PETA wants Insurance Carriers to Charge Meat-Eaters Higher Premiums

Insurance carriers charge smokers more, so why not charge omnivores more as well, suggested PETA in a letter to to Blue Cross Vermont President Bill Milnes Jr. PETA Vice President Tracy Reiman writes, “By giving your policyholders a financial incentive to go vegetarian – and penalizing those whose meat-based diets fuel our nation’s worst health problems – Blue Cross Blue Shield can save millions of dollars in the long run as your members begin to require fewer cholesterol-lowering medications, chemotherapy treatments, and diabetes drugs.”

Preimums for smokers are a good analog for linking insurance premiums to meat consumption.  We know that smokers  pay higher health insurance premiums, but did smoking decrease as a direct result of that cost? Social factors and evidence about health risks of smoking probably played a larger role in affecting the smoker than this added premium.  Taxes have gone up nth times on cigarettes and yet people still choose to smoke.  As such, it is more likely that smoking rates have dropped because of an increased awareness of its consequences, not monetary punishments from insurance carriers. The same might be said for meat and animal byproduct consumption and its potential health consequences. PETA might do well to fund basic research into diet and health outcomes instead of making blatant overtures of social control. In other words, show us the science.

The letter from Reiman to Milnes also links a recent E.coli outbreak in the Green Mountain State from tainted meat as an additional reason that residents should go vegetarian (see article). The claim that only meat-eaters get sick because of bacteria on food is asinine. Some of the most recent salmonella outbreaks have been on spinach, tomatoes, and jalapenos, etc. In addition to funding basic research, PETA could and should be lobbying for basic agricultural change so that the people that do eat their veggies are not unduly harmed.

Additionally, a spokesperson for PETA admits that not all vegetarians necessarily eat healthily after cutting meat from their diet.  I think she just put the final nail in the argument’s coffin.

No. Wait. Putting a nail in a coffin doesn’t sound PETA-friendly. Instead, let’s let Leigh Tofferi, director of public relations for Blue Cross Vermont, do it. She says that if vegetarians were in a large group plan (over 50), the price of that group’s premiums would be structured to take into account past health expenditures.  Meaning that if vegetarians actually required less health care than others, that group would already have lower premiums.  So, healthy vegans and vegetarians could potentially save money and would not even bother anyone else.

And besides, when will charging someone for their specific risks end?  The point of insurance is to help people that have health incidents pay for them.  If everyone were charged according to their exact risks they would not have insurance.  Instead, they would have a bank account at a insurance company that doesn’t even pay interest.  Meaning, insurance discrimination only helps the insurance companies.  Even discoverable risks should be ignored in health insurance. It’s fine for profit-based insurance, but health is too fundamental to quality of life to be made for-profit.  Even lifestyle choices like smoking shouldn’t enter into it.  Because if you’re going to be selective about what you look at, it really amounts to an attempt at social control.  And, I’m sure that is PETA’s thinly veiled motive.  There’s a reason why there are lots of laws against these sort of “financial incentives.”

Billboard vandalized by the Animal Liberation Front

Billboard vandalized by the Animal Liberation Front

 

 

 

An aside–A vegan’s short rant about PETA:

PETA angers a lot of people, but when they anger meat-eaters they often encourage unmitigated meat consumption as seen in this anonymous comment responding to the letter to the insurance carrier:

“Well, that settles it. I told my self the next time PETA does something idiotic that i would buy a huge steak. Looks like im having some meat with a side of meat tonight. Thanks PETA!…”

Or as ‘Hunter- Farmer’ bluntly puts it:

“Deer season is nearly upon us, I can’t wait!”

I have hence decided that PETA is an organization secretly financed by the meat and diary industries of America.  I say to PETA, well-done.  Your antics are an effective way of getting people to defend meat and increase its consumption.

November 18, 2008  Tags: , , ,   Posted in: Health, Politics

3 Responses

  1. amart007 - November 18, 2008

    omg…what a load of bs….
    peta is always trying to force their ideals on everyone else. its not i like go around telling vegans or vegetarians “hey look! i eat animals! fuck you! oh and you’re wrong for not eating them!!” not to mention that some peta pple have done some crazy shit to animal labs in the past! and! they also want ben and jerry’s to use breast milk in their ice cream!! wtf!!

  2. PETA wants Insurance Carriers to Charge Meat-Eaters Higher … | dairyfactory.com - November 19, 2008

    [...] Here is the original post [...]

  3. Soda Taxes, In Review | Food Bubbles - March 4, 2009

    [...] before.  At one time, PETA suggested that meat eaters be charged higher insurance premiums (link). Most people would dismiss a PETA proposal out of hat, yet the proponents of the soda tax are [...]

Leave a Reply