Weighty Arguments
Insuring our waistlines
Does having health insurance make people fat? A July working paper from the National Bureau of Economic Research found "strong evidence that being insured increases body mass index and obesity." Not only that, but public insurance seemed to have a substantially stronger effect than private insurance: It was associated with an average body mass increase of 2.1 points, vs. a 1.3-point increase for privately insured patients.
As Congress debates health insurance reform, one of the key arguments for government-mandated universal health insurance in general, and a new public insurance option in particular, is that a better insured population would mean lower costs in the long term. In a health care address on July 22, President Barack Obama warned that without reform "we will not be able to control our deficit."
But if more insurance means more obesity, we may be in a bind. A July study published by the journal Health Affairs claims that obesity is responsible for almost 10 percent of medical spending in the U.S. each year. While many argue those figures are overstated, it's undeniable that diabetes and other expensive obesity-related conditions are on the rise.
So why would a more insured population also be a fatter, pricier population? Simple behavioral economics. According to the Health Affairs study, "by insulating people from the costs of obesity-related medical care expenditures, insurance coverage creates moral hazard in behaviors related to body weight." An ounce of insurance might be worth a pound of, well, you know.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
My only point is that if you take the Bible straight, as I'm sure many of Reasons readers do, you will see a lot of the Old Testament stuff as absolutely insane. Even some cursory knowledge of Hebrew and doing some mathematics and logic will tell you that you really won't get the full deal by just doing regular skill english reading for those books. In other words, there's more to the books of the Bible than most will ever grasp. I'm not concerned that Mr. Crumb will go to hell or anything crazy like that! It's just that he, like many types of religionists, seems to take it literally, take it straight...the Bible's books were not written by straight laced divinity students in 3 piece suits who white wash religious beliefs as if God made them with clothes on...the Bible's books were written by people with very different mindsets..
..in order to really get the Books of the Bible, you have to cultivate such a mindset, it's literally a labyrinth, that's no joke
vdfa
safasgasd
thank you man thanx a lot's
is good