John Hancock Will Include Fitness Tracking In All Life Insurance Policies (venturebeat.com) 295
An anonymous reader quotes a report from VentureBeat: John Hancock, one of the oldest and largest North American life insurers, will stop underwriting traditional life insurance and instead sell only interactive policies that track fitness and health data through wearable devices and smartphones, the company said on Wednesday. The move by the 156-year-old insurer, owned by Canada's Manulife Financial, marks a major shift for the company, which unveiled its first interactive life insurance policy in 2015. It is now applying the model across all of its life coverage. Policyholders score premium discounts for hitting exercise targets tracked on wearable devices such as a Fitbit or Apple Watch and get gift cards for retail stores and other perks by logging their workouts and healthy food purchases in an app. In theory, everybody wins, as policyholders are incentivized to adopt healthy habits and insurance companies collect more premiums and pay less in claims if customers live longer.
And so it begins (Score:5, Insightful)
tracked on wearable devices such as a Fitbit or Apple Watch
Yeah, THAT will go over well with my employer. Specifically, no smart watches in the building. AT all, ever.
Re: (Score:2)
Don't worry, if you contact my new insurance broker start up company, you are guaranteed to always get the best price available from that company.
All thanks to our revolutionary app available for all types of devices, you are guaranteed to always have the best fitness and health data available.
Term life is for your kids' college fund (Score:2)
So why should I give up money now, so that I can have more when I am dead?
The pitch I've seen most often from AIG's kinetic-typography-driven TV commercials is that life insurance allows your children to complete their education at a trade school or four-year university despite your untimely death.
Re:And so it begins (Score:5, Informative)
Serious answer: life insurance is geared towards somebody who is a major provider for the family. The idea is that you're bringing in an income to support your family; if you die, the family no longer has that income, and hence could well hit hard times. Having life insurance provides a safety net, so that the rest of the family can continue on without having to worry about how to replace your income. (Think education, food, health, etc.)
If you have children, it may well be worth the premium to know that they won't be hit with hard times if you aren't there. If you don't have children, it probably isn't worth so much. For me - single, no kids, no dependents to speak of - I haven't bothered taking out a life insurance policy; there's no point. If I had children, it might well be a different story.
It might not make sense for your circumstances, and that's fine. But insurance is all about identifying and managing risk - pay a small amount on a regular basis, just in case you have a need for a much larger sum for some unexpected reason. If you can afford the hit of the larger sum, that small amount may not be worth it. If you can't, it may be.
Re: (Score:2)
Then the best life insurance policy is forcing your family members to become self-reliant and hard times proof ASAP, and/or learn to make future-safe choices.
I'll be sure to tell that to my 2 year old, after riding my motorcycle home from work.
Re: (Score:2)
Life insurance has never made any sense to me.
I am alive, and healthy, and can enjoy life. So why should I give up money now, so that I can have more when I am dead?
Also, why would I want my wife to think I am worth more dead than alive?
I think you're being facetious, but my life insurance policy is not for me, it's so my wife won't have to dip into our retirement funds to pay the mortgage if I die. We have a decent retirement portfolio, so if I were worried about her killing me off for money, it doesn't take insurance for that.
It's kind of the same reason I have an action-cam on my bike -- it's not really for me, it's so my wife can go after the guy that ran me down and hopefully get a good settlement.
Re: (Score:2)
The idea is to protect your family from your untimely death. If you are killed in an accident they won't be unable to pay the mortgage.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Life insurance has never made any sense to me.
I am alive, and healthy, and can enjoy life. So why should I give up money now, so that I can have more when I am dead?
Also, why would I want my wife to think I am worth more dead than alive?
With that kind of logic, she probably already does.
Re: (Score:3)
I am alive, and healthy, and can enjoy life. So why should I give up money now, so that I can have more when I am dead?
I'm married. My wife and I have two kids (8 & 10) and a mortgage on our house. Both my wife and I work full time.
We have a life insurance plan.
