DNA scan 'could cut cost of insurance - even if results kept secret

[The Straight Story]

DNA scan 'could cut cost of insurance - even if results kept secret

Taking genetic tests to assess potential health risks could mean cheaper medical insurance even if the results are not disclosed, a senior industry executive has told The Times.

Customers who take personal DNA scans will pay lower premiums because insurers believe that they encourage a healthier lifestyle, according to Gil Baldwin, the managing director of Norwich Union Healthcare.

The advent of tests for DNA variants that affect common disorders such as diabetes and heart disease has prompted fears of discrimination and the creation of a “genetic underclass” who cannot buy cover. Mr Baldwin insisted that his company did not see genetics as a tool for cherry picking low-risk customers but as a way of helping them to manage and reduce their risk of disease with the aim of lowering costs for both parties.

In an interview with The Times, he said that people who take genetic screening are likely to act on the results and therefore present a much better risk profile. Insurers will reflect this in premiums, regardless of whether results are disclosed.


“The thing about genetic screening is I'm not interested in knowing what your results are,” Mr Baldwin said. “I'm interested that you are interested in going for a screen, because only a madman would get information saying you're at risk of a heart attack and do nothing with that information.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article5989433.ece

[Raineyb]

1. If you believe that I've got a bridge to sell you.

Get genetic screening and suddenly you'll end up uninsurable, or they'll jack up your rates based on something they saw in the results because I rather doubt that the results will be withheld from the insurance company who is after all paying the bill.

Regards

[The Straight Story]

2. And think about this:

If the government were adopted a plan where you HAD to have insurance coverage (for you/kids) then we will see insurance companies raising rates on anything you do that they think is a risk. Drink soda, your cost goes up, eat out at McD's, goes up more.

Insurance companies will 'tax' our sins without having to have to run for election, get congress to sign off on it, etc.

[LiberalFighter]

4. Which is why insurance companies need to be taken out of the equation for this.

The only thing mandatory about having insurance should be for everyone to have it without insurance companies deciding how much or whether they will accept you.

[enlightenment]

6. The word 'insurance' should be removed from the debate.

It shouldn't be about the ability to buy insurance, it should be about the ability to receive care.

[w4rma]

14. There is no way on Earth that this will make insurance less expensive. (nt)

[Posteritatis]

15. This is explicitly illegal in the United States right now (nt)

[tavalon]

3. One word

Gattica

[adamuu]

5. "I" is not a nucleotide abbreviation.

;-)

[Turbineguy]

7. Obviously it would seem that rates would drop.

Which is precisely why it won't happen. This is supply-side economics disguised as health care.

[subterranean]

8. Interesting that this article comes from the UK.

How large a role does private health insurance play there? If people can't afford insurance, can't they just use the NHS system?

[burythehatchet]

9. I lOVE The Onion

[acmavm]

10. DNA scans, with the results kept secret, will cause people to live healthier

lives?

This is the best one I've heard all day, and I've been up since 5:30 a.m.

[The Straight Story]

11. Didn't mean to keep you waiting all day

:rofl:

[acmavm]

13. It wasn't directed at you doofus. It was directed at the article.

Man, some people's kids.

[SoCalDem]

12. Hah!

Not until we have universal/single-payer health care.

If we had a non-profit system, maybe..but not when insurance companies/big-pharma/Hospitals, Inc run things..