Do you smoke? Y/N - Page 3 - e-cigarette-forum.com • The place for electronic cigarette reviews, news and chat

maryjo · 07-03-2009, 02:25 PM

For insurance purposes you would be considered a tobacco user if you use nicotine - thats how they overcharge the "dippers and chewers"

TropicalBob · 07-03-2009, 02:32 PM

Overcharge? They'll be happy to show you the charts of expenses they've tabulated for chewers and dippers! That is not a healthy practice. Our goal, though, should be to get companies to recognize harm differences involving various tobacco and nicotine products. A smoker or dipper would get the very highest penalty; an e-cig user or snus user would get a much lower premium. All nicotine and tobacco is not equally harmful, yet all users are treated as if they smoked 30 cigarettes a day.

maryjo · 07-03-2009, 02:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by QueenInNC

What about for health/life insurance? They would test for nicotine. Would they just put you down as a smoker? I have wondered this and even asked here once, I think.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TropicalBob

Overcharge? They'll be happy to show you the charts of expenses they've tabulated for chewers and dippers! That is not a healthy practice. Our goal, though, should be to get companies to recognize harm differences involving various tobacco and nicotine products. A smoker or dipper would get the very highest penalty; an e-cig user or snus user would get a much lower premium. All nicotine and tobacco is not equally harmful, yet all users are treated as if they smoked 30 cigarettes a day.

Love ya TropicalBob, but I don't see them charging extra for the obese. Lets see a chart comparing the french fry lovers and salt suckers to dippers and chewers!

TropicalBob · 07-03-2009, 03:12 PM

Oh .. we very much agree. The insurance practices infuriate me, and worry me that before long, with our medical records computerized in a large database, the companies will be able to identify people with a genetic proclivity for cancer, or diabetes, or heart failure, and charge even higher premiums for those unfortunate folks. Not good ...

maryjo · 07-03-2009, 03:18 PM

At least the 0 nic users will reap some benefit with the insurance co's

Janetda · 07-06-2009, 06:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maryjo

Love ya TropicalBob, but I don't see them charging extra for the obese. Lets see a chart comparing the french fry lovers and salt suckers to dippers and chewers!

Speaking as one of the obese, yes they do charge more...love them french frys!

j

CoderGuy · 07-06-2009, 06:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TropicalBob

But Sun's point is correct and those using e-cigs should note it well. You are NOT a non-smoker until your system is free of nicotine FOR ONE YEAR. You will pay more in insurance until that cotinine-free state shows up on tests.

And since it's not "smoking" being tested, you remain a "smoker" as long as you put nicotine into your body on a regular basis. Makes no difference if it's from vapor, snus, nasal snuff or Big Pharma's gum.

What is really being required today is "nicotine-free" employees. That's the new reality.

I thought nicotine was completely out of your system after 72 hours?

CoderGuy

.308 · 07-06-2009, 05:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TropicalBob

But Sun's point is correct and those using e-cigs should note it well. You are NOT a non-smoker until your system is free of nicotine FOR ONE YEAR. You will pay more in insurance until that cotinine-free state shows up on tests.

And since it's not "smoking" being tested, you remain a "smoker" as long as you put nicotine into your body on a regular basis. Makes no difference if it's from vapor, snus, nasal snuff or Big Pharma's gum.

What is really being required today is "nicotine-free" employees. That's the new reality.

Thou shalt not eat cauliflower. You will have trace amounts of nicotine.

Surf Monkey · 07-06-2009, 07:57 PM

Everyone needs to stop deluding themselves. PVs don't get the monkey off your back. You're still just as addicted to nicotine as you were before switching. The reality is that health insurance companies are in the business of denying claims. That's how they make their money. They do now and always will consider anyone with high nicotine levels in their blood to be smokers. It makes no difference that your risk level is drastically lowered (we think) by using a PV. You're still a nicotine addict, and that's what they take issue with.

CoderGuy · 07-06-2009, 10:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Surf Monkey

Everyone needs to stop deluding themselves. PVs don't get the monkey off your back. You're still just as addicted to nicotine as you were before switching. The reality is that health insurance companies are in the business of denying claims. That's how they make their money. They do now and always will consider anyone with high nicotine levels in their blood to be smokers. It makes no difference that your risk level is drastically lowered (we think) by using a PV. You're still a nicotine addict, and that's what they take issue with.

Unfortunately you are correct. I tried at one point to quit completely by vaping zero nic, by the 2nd week I realized I was going through major nicotine withdrawl symptoms and was almost ready to start analogs again. Luckily I had a charged battery and some 16mg juice. Half hour later (constant vaping) I was no longer in need.

Now I just say I don't smoke anymore but use NRT. If they press I tell them about the e-cigs (they usually smell that I am not lying though).

CoderGuy

07-06-2009, 07:57 PM	#29
Surf Monkey Super Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Portland, Oregon Posts: 2,570	Everyone needs to stop deluding themselves. PVs don't get the monkey off your back. You're still just as addicted to nicotine as you were before switching. The reality is that health insurance companies are in the business of denying claims. That's how they make their money. They do now and always will consider anyone with high nicotine levels in their blood to be smokers. It makes no difference that your risk level is drastically lowered (we think) by using a PV. You're still a nicotine addict, and that's what they take issue with. __________________ It isn't the caffeine in a latte that makes you fat. It's the milk. It isn't the nicotine in a cigarette that kills you. It's the tar, CO2, fine particulate and chemical additives.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

07-03-2009, 02:25 PM	#21
maryjo Super Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Columbia, LA Posts: 438	For insurance purposes you would be considered a tobacco user if you use nicotine - thats how they overcharge the "dippers and chewers"

07-03-2009, 02:32 PM	#22
TropicalBob ECF Veteran Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Port Charlotte, FL USA Posts: 5,076	Overcharge? They'll be happy to show you the charts of expenses they've tabulated for chewers and dippers! That is not a healthy practice. Our goal, though, should be to get companies to recognize harm differences involving various tobacco and nicotine products. A smoker or dipper would get the very highest penalty; an e-cig user or snus user would get a much lower premium. All nicotine and tobacco is not equally harmful, yet all users are treated as if they smoked 30 cigarettes a day.

07-03-2009, 03:12 PM	#24
TropicalBob ECF Veteran Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Port Charlotte, FL USA Posts: 5,076	Oh .. we very much agree. The insurance practices infuriate me, and worry me that before long, with our medical records computerized in a large database, the companies will be able to identify people with a genetic proclivity for cancer, or diabetes, or heart failure, and charge even higher premiums for those unfortunate folks. Not good ...

07-03-2009, 03:18 PM	#25
maryjo Super Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Columbia, LA Posts: 438	At least the 0 nic users will reap some benefit with the insurance co's