Insurance Test for Work

[SmellYaLaterCigs]

Absafreakinloutely. It's a "safe" assumption that if you are using conventional NRT: 1.) You were very recently a smoker. Actuarially speaking - they don't care. 2.) If you are using conventional NRT there is an 80 - 95% chance you will relapse anyway. Actuarially speaking...

I'm not saying I agree with the "logic" being applied. Quite frankly it's all way too Orwellian.

I have to agree with this.

It's great that people using the gum/patch/vape are attempting to quit but its reasonable to believe they've smoked in the past (and possibly have health effects from it) and are also significantly more likely to pick up a cigarette tomorrow than someone who's never smoked.

As someone who smoked for 10 years before vaping I have to agree with the insurance companies point of view, it sure does suck paying a higher rate but I guess thats another hidden cost of being a smoker.

 

[QTPie]

That's impossible. Potatoes, tomatoes, eggplant, squash and many other common vegetables contain nicotine. No one could register zero.

Here's a page you might find useful.

NICOU - Clinical: Nicotine and Metabolites, Urine

Well I mean the equivalent of a non smoker. My bad. It's a blood test anyway.

 

[BlueMoods]

My insurance accepted a reciept for my Provari (dated 3 months prior to the exam) and another for a total of 160 ml juice I had form the week before for my bulk order plus the facts showing nic alone nor PG or VG is a carcinogen I do periodically. That seemed to be enough to satisfy them I was in fact vaping and not smoking and, they class me as a non tobacco user with a note that I do use carcinogen free nicotine.

I would contact the insurance company as I did and ask if receipts to show a history of usage and the info showing it does not cause cancer would be enough to keep your rates from going up or, if they raise rates for nicotine usage alone even though it has not been proven to cause cancer.

 

[vjc0628]

Have you confirmed that electronic cigarettes are counted as smoking?
What about NRTs like the patch or nic gum? If you're using those, do you still get dinged?

they would ding you for that because they consider you a smoker if you've smoked within a year

If using the patch or nic gum then you've smoked within a year

 

[zoiDman]

My insurance accepted a reciept for my Provari (dated 3 months prior to the exam) and another for a total of 160 ml juice I had form the week before for my bulk order plus the facts showing nic alone nor PG or VG is a carcinogen I do periodically. That seemed to be enough to satisfy them I was in fact vaping and not smoking and, they class me as a non tobacco user with a note that I do use carcinogen free nicotine.

I would contact the insurance company as I did and ask if receipts to show a history of usage and the info showing it does not cause cancer would be enough to keep your rates from going up or, if they raise rates for nicotine usage alone even though it has not been proven to cause cancer.

Me...

I would Only do this if I failed the Test For Nicotine. Because sending them Receipts for e-Liquids I kinda an Omission that you use Nicotine.

I would do Everything Possible to pass the Test first.

 

[QTPie]

Me...

I would Only do this if I failed the Test For Nicotine. Because sending them Receipts for e-Liquids I kinda an Omission that you use Nicotine.

I would do Everything Possible to pass the Test first.

I am, I purchased some cinnamon liquid to see if that helps with throat hit only 0 nic for at least 3 days. Fingers crossed, wish me luck. I let you guys know how it goes.

 

[BlueMoods]

If it were just a urine test, I could tell you how to pass that, no problem - old truck driver trick to that one. Blood tests well, those are a bit harder to pass. Best of luck.

 

[VprNomi]

That was very smart of both you, BlueMoods, and quite frankly, the insurance company. I'm impressed.

The basic problems with the posts I read on this thread prior to (not including) yours, are:

1. This insurance company's policy seems to be based on the false assumption (that most people still have today based on BT/FDA propaganda) that the culprit in all the health problems caused by smoking is nicotine. That's why I'm impressed both that you forwarded evidence to the contrary to the insurance company and frankly, even more so, that they accepted it and agreed with you. I've worked in the insurance industry for about 15 years and although I think we (usually) don't deserve quite the bad reputation that the general public tends to put on us (i.e. read your policies before you sign them - if it specifically says flood damage isn't covered, don't blame the insurance company & claim they're corrupt when they deny your claim for flood damage - it's not their fault you didn't purchase that coverage), we're full of financial/mathematical analysts, especially at the top, who aren't well known for their flexibility.

