paxman

designr said:

paxman said:

designr said:

paxman said:

designr said:

paxman said:

designr said:

ihatescreennames said:

Paying me for the data I opt in to provide sounds like a trend I would like to see expand.

And, in this case, it's a double-benefit if it encourages someone to begin—and make a habit—of some healthy life choices. That part will pay greater dividends than the money alone.

No healthcare, pharma or insurance company ever did anything other than for their bottom line. There is no way this has anything to do with making healthy choices. A healthy client is a non-paying client, the saying goes. Don't you ever feel you are being scammed?

That is true with the health service delivery part (i.e., doctors, hospitals, and pharmaceuticals). Insurance companies want to avoid paying for these things. One way for this to happen is for you to need it less. One way for that to happen is for you to be healthier.

Totally agree. Following any kind of official guidelines are unlikely to make that happen, however. I am not sure an insurance company cares how much it pays out as whatever it is will always be reflected in what it charges. They more it pays out the more it will charge and the more it will profit. Health for profit doesn't really work. 

Okay. ߙ䦬t;/div>

As a kind of 'aside' here is a graphic of what happened when the USDA introduced the dietary guidelines. You can research this as much as you want. The food pyramid is an absolute joke and was never based on science at all. Today 88% of Americans are classed as metabolically unhealthy. 

No question the food pyramid is a joke—a tragedy really—and why we ought to keep the government out of health and healthcare.

But things like 5,000 steps or more each day, 15 minutes or more of activity per day, and healthy sleep habits and patterns are not the food pyramid.

That is true and whatever keeps you (one) moving is a good thing. Health is a multi faceted thing but a sedentary lifestyle is not going to do you any favours. What's the saying - wanna get fit, go to the gym, wanna lose weight, stay out of the kitchen.  There is some truth to that but exercise and food choices might actually be more important.

designr said:

paxman said:

designr said:

ihatescreennames said:

Paying me for the data I opt in to provide sounds like a trend I would like to see expand.

And, in this case, it's a double-benefit if it encourages someone to begin—and make a habit—of some healthy life choices. That part will pay greater dividends than the money alone.

No healthcare, pharma or insurance company ever did anything other than for their bottom line. There is no way this has anything to do with making healthy choices. A healthy client is a non-paying client, the saying goes. Don't you ever feel you are being scammed?

That is true with the health service delivery part (i.e., doctors, hospitals, and pharmaceuticals). Insurance companies want to avoid paying for these things. One way for this to happen is for you to need it less. One way for that to happen is for you to be healthier.

Totally agree. Following any kind of official guidelines are unlikely to make that happen, however. I am not sure an insurance company cares how much it pays out as whatever it is will always be reflected in what it charges. They more it pays out the more it will charge and the more it will profit. Health for profit doesn't really work. 

waveparticle said:

paxman said:

designr said:

ihatescreennames said:

Paying me for the data I opt in to provide sounds like a trend I would like to see expand.

And, in this case, it's a double-benefit if it encourages someone to begin—and make a habit—of some healthy life choices. That part will pay greater dividends than the money alone.

No healthcare, pharma or insurance company ever did anything other than for their bottom line. There is no way this has anything to do with making healthy choices. A healthy client is a non-paying client, the saying goes. Don't you ever feel you are being scammed?

There is no free lunch. Except from the US government. 

There isn't really a free lunch from the US government unless you are a healthcare, Pharma or insurance company, or unless of course, you are already so wealthy you just don't need it. 

designr said:

ihatescreennames said:

Paying me for the data I opt in to provide sounds like a trend I would like to see expand.

And, in this case, it's a double-benefit if it encourages someone to begin—and make a habit—of some healthy life choices. That part will pay greater dividends than the money alone.

No healthcare, pharma or insurance company ever did anything other than for their bottom line. There is no way this has anything to do with making healthy choices. A healthy client is a non-paying client, the saying goes. Don't you ever feel you are being scammed?

Apparently the call for lower wages was based on the allegation that he earns more than 1400 x more than the lowest paid Apple worker. If so that is kinda crazy in any environment. Perhaps there should be legislation that regulates not the highest or lowest wage within an organization, but instead the allowable disparity. It would likely mean that bottom wages would increase and top wages go down but still grades and hierarchy could be observed.