If I'm hit by a bus and killed this afternoon, the life insurance means my wife won't suffer financial hardship. She won't have to sell the house (she likely would without life insurance), she'll be able to afford a nanny to look after th
Re: (Score:2)
Insurance is really just legalized gambling. Much like the tracks, not all horses are a good retur
Re: (Score:3)
Thing is, it's none of my fucking business what you do in your PRIVATE life, and it's none of YOUR fucking business what I do in mine.
I'm not willing to sacrifice my privacy, or yours, to maximize profits for Insurance companies. You think you're going to get LOWER rates from this?
Oh you sweet summer child.
Re:And so it begins (Score:4, Insightful)
Insurance is really just legalized gambling. Much like the tracks, not all horses are a good return on investment. No one wants to bet on a loser and the only reason to do so is because the payout is so high.
While true, what the insurance companies do now is like increasing the betting cost on low ranked horses without increasing the payout. The end result is that no one will go the races any more.
The more you track the customers and better predict their future, the less incentive there is for those customers to buy insurance. If the premiums could reflect your risk with 100% accuracy, you'd lose no matter what. The closer they get to accurate and farther from chaos, the more certain a loss will be, and the less incentive there is to participate.
Re: (Score:2)
If you force everyone to pay $300/mo on healthcare insurance...
Just out of interest, is that considered cheap health insurance in the US?
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, it's very cheap. Employers tend to pay double that per employee.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Most families are paying more than their rent/mortgage for health care in the US, unless their employer is chipping in a very large portion.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe if there was universal health coverage like in any other modern country.
But the fast-driving, red-meat eating dudes would likely rather drive themselves directly to the grave that have that, for some reason.
"They bought their ticket, they knew what they were getting into. I say, let 'em crash!" -- Airplane! (1980)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
3 years later...oh, actually eating red meat is good for you now. Here's a refund...just kidding. Just wait until you look at people's egg and butter/margarine consumption histories. Everything bad is good again and vice versa. Good old grains are currently the devil.
Re: And so it begins (Score:2)
Donâ(TM)t worry, you will just pay more for not using the watch.
Re: (Score:2)
Not fit enough, eat too much red meat, drive too fast....sucks to be you.
Actually I'm totally for that last one. Speed limits aren't suggestions. Bout time the assholes putting the rest of us in danger got their due.
Re:And so it begins (Score:5, Insightful)
I take responsibility for my life by refusing to use tracking devices that communicate with companies that show no evidence of being able to spelldata security, much less actually implement it.
Particularly since, which the insurance company is bound by HIPPA laws, Fitbit is not.
This will last until the first breach, which is inevitable.
Re:And so it begins (Score:5, Informative)
FTFY.
If you think this won't last, I invite you to look at the shitstorm that Equifax went through after they were hacked.... they'll be begging us for mercy.... any day now...... /sarcasm
Even if they do get hacked, it will be swept under the rug as SOP, and you'll just loose even more control of your life same as always. Only now if you refuse you won't be able to afford a doctor without leaving the country. To which everyone else in the US will say: "And nothing of value was lost." Because they are all a bunch of fat and stupid sheep. Welcome to the first days of hell, we've all earned it.
Re: (Score:3)
Breaches are nothing, a temporary PR blip.
Look at Equifax. Masses of extremely personal data leaked out, media blitz for a day or two, and they are still operating with a promise to do better next time.
Re: (Score:3)
So that's an interesting question... Is it permissible for a HIPAA bound entity to require you to waive your rights by disclosing protected health information to a third party which isn't HIPAA bound?
If my doctor said, "I'll only see you if you agree to let me post your weight and cholesterol numbers in a classified ad in the New York Times," I can't see that working out well for Doc. (I also make zero distinction between the security/privacy stan
Re:And so it begins (Score:4, Insightful)
"This will last until the first breach, which is inevitable."
Um....yeah. Tell that to Equifax. Virtually no fucking penalties of any significance WHATSOEVER.
Re: (Score:2)
Life Insurance has nothing to do with socialist health care systems. You have to be dead before you can collect. That isn't exactly health care.
Re: (Score:2)
LOL, what is NASA afraid of? Someone using a phone to steal secrets on their decades-old space shuttle technology?