2. What we call in the business "intentional material misrepresentation in an attempt to obtain a benefit (i.e. lower cost) that otherwise would not be due" - which is what trying to manipulate results of lab testing by temporarily modifying your normal behavior essentially is - is a very precisely defined and polite way of saying "committed FRAUD", which is a felony that can be punishable not only by loss of coverage, entitlement of reimbursement for monies paid under false pretense (including potential lawsuit and judgement) but serious penalties/fines and/or even arrest and jail time if one is caught.

I certainly don't disagree that a vapor is unlikely to suffer the health problems common to smokers, especially long term, and shouldn't have to pay the same higher "penalty" premium that smokers do because of it but that doesn't change the points I make. I'd strongly recommend OP try your approach, BlueMoods, which was absolutely the right thing to do (even if the insurance company had disagreed - you were telling the "whole" truth and that's always the best approach). Otherwise, IMHO, the risks of trying to beat the system in this instance are not worth the potential reward. Best of luck to you!

My insurance accepted a reciept for my Provari (dated 3 months prior to the exam) and another for a total of 160 ml juice I had form the week before for my bulk order plus the facts showing nic alone nor PG or VG is a carcinogen I do periodically. That seemed to be enough to satisfy them I was in fact vaping and not smoking and, they class me as a non tobacco user with a note that I do use carcinogen free nicotine.

I would contact the insurance company as I did and ask if receipts to show a history of usage and the info showing it does not cause cancer would be enough to keep your rates from going up or, if they raise rates for nicotine usage alone even though it has not been proven to cause cancer.

 

[QTPie]

That was very smart of both you, BlueMoods, and quite frankly, the insurance company. I'm impressed.

The basic problems with the posts I read on this thread prior to (not including) yours, are:

1. This insurance company's policy seems to be based on the false assumption (that most people still have today based on BT/FDA propaganda) that the culprit in all the health problems caused by smoking is nicotine. That's why I'm impressed both that you forwarded evidence to the contrary to the insurance company and frankly, even more so, that they accepted it and agreed with you. I've worked in the insurance industry for about 15 years and although I think we (usually) don't deserve quite the bad reputation that the general public tends to put on us (i.e. read your policies before you sign them - if it specifically says flood damage isn't covered, don't blame the insurance company & claim they're corrupt when they deny your claim for flood damage - it's not their fault you didn't purchase that coverage), we're full of financial/mathematical analysts, especially at the top, who aren't well known for their flexibility.

2. What we call in the business "intentional material misrepresentation in an attempt to obtain a benefit (i.e. lower cost) that otherwise would not be due" - which is what trying to manipulate results of lab testing by temporarily modifying your normal behavior essentially is - is a very precisely defined and polite way of saying "committed FRAUD", which is a felony that can be punishable not only by loss of coverage, entitlement of reimbursement for monies paid under false pretense (including potential lawsuit and judgement) but serious penalties/fines and/or even arrest and jail time if one is caught.

I certainly don't disagree that a vapor is unlikely to suffer the health problems common to smokers, especially long term, and shouldn't have to pay the same higher "penalty" premium that smokers do because of it but that doesn't change the points I make. I'd strongly recommend OP try your approach, BlueMoods, which was absolutely the right thing to do (even if the insurance company had disagreed - you were telling the "whole" truth and that's always the best approach). Otherwise, IMHO, the risks of trying to beat the system in this instance are not worth the potential reward. Best of luck to you!

It's for a huge corporation and I don't think the insurance company would even listen. But we'll see.

 

[QTPie]

That was very smart of both you, BlueMoods, and quite frankly, the insurance company. I'm impressed.

