally, $4250/yr comes out to $11.64/day, or almost exactly the same price as a 1-1.5 pack/day habit (depending on your location and preferred brand).

-Dan.

 

[dogs4thewin]

Yep


Yep


Yep


Yep. Poor oral hygene causes many more health problems and costs than merely dental costs.


There is little correllation between vehicle size and safety. The 2012 Subaru Impreza has the highest possible crash rating yet many SUVs and trucks do not.


Yep


People who live lifestyles that disprortionately burden the system should pay more. I find it hilarious how quickly the right-wing claims of personal responsibility break down when put into practice.

For my last 2 employers there was a $1200 and $600 additional cost for insurance if you were a smoker. Actually, they offered a discount to non-smokers and smokers who agreed to enter a smoking cessation program.

Then should people like myself who have to take medications for conditions NOT caused by lifestyle choices be forced to pay more for the increased risk of liver damage leading to the increased likelyhood of needing a transplant?

 

[kermit]

Then should people like myself who have to medications for conditions NOT caused by lifestyle choices be forced to pay more for the increased risk of liver damage leading to the increased likelyhood of needing a transplant?

Of course not. People who lead reasonably healthy lifestyles still get sick, injured or suffer from cronic conditions and they shouldn't be forced to pay more due to things beyond their control. But if a person chooses to live a lifestyle that greatly increases their risk of getting sick, injured or having a cronic condition then why should everyone else have to pay for their choice?

If you don't smoke, limit sun exposure and watch what you eat the odds of you getting cancer or diabetes is pretty low. However, if you are an obese smoker who goes to tanning booths the odds of you getting cancer or diabetes is nearly a near certainty.

 

[dogs4thewin]

Of course not. People who lead reasonably healthy lifestyles still get sick, injured or suffer from cronic conditions and they shouldn't be forced to pay more due to things beyond their control. But if a person chooses to live a lifestyle that greatly increases their risk of getting sick, injured or having a cronic condition then why should everyone else have to pay for their choice?

I was wondering because even though between my seizures and mental health ( two things that likely I can do little to nothing besides medication about the fact is that like age it increases the risks of certain health problems, yet it will pretty much be a life without parole situation.

 

[Steve Petersen]

So what CAN'T the State do in the name of public health?

 

[dogs4thewin]

So what CAN'T the State do in the name of public health?

completely control the black market.

 

[jayem]

People must have affordable health insurance. I'd rather keep premiums for smokers moderate, and put an additional excise tax on tobacco sales, that will go to health insurors. Same for alcohol. (And personally, I'd have no problems with the same applied to high trans fat foods.) But this would work best in a one-payer system, where there is a single health fund to receive these tax revenues.

 

[motherprayer]

People must have affordable health insurance. I'd rather keep premiums for smokers moderate, and put an additional excise tax on tobacco sales, that will go to health insurors. Same for alcohol. (And personally, I'd have no problems with the same applied to high trans fat foods.) But this would work best in a one-payer system, where there is a single health fund to receive these tax revenues.

That's actually a brilliant idea. Rather than charge higher premiums, heighten the tax, and use the added taxed paid to pay for the healthcare of smokers. This way, a person's "premium" would be corrolated with how much they smoke, and there would be more incentive to stop, IMHO, than just raising a healthcare premium.

 

[Bubbahotep]

It is reported 50,000 individuals die per year due to secondhand smoke. These individuals may have needed the same respiratory treatment as smokers diagnosed with COPD: nebulizer breathing treatments and/or oxygen therapy.

A massive lie if ever there was one.

 

[dogs4thewin]

ANY of this only works though if there is no black market. Newsflash on the black market the government cannot control it.

 

[wintermile]

A massive lie if ever there was one.

Since those exposed to secondhand smoke are subject to 7000 chemicals, their health is compromised.

Read the sources from the CDC and then dispute them.

In adults who have never smoked, secondhand smoke can cause heart disease and/or lung cancer.3

Heart Disease
For nonsmokers, breathing secondhand smoke has immediate harmful effects on the cardiovascular system that can increase the risk for heart attack. People who already have heart disease are at especially high risk.3,5
Nonsmokers who are exposed to secondhand smoke at home or work increase their heart disease risk by 25–30%.3
Secondhand smoke exposure causes an estimated 46,000 heart disease deaths annually among adult nonsmokers in the United States.6

Lung Cancer
Nonsmokers who are exposed to secondhand smoke at home or work increase their lung cancer risk by 20–30%.3
Secondhand smoke exposure causes an estimated 3,400 lung cancer deaths annually among adult nonsmokers in the United States.6

CDC - Fact Sheet - Secondhand Smoke Facts - Smoking & Tobacco Use​

Secondhand smoke victims can be diagnosed with COPD. Refer to the Tables in the CDC's Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report.

Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Among Adults — United States, 2011​

 

[Vylo]

So what CAN'T the State do in the name of public health?

Thing is this isnt the state. It doesnt matter if the government, private insurance or willy wonka's factory provides the care. Smokers still cost more and therefore would be charged more.

 

[MSBS]

Frankly, I'm tired of paying for other people's poor choices in life through higher insurance premiums (yes, we collectively pay for their behavior).

Ultimately, since smokers die at a much younger age, so don't take up resources through years long chronic illnesses in old age, there is a net savings to the government if people are smokers. Certainly, the savings is back-loaded, but smokers don't cost more.

Of course, there is also the savings in social security benefits as well.

 

[kermit]

Ultimately, since smokers die at a much younger age, so don't take up resources through years long chronic illnesses in old age, there is a net savings to the government if people are smokers. Certainly, the savings is back-loaded, but smokers don't cost more.

That's just not true. While smokers may die sooner on average, smoking related health problems will start disproportionately sooner. Many smoking related problems can begin in a person's 30's.

 

[Veritas]

I have no sympathy for smokers.

I feel the same way about liberals. Since they voted for this vis a vis Obama, they should also pay a surcharge.