Re:And so it begins (Score:4, Informative)
Not sure about the OPs case, but if you work around gear that’s sensitive to RF noise, you don’t want everyone brining their own transmitter to work. Even without a radio, electronics can interfere with sensitive equipment.
Works for now (Score:2)
I just don't know about this (Score:5, Insightful)
These should be things that one has to "opt-in" for.
I don't want the "discount" for being on an electronic leash......
There is just something about this that rubs me the wrong way.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If it's employer provided/subsidized, you have no realistic option.
It should be ILLEGAL for them to have that as a compulsory term.
Full stop.
Try that shit in Europe and see how long it works for you.
Re: (Score:2)
It's interesting because in Canada there's already provincial legislation that makes this illegal. My guess is that they're going to try going the federal route(that there's no legislation covering all canadians) when this is challenged in court stating that the provinces are unable to regulate it, the courts of course already have already set precedent in other issues similar to this. The insurance industry was slapped over similar attempts with cars and driving habits a few years ago.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"The insurer will begin converting existing life insurance policies to Vitality in 2019, it said."
Or if they just decided to unilaterally change the terms of your agreement.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes but it is illegal to driver without insurance...
No it isn't - in some states.
Re: (Score:3)
EVERYTHING about this is wrong... (Score:4, Interesting)
Where I work we have a health plan set up with Virgin Pulse, and everyone is strongly encouraged to get trackers for #of steps etc.
Pretty much everyone has them, because hey - they're cool right? And it automatically uploads your info. Luckily for me, you are still able to manually enter your steps and other info - so I wrote a script I run every morning to go log into the site and enter them. Why would I even bother? Because they charge you a lot more for your policy if you don't. You have to hit a certain goal for the quarter or they penalize you.. whoops, I mean, you don't get the discount. And it is several hundred dollars.
But I REFUSE to be tagged and tracked like a wild animal, all for the sake of "fitness". Which is a total sham. The "nutrition advice" and pseudo-medical tips they constantly hammer you with on their site are garbage. I lie on the surveys, and tell them what they want to hear. Not because I eat garbage and don't want them to know, but because I know better than their one-size-fits-all advice. I know what I know through personal research, and listening to actual experts on these things. I have been at my ideal weight for 6 years, and the only "concern" with my health is high cholesterol - which I don't really know if it is a concern or not. I haven't tried to get a real lipid panel done because my insurance won't cover it. There are 5 indicators for metabolic syndrome, and my cholesterol is the only one that isn't perfect. Yet doctors will try to put me on statins - based on one overly generalized test that tells you nothing valuable. High cholesterol, in and of itself, tells you nothing about possible risks to your health. "any history of heart issues?" Yes, my father had 2 stints put in a couple of years ago. "ahh, I see... so we should put you on statins". Oh, by the way, my father has an absolutely normal lipid panel. So why do you want to prescribe statins to me again?
Our healthcare and insurance industries are abysmal. I went for a checkup once (required by the healthplan) and all was well. A couple of weeks later, I got a letter from my life insurance company that said I was required to enter rehab in order to keep my policy. I called my agent, who I knew pretty well, and he said he couldn't talk about it. I tried to call my doctor, and doctors don't talk to you. This went on for a few days, and finally I was a bit frantic and my life insurance guy said "your doctor indicated that you use drugs, so you need to attend rehab to keep your policy". I was LIVID. I left a VERY terse message at my doctor's office and did something that I hate - I threatened legal action if they did not contact me. I eventually found out that the medical assistant, who had done the whole "do you smoke... do you drink... " questions at the beginning of that visit had checked that I use marijuana. Which I do not. I still never found out why, but have to assume it was some mistake - why would I say I did? Anyway, I demanded that they send a letter to my insurance company to tell them it was a mistake on their part. Now... I don't tell my doctor anything. I answer all their stupid little questions the way they want me to, and I go about my life. What REALLY burns me about this is that it was my life insurance company (not my health insurance) that knew about this mistake - but because it was protected information, they couldn't actually tell me what was going on. It's an old word, but "cahoots" is about as perfect of a word that can be used to describe it.