The basic problems with the posts I read on this thread prior to (not including) yours, are:

1. This insurance company's policy seems to be based on the false assumption (that most people still have today based on BT/FDA propaganda) that the culprit in all the health problems caused by smoking is nicotine. That's why I'm impressed both that you forwarded evidence to the contrary to the insurance company and frankly, even more so, that they accepted it and agreed with you. I've worked in the insurance industry for about 15 years and although I think we (usually) don't deserve quite the bad reputation that the general public tends to put on us (i.e. read your policies before you sign them - if it specifically says flood damage isn't covered, don't blame the insurance company & claim they're corrupt when they deny your claim for flood damage - it's not their fault you didn't purchase that coverage), we're full of financial/mathematical analysts, especially at the top, who aren't well known for their flexibility.

2. What we call in the business "intentional material misrepresentation in an attempt to obtain a benefit (i.e. lower cost) that otherwise would not be due" - which is what trying to manipulate results of lab testing by temporarily modifying your normal behavior essentially is - is a very precisely defined and polite way of saying "committed FRAUD", which is a felony that can be punishable not only by loss of coverage, entitlement of reimbursement for monies paid under false pretense (including potential lawsuit and judgement) but serious penalties/fines and/or even arrest and jail time if one is caught.

I certainly don't disagree that a vapor is unlikely to suffer the health problems common to smokers, especially long term, and shouldn't have to pay the same higher "penalty" premium that smokers do because of it but that doesn't change the points I make. I'd strongly recommend OP try your approach, BlueMoods, which was absolutely the right thing to do (even if the insurance company had disagreed - you were telling the "whole" truth and that's always the best approach). Otherwise, IMHO, the risks of trying to beat the system in this instance are not worth the potential reward. Best of luck to you!

Also, are you saying that you would totally be fine to pay a triple rate because you vape and don't smoke anymore??? So if so good to you and I am glad that you make so much money. I don't and I have to have insurance for the whole family since my husband's company doesn't offer insurance.

 

[VprNomi]

They listened to BlueMoods. Still, even if they don't, are the risks worth it if you get caught? Important consideration.

It's for a huge corporation and I don't think the insurance company would even listen. But we'll see.

 

[VprNomi]

Ok, I am not going to get into some kind of flame war or whatever with you. I apologize for pointing out the potential consequences of doing something that might be construed as a less than honest approach, especially when "a huge corporation" is involved. I investigate these matters every day and when we catch it, we prosecute aggressively. I thought that might be an important piece of advice to you. If you don't want to hear it because saving money is more important to you than what might happen as a result of the way you try to beat the system to do it, that's your decision and I'm sorry to have brought it up before it could be too late.

That's all I"m saying. It's your decision. Do what you want. Again, I wish you luck, and now I'm not saying anything more about it.

Also, are you saying that you would totally be fine to pay a triple rate because you vape and don't smoke anymore??? So if so good to you and I am glad that you make so much money. I don't and I have to have insurance for the whole family since my husband's company doesn't offer insurance.

 

[QTPie]

Ok, I am not going to get into some kind of flame war or whatever with you. I apologize for pointing out the potential consequences of doing something that might be construed as a less than honest approach, especially when "a huge corporation" is involved. I investigate these matters every day and when we catch it, we prosecute aggressively. I thought that might be an important piece of advice to you. If you don't want to hear it because saving money is more important to you than what might happen as a result of the way you try to beat the system to do it, that's your decision and I'm sorry to have brought it up before it could be too late.

That's all I"m saying. It's your decision. Do what you want. Again, I wish you luck, and now I'm not saying anything more about it.

I'm not trying to fight with you but obviously you are a vaper and if not then what are you doing here? If you work for insurance don't they make you take a nicotine test?

 

[VprNomi]

If you're talking about health insurance, no - they don't even ask about smoking, cholesterol, sugars, etc. much less make anyone go get lab work done to prove it. If you're asking about life insurance, they asked if I use nicotine and I said yes. I should have done what BlueMoods did with sending them all the paperwork instead, but I took the easy way out. My life ins premium is minimal anyway (less than $10/month) so it wasn't a big deal. Health insurance costs much more (I also cover my entire family through my job - husband & 3 kids) but like I said, they don't ask any health questions and everybody pays the same rates for single, single + 1 or entire family.

