FINALLY!! A company takes a stand against obese workers.

"The population of Indiana is one of the un-healthiest populations in the country,” said Dr.Robert Goulet of Clarian Health. "The ultimate goal is not to collect more money, the ultimate goal is create a healthier population.”

And his nose grew so large that he fell to the ground.

yeah, but it's still a win-win, they collect more money, and they let people live longer.. so they can collect more money

Robert Goulet? When did he stop singing and get an MD? Wow, he's impressive.

I wasn't aware that Robert Goulet had an MD, did anyone else know this? If that is true, he is one talented man.

Put down the Dove bar wrote:

Yale university professor Rebecca Puhl studies how society treats the obese and she says “these types of punitive programs are a form of weight discrimination."

”There are better ways of addressing this issue than imposing additional prejudice and penalties on this population," she said.

As usual, when a fatass is asked to do something about their problem, somebody is always there to make them a victim.

It's funny the professor made no mention of how much these cows cost a company in missed work days due to illness and all the common colds and flu they pass on to others in the office.

weight discrimination?! HA!

this makes complete sense to me. Unhealthy people who eat a lot of bad food, and smoke, will cost the company more healthcare $$ then HEALTHY people who do neither. So by making a standard, the company is saving money AND employees are getting HEALTHY. i'm sure the obese who claim they were born that way don't understand that, though if they actually attempted to fight their urges and ate healthy, maybe even attempted to exericse, things would be different.

one of my main beefs against people who are smokers is that the majority of them feel as though that nonsmokers should cater to their needs. they don't understand that their own personal smoking is harming MANY others - and they don't seem to care. i don't mean to be a jerk, but i do not smoke, and so when people who do are at my house, or in my car, i don't let them. if i voluntarily put myself at their house or in their car - that's their place so I can exactly complain (because i put myself in that situation). but in public - i can't wait for smoking bans to be more widespred. when i go for a run, the last thing i want in my lungs is a cloud of smoke. if i wanted that crap in me - i'd do it myself. non-smokers should no longer have to deal with the personal mistakes of smokers. i feel that smoking should be a private thing that you do in the privacy of your own home - where you can sit and kill yourself slowly. why harm othes in public? it's no fair. when i'm choosing to be healthy, i still have to encounter unfiltered smoke from those who could care less.

Do you go on tempo runs through bars?

When do you run through clouds of cig. smoke?

The only time I ever caught a whiff was when I went running through a park in Italy because everyone was smoking. Running along a road when a bus or truck passes is much worse and much more likely.

I'm a nonsmoker myself but I think that it's like drinking, "harmful" to the person partaking it, with the small penitential to harm bystanders. Banning smoking in public completely is retarded.

This is weight discrimination the same way paying more for auto insurance for being an under 25 year old male is sex/age discrimination.

This is common sense. If you are a higher risk to cost the company money, you should pay more. And it should be a bunch more than $5 here, $10 dollars there.

If we're going to start assuming that having health care coverage is a right, as some politicians seem to think, we will absolutely need to practice weight discrimination more vigorously. People who choose lifestyles that are dangerous and unhealthy are stealing money for more responsible citizens, and they ought to be treated like criminals.

agreed.

NonSmoker wrote:

but in public - i can't wait for smoking bans to be more widespred. when i go for a run, the last thing i want in my lungs is a cloud of smoke. if i wanted that crap in me - i'd do it myself. non-smokers should no longer have to deal with the personal mistakes of smokers.

How harmful do you think this really is?

The emissions from cars/trucks probably hurt your lungs and body more.

Even smokers will go a decade or more before they notice any negative side effects aside from smokers cough, tooth staining, and addiction. Smoking used to be a lot more widespread, you should appreciate how much less common it is indoors with all the bans now-a-days.

I agree with most of what you're saying though and with the first part of your post.

They can always go another route with this and simply jack up health costs 15$ for everyone. Then, simply deduct the 5 or 10$ from the healthy employees and call it a healthy living bonus or something. That way there is no discrimination simply a reward for those willing to go an extra step in there regular lives to help the company.

Personally, I agree with you. However as long as these oversensitive fatties exist they will cry discrimination at anything of this sort.

What about inherited high cholesterol and/or high blood pressure?

I like non smoking bars however, it should be left up to the owner of the establishment to determine the rules. Post them for everyone to see and if they don't like it they can go elsewhere.

fran wrote:

What about inherited high cholesterol and/or high blood pressure?

Medication takes care of that. Our company doesn't have penalties but they have some nice monentary rewards for healthier lifestyles. I get about an extra $800 a year for this.

But the BMI is crap for a muscular, lean person. 4% bodyfat NFL types would be considered to have an unhealthy weight. I smell lawsuits galore from this one!

Put down the Dove bar wrote:

Starting in 2009, Clarian Health Partners -- the Indiana hospital chain with 26,000 employees -- will start screening workers and docking paychecks $5 if you smoke, $10 if your body mass index is too high, and $5 for high cholesterol, high blood sugar and high blood pressure.

step in the right direction; just have to add a low body fat exemption for people with high bmi due to muscle mass

i hope the people get paid weekly

How are they gonna enforce the smoking one? Won't people just lie?

Not totally. My wife is a marathon runner and watches what she eats, takes medication and her blood pressure is still higher than it should be. But, I can see why she would have to pay the extra because she potentially could cost more to insure over time. Some of these extras can be controlled and some can't but that doesn't change the fact that a person is higher risk.Like life insurance, if you are a smoker you pay extra and if your family has a history of heart attacks you pay extra. You can't control the second but you are still a risk.

Incognito wrote:

fran wrote:

What about inherited high cholesterol and/or high blood pressure?

Medication takes care of that. Our company doesn't have penalties but they have some nice monentary rewards for healthier lifestyles. I get about an extra $800 a year for this.