My point is - don't play into these types of programs. It may seem easy, but it is such a slippery slope. It's only paranoid if they aren't out to get you - and these fuckers are out to get you! Not to mention that their data collection is only to benefit them, not you. If you think all the people who have those fitness trackers are getting healthier because of them... think again. Everyone is still the same. The overweight lady who wears her tracker and goes to the gym every day is still gaining wei
Sounds like a big hassle (Score:2)
Premiums for spyware? (Score:2)
So they're basically saying, you will be paying your life insurance premium and they get to spy on everything you do basically.
Sounds recipe for making it easier for insurance companies to deny claims and nothing more.
And if you're a good little insured person, they'll give you swag. Seriously? Like the same types of swag we used to get from Marlboro miles? No thanks.
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds recipe for making it easier for insurance companies to deny claims and nothing more.
If you have a heart attack and die, the fitness tracker should report that incident correctly. And they'll have to pay. What they will do in the meantime is to jack up your monthly premiums should you not keep up with your fitness goals. Or spend too much time in bars or awake late at night.
Re: (Score:2)
I actually think of this as a way to make people pay for externalized costs. Like the coal industry. You want to consistently be a part of bad practices? Now it's time to pay for it. Eating large quantities of fats and red meats should force people to be on a higher plan.
Granted, I don't think people's best interests are at the heart of this monitoring idea, but I think that's the best way to get lower premiums. If our diets were better our health care bills would be drastically reduced over time.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think people's best interests are at the heart of this monitoring idea
If it motivates people to get off their fat asses and exercise in return for a lower premium, it serves the interests of both the insurance company and the client to not drop dead too soon.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Worse, they can now sell a very comprehensive data set on you, for much more than the discount you traded for.
As a bonus, when you decide you've had enough and cancel, it's a guarantee that data will be peddled other companies, who will then jack your premiums or refuse to insure you based on any indication of liability. Conveniently provided by your fitness data blob, that you traded for some stationary and a beach towel.
Progressive Snapshot Hacks (Score:2)
I read a story about a guy who hacked his Progressive car tracker thing so it would transmit when not plugged into his car.
Here's the reddit story: https://www.reddit.com/r/hacki... [reddit.com]
Looking forward to the creative hacks people will come up with for these forced insurance trackers.
Re: (Score:2)
Just don't get in a wreck with the dongle at home. Or that patch cord attached.
Re: (Score:2)
What are they gonna do. Raise your rate?
Re: (Score:2)
> What are they gonna do. Raise your rate?
You wish. They'll refuse to cover the cost of the damages if they found out you were cheating them.
Re: (Score:2)
That's a legal quagmire that they'll have to work out with both the other party and yourself. They're way more likely to pay the claim and drop you. Cheaper that way.
Re:Progressive Snapshot Hacks (Score:5, Insightful)
They're way more likely to pay the claim and drop you
Yeah...that won't work for the life insurance ones. Everyone gets dropped after the first claim.
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds like insurance fraud, which is a crime. Don't collect $200, go straight to jail.
Re: (Score:2)
In Soviet America everything is a crime!
You've confused America with Europe.
Re: (Score:3)
Looking forward to the creative hacks people will come up with for these forced insurance trackers.
Well, this explains why I saw a guy jogging this morning with about twenty fitness tracking devices on his arms and legs.
I thought he was probably a student in the sports medicine program at the local university.
But I guess he was just outsourcing fitness training for a lot of folks who would rather pay him to wear their devices, than to jog themselves.
Enjoy your $50 amazon card we gave you (Score:2)
As you're healing up from that $8k torn ACL you got trying to earn it. And does anyone really believe this?
"Tingle said, as Vitality policyholders worldwide live 13 to 21 years longer than the rest of the insured population."
Re: (Score:2)
"Tingle said, as Vitality policyholders worldwide live 13 to 21 years longer than the rest of the insured population."
