IIRC, you are studying to be a lawyer. For that reason only, the proper phrase would be “list of disabling impairments.” Precision in terms matters.
It will now be easier for the obese to qualify for disability pensions. Watch your taxes rise-many police and firemen are dangerously obese.
I concur. An ounce of prevention worth more than a pound of cure. However, most have a hard time getting past face value - “if it raises insurance rates, it must be bad”. Similar to the idea that if everyone has access to modestly priced preventative care, there will be overall savings by less emergency care treatments.
Preventative care does not, by and large, save money. Cite, cite, cite.
Further, it seems to me that the issue is not simply that mandating insurance coverage of obesity as a disease, will raise insurance rates, but that it will do so with almost no offsetting benefit. There is no effective, long-term treatment of obesity. Insurance money that goes to treating obesity, therefore, is mostly wasted.
Regards,
Shodan
Bariatric surgery is the closest thing we have to an effective, long-term treatment for obesity—well, morbid obesity, anyway. (Morbid obesity being defined as having a BMI of 40 or greater.) Unfortunately, many insurance companies fight like hell to keep people who could really benefit from this surgery getting coverage. There are currently four commonly-performed forms of weight-loss surgery, and they vary in long-term effectiveness. The most effective, the duodenal switch, is also highly effective in treating or preventing diabetes and high cholesterol as well. (Anecdotal evidence—my cholesterol was over 220 prior to my having the DS. Now it’s 112.)
WLS isn’t the ‘cure’ for everyone, but it does save many peoples’ lives, and improves the quality of life for many, many more. I think calling obesity a disease will be a good thing for many, many people.
Thanks. I’m trying not to be too precise on the boards. I find it annoying (when I do it). 