I'm not trying to fight with you but obviously you are a vaper and if not then what are you doing here? If you work for insurance don't they make you take a nicotine test?

 

[VprNomi]

I realize triple premium is a lot of money and I agree that vapers shouldn't have to pay at a smoker's penalty rate. However, I don't make the rules, I just follow them or pay the consequences, no different than anybody else. You either work with them like BlueMoods did, put up with the stinkin' unfairness of it all until the rules change (just like lots of things like taxes are unfair but you don't get a choice if you want to be on the up & up) or be a rebel & do your own thing. Just don't make your decisions blindly.

I'm not trying to fight with you but obviously you are a vaper and if not then what are you doing here? If you work for insurance don't they make you take a nicotine test?

 

[QTPie]

If you're talking about health insurance, no - they don't even ask about smoking, cholesterol, sugars, etc. much less make anyone take go get lab work done. If you're asking about life insurance, they asked if I use nicotine and I said yes. I should have done what BlueMoods did with sending them all the paperwork instead, but I took the easy way out. My life ins premium is minimal anyway (less than $10/month) so it wasn't a big deal. Health insurance costs much more (I also cover my entire family through my job - husband & 3 kids) but like I said, they don't ask any health questions and everybody pays the same rates for single, single + 1 or entire family.

That's how it used to be with my company. But not now. I'm not smoking so I will say no to that question. I do use nicotine and will not stop anytime soon. That is my stance.

 

[zoiDman]

I am, I purchased some cinnamon liquid to see if that helps with throat hit only 0 nic for at least 3 days. Fingers crossed, wish me luck. I let you guys know how it goes.

You can make it.

Just Bite your Lip when the Cravings Come and think of the Money You are going to Save.

 

[QTPie]

You can make it.

Just Bite your Lip when the Cravings Come and think of the Money You are going to Save.

I will and we'll see! I don't smoke anymore so I don't feel afraid of that question.

 

[VprNomi]

That's how it used to be with my company. But not now. I'm not smoking so I will say no to that question. I do use nicotine and will not stop anytime soon. That is my stance.

I had a long post explaining why everyone paying the same rate (the traditional model for health insurance) isn't fair either and complaints/lobbying about that is why some companies have moved to this "modern" model instead, trying to be as fair as possible. I lost the post because I timed out before I finished it but whatever - I don't think anyone cares anyway. They're always just going to blame the insurance company and complain it's unfair no matter what. What would really be unfortunate and potentially cost too much to recover from would be having to pay your own medical bills with no insurance no matter what - but I digress.

What I did want to say from that lost post although is that the flaw in this modern model is not that people with a statistically greater chance of incurring higher health costs should pay more premium than those with less, the flaw is in the idea that vaping is statistically equal to smoking - which is what BlueMoods provided evidence of to his representative for health ins premium purposes and it worked. That's why I recommended it to you.

Again, I wish you good luck.

 

[QTPie]

I had a long post explaining why everyone paying the same rate (the traditional model for health insurance) isn't fair either and complaints/lobbying about that is why some companies have moved to this "modern" model instead, trying to be as fair as possible. I lost the post because I timed out before I finished it but whatever - I don't think anyone cares anyway. They're always just going to blame the insurance company and complain it's unfair no matter what. What would really be unfortunate and potentially cost too much to recover from would be having to pay your own medical bills with no insurance no matter what - but I digress.

What I did want to say from that lost post although is that the flaw in this modern model is not that people with a statistically greater chance of incurring higher health costs should pay more premium than those with less, the flaw is in the idea that vaping is statistically equal to smoking - which is what BlueMoods provided evidence of to his representative for health ins premium purposes and it worked. That's why I recommended it to you.

Again, I wish you good luck.

Thank you. I got the idea.