With no attempt to distinguish between cause and effect. I suspect that people who use such devices live healthier lives anyway, since the primary motivation for these devices seems to be bragging rights.
useless data sources (Score:5, Funny)
a friend of mine mentioned that when he wears his fitbit on his right hand and plays his ukulele, his recorded activity level goes through the roof. so getting those insurance discounts while sitting on your couch will be easy. ditto for posted food choices. when the company figures that out their next move will be to become big brother.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:useless data sources (Score:5, Funny)
This comment is much funnier if I take "plays his ukelele" as a euphemism.
Re: (Score:2)
I also like to play my ukulele.
Re: (Score:2)
What about putting it on the arm that... you know... you do yourself with?
Now THERE'S a situation where everybody wins!
Different combination (Score:2)
How about a different idea? How about all health insurance policies including some life insurance?
Re: (Score:2)
How about, no?
More f'ing data aggregation... (Score:2)
It sucks that they are going to pry into what I do, when I do it. It sucks worse that they will sell this information, and not invest in the data governance and security required to protect that information.
Re: (Score:2)
No point asking Apple for the data. They don't have access to it. The user gives permission, not Apple. They designed it that way.
No. Fuck them. (Score:3, Interesting)
The sad part is people will be ok with this. Fuck them, too.
What is this, a space mission where our vitals must be constantly monitored?
No tattle dongles on my car, no smart watch on my wrist. If the insurer balks, Iâ(TM)ll take my shit elsewhere. If my employer balks, Iâ(TM)ll look for. New job.
Fuck 5em, fuck 5em, fuck them, and may the inbred spawns of bacteria that came up with this idea and all ideas like it have an interesting life. I wish them a very interesting, quite educational life.
Good thing I have more years behind me than in front of me, if this is the direction the world is going I have no interest in partaking.
There's bad news and more bad news (Score:2)
The bad news is your life insurance premium just went up.
More bad news is that the more it increased, the more likely actuaries and statisticians and people who study this kind of thing think it is that you might die soon.
I have a Mi Band 2, but the data is only for me...lol, I'm not that naive. I just assume Xiaomi is counting the steps I take and the hours I sleep and even my heartbeat. I refused to grant the app access to my contacts and location and got over it.
I probably wouldn't be comfortable shari
Put the tracker on your dog (Score:2)
Put the tracker on your dog (or a small child). That will log so much exercise the insurance would be free.
Re: (Score:2)
I know you meant it as a joke. But before anybody gets any funny ideas, if the insurance company finds out you were cheating, and if I were them, I wouldn't even tell you that I know. I'd be happy to let you keeping paying the premiums. It is when you or your family comes to collect, I'd claim fraud on your part.
You have two choices (Score:2)
1. Live a healthy lifestyle.
2. Don't buy life insurance from this company.
What is up with all the griefers?
If a large, well established company is doing this (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You really went with "you don't need privacy if you have nothing to hide?"
Re: (Score:2)
2. Don't buy life insurance from this company.
Companies that don't differentiate based on fitness trackers will have to increase the premiums because of the influx of unhealthier people. This will then also affect all the people who can't wear a fitness tracker for legitimate reasons.
Re: (Score:2)
Even better. Don't buy a life insurance at all. It is the most worthless insurance ever. Put the money you would pay to the insurance company on your savings account. That is a much better deal.
My life insurance policy (through employer) of about $200K, costs about $3/month. That's about $36/year. Over 30 years, that's a whopping $1080 at the current rate. If I were to just put that money in a savings account and let it gain interest, it wouldn't amount to much.
And hey, if I die in an accident, it's $400K. Score!
An example of stupid (Score:5, Insightful)
A fitness tracker, like the stupid BMI calculation, would show me as layabout. Every actual measure of my health shows me to be in great health. I'm 65 and compete successfully at a world level in judo and bjj for my age. This is the classic case of how vs what. Look at the actual thing to be measured, not a poorly defined process that tries to look at how something MIGHT be measured. .
Re: (Score:2)
This is so dumb. A tracker would show me as terribly inactive because...
It's only dumb if a financial majority of the insurer's customers are similar to you.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Look at the actual thing to be measured, not a poorly defined process that tries to look at how something MIGHT be measured. .
While I am against what they are doing, I'm curious how you would suggest they actually measure your fitness, if not by any of the doable measures.
