Over here, smokers already do pay more for medical insurance. I'm not sure about obese people.

Why demonise groups of people that do something legal? If you say yes, then you should also make obese people pay more for their diabetes/heart treatments, and don't forget the alcoholics - they should pay more for liver treatments and transplants. There is good cause for this argument, but at the same time, it is legal to smoke, and governments where I live already tax them at a high rate (more than 50% of the cost is tax, and it is intended for health programs).

What about those who voluntarily partake in dangerous sports or have dangerous jobs, or who drive very fast cars, or who binge drink ....... If you're going to pick on one, you need to pick on them all!

In the UK they do, I work for Independent Financial Advisers and Private Medical Insurance is really beginning to take off. There is 2 basic types of underwriting. The first one you are given a premium that you pay every month, but are not covered for any existing medical conditions like diabetes or whatever, that you already have. The second type you are covered for everything, even existing conditions, but you have to go through a full medical screening after which the company can charge you whatever premium they like, take it or leave it. Off the top of my head, some of the factors affecting your premium are smoker status, height/ weight ratio, age, gender, occupation and Post code (Zip code).

Smokers DO pay more for health and life insurance (in the U.S.). Obesity can be caused by a number of different factors, some of which are beyond the persons control. So unless you went through and determined which people are just eating too much and exercising too little and which people have less control over it than that, you can not really make a blanket policy as such.

No, as a general answer. There should a grandfather clause added to health insurance policies. meaning, back in the 50's, smokers were not told of the health hazards of smoking. it became an addiction and some are still hooked today, there are not many older smokers around. Health insurance companies should set a time-line date, that insurance would cover. Example: take. say, July 1, 1970 as the cutoff date. people, who were smokers prior to this date, would be covered by health insurance at the same cost for cigarette-releated illnesses. after that date, there would be no coverage. i chose that date as a mid-marker for cigarette education. the bad effects of cigarette smoking, was released to the public on that date. If the public does not have health-related information, how can they respond or not respond? Having the cutoff date would be a fair approach to the costs of health coverage, for smokers. I smoke. my wife smokes. my children do not. Case in point.

Smokers already are. It would be hard to force fat people to pay more. What about taxing sugar at the same rate tobacco is taxed?

What SHOULD be done in the US involves proper, nationalized health care. In this case, no one will pay more for their habits, be they smoking, speeding, being an air traffic controller, binge eating, binge drinking, hatred for seatbelts, or what have you.

How about bikers paying less for medical insurance, as it is good for heart health.

In the US, the insurance carriers are creating a movement to better improve the health of their insureds. They are doing so in many different fashions, but the one that is most prevelant, is reuquiring an insured to have a physical examination every 'x' years for prevention reasons. It is easier to treat potential problems ahead of time, and certainly less expensive over the long duration. Secondly, most group insurance rates that an employer pays is not biased upon 'habits' outside of the workplace. they use actuarial tables to determine how to spread out the risk based on previous experience. Specifically to smokers and obese people --- yes there is a trend to force this particular risk group to oay more for teir coverage(s). this is only being done after it has been explained to them, and they have a period of time to meet 'x' requirments. if someone is obese for medical reasons, they fall outside of the ring and are not part of the equation. in this specific example posed here, the two risk groups account for higher than expected claims, and hence the entire group of employee are going to be penalized when new rates are established, and passed on to the employee from the employer. the good news here is that as time goes on, the more proactive a company can be, the healthier we are, and it will save lives and make people have a more enjoyable life

No. Because people who stress out should be forced into the same as well then.

That's a slippery slope. We could come up with a whole bunch of people who should pay more.

"Should smokers and obese people be forced to pay more for medical insurance?" . This answer might surprise you from me ... "NO". They shouldn't be forced to do anything. . However, insurance companies also shouldn't be forced to give them the same rates as someone who is healthy. They should remove the restrictions and let the market handle it.

What about someone whos family has a history of heart disease. Or the person whos parents died at an early age. What about the people who live in smog infested cities. Should any of them pay more, Where do you draw the line. You cant single out people like that.

Only if sky-divers, motorcyclists, people in high-stress jobs, drinkers, illegal drug users, etc., etc., are also force to may more. After all, smokers choose to smoke and the obese choose to be obese, don't they? And shouldn't women pay more than men because only they get to claim for pregnancy-related costs?

For 2009, my company just started charging smokers $80 more per month on health insurance premiums. The health insurance is thru Aetna, so I don't know if Aetna forced it or if the company I work for bought into what Aetna was offering. With the cost of cigarettes and increased cost of health insurance, I guess it's time to quit. I could take all that money and invest it in the stock market. But when I quit smoking, I will probably become obese and get charged for that by the insurance company.

What if their obesity is a result of a treatable medical condition, like hypothyroidism or Polycystic Ovary Syndrome? Without the medical insurance they can't get the medications that make weight loss possible.