John Hancock Will Include Fitness Tracking In All Life Insurance Policies (venturebeat.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from VentureBeat: John Hancock, one of the oldest and largest North American life insurers, will stop underwriting traditional life insurance and instead sell only interactive policies that track fitness and health data through wearable devices and smartphones, the company said on Wednesday. The move by the 156-year-old insurer, owned by Canada's Manulife Financial, marks a major shift for the company, which unveiled its first interactive life insurance policy in 2015. It is now applying the model across all of its life coverage. Policyholders score premium discounts for hitting exercise targets tracked on wearable devices such as a Fitbit or Apple Watch and get gift cards for retail stores and other perks by logging their workouts and healthy food purchases in an app. In theory, everybody wins, as policyholders are incentivized to adopt healthy habits and insurance companies collect more premiums and pay less in claims if customers live longer.

Comments

And so it begins

[YrWrstNtmr]

Not fit enough, eat too much red meat, drive too fast....sucks to be you.

tracked on wearable devices such as a Fitbit or Apple Watch
Yeah, THAT will go over well with my employer. Specifically, no smart watches in the building. AT all, ever.

Re:And so it begins

[taustin]

I take responsibility for my life by refusing to use tracking devices that communicate with companies that show no evidence of being able to spelldata security, much less actually implement it.

Particularly since, which the insurance company is bound by HIPPA laws, Fitbit is not.

This will last until the first breach, which is inevitable.

Re:And so it begins

[Anonymous Coward]

This will last indefintely and become the new norm because it saves the greedy fucks money and enables even more data collection. Even better it forces those who wish to avoid such invasions of their lives to submit to them under the threat of medical bankruptcy if they refuse. Always expect greedy fucks to throw you under the bus in the pursuit of more coin, which is inevitable.

FTFY.

If you think this won't last, I invite you to look at the shitstorm that Equifax went through after they were hacked.... they'll be begging us for mercy.... any day now...... /sarcasm

Even if they do get hacked, it will be swept under the rug as SOP, and you'll just loose even more control of your life same as always. Only now if you refuse you won't be able to afford a doctor without leaving the country. To which everyone else in the US will say: "And nothing of value was lost." Because they are all a bunch of fat and stupid sheep. Welcome to the first days of hell, we've all earned it.

Re:And so it begins

[Anonymous Coward]

Serious answer: life insurance is geared towards somebody who is a major provider for the family. The idea is that you're bringing in an income to support your family; if you die, the family no longer has that income, and hence could well hit hard times. Having life insurance provides a safety net, so that the rest of the family can continue on without having to worry about how to replace your income. (Think education, food, health, etc.)

If you have children, it may well be worth