Their interests actually align with yours (Score:2)
another corporate conspiracy ? (Score:5, Interesting)
Back around 1950 a major insurance company with an excellent reputation and very low premium rates set stringent requirements for its customers. Agents would fill in the forms with the usual information for clients; age, address, some medical background, etc. But potential clients had to qualify for the insurance policy. Like any company; older people would pay more for life insurance. People with accidents would pay more for auto insurance. But unlike other companies, many medium risk clients were simply not allowed to buy from this insurance company. At any price. And all approved clients got low premiums and were happy.
But they went beyond that. Agents had a secret checklist for every potential client. Things you might never guess could disqualify you for the money saving policy. One item that has stuck in my memory all this time is this: any potential client who enters the agent's office wearing boots is automatically disqualified.
Actuaries must have determined risk factors far beyond the norm. Perhaps they consulted psychologists and did unusual surveys to come up with odd criteria. Nevertheless, insurance companies take risks and need to protect themselves. If you want cheap insurance from a reliable company, expect to prove that you are worthy.
Re: (Score:2)
One item that has stuck in my memory all this time is this: any potential client who enters the agent's office wearing boots is automatically disqualified.
Did they close in the winter?
Gimmick (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
you are correct! and i'm betting the real benefit for THEM comes from the fact that they get paid by the firms sending you gift cards, perks and healthy food (all those things are just ads in disguise)
Re: (Score:2)
Ah fuck them sideways with a rusty chainsaw (Score:2)
What if you don't have or want a smartphone? I don't and refuse to have one and I'm far from alone in that.
This has got to be one of the stupidest things I've heard lately. Won't last.
Re: (Score:3)
*Old man yells at cloud.*
Re: (Score:2)
In theory, everybody wins, (Score:2)
> In theory, everybody wins,
Except those who have been paying their life-insurance premiums for 30 years and are forced onto these "New & Improved" spyware policies which immediately classify them as a high risk and void their policy.
Which is probably EXACTLY what this change is designed to do - dump all the boomers who have been dumb enough to pay for life insurance for decades now that they're getting to the age where 90% of them will be dead within 10 years.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm guessing they cannot just get rid of existing policies like that. My guess is that only new policies can have this limitation applied. Or, there will be some fun class action lawsuits coming up./p.
In the not so distant future (Score:3)
Talking fitness trackers mandatory for life of health insurance. No mute button. But it will provide very helpful advice. Obey or pay more than you make for a premium. For example:
Jim, you are not exercising enough. Cotton picking is great exercise. We have provided a field ready to harvest. Instructions are uploaded to your Phon.
Now, pick that cotton Jim.......more........more.......pick faster.......come on! Put your back into it BOYYY!!!
Re: (Score:2)
*Dig that hole. Forget the sun.*
*When at last the work is done, don't sit down, it's time to dig another one.*
Thoughts from someone familiar with life insurance (Score:2)
Actuarial background.
For life insurance, risk analysis and pricing is done at the time of sale. How healthy are you now? For 1 year term (policy expires in 1 year) this is very accurate. For a whole life policy (inforce until you die or stop paying premiums) policy this is a statistical question. Thus actuaries... Policies can be on the books for up to 100 years (issue around birth, inforce until death). (Aside: This is a technical debt nightmare from a systems perspective)
The article says there are
Activity robots (Score:2)
Panopticon (Score:3)
everybody wins (Score:2)
Just another company to stay away from.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
My life insurance policies are through my employer. Guess you haven't worked for the right place yet. Many large companies include life insurance (among others) as a part of their benefit packages.
Re: (Score:2)
they could make the system voluntary
Sounds like they are. Just buy your life insurance elsewhere.
I don't know how they will handle existing fixed premium contracts. If you have one, you are probably good until it's term (if any) is up.
Re: (Score:2)
Let those that care pay higher premiums reflecting the reduced information available to the insurance company
Nah....it will reflect the worst case scenario because you obviously have something to hide. Just like spoliation of evidence [wikipedia.org] in a court case. You will get the highest possible premiums, not an average.
Re: (Score:2)
You're also free not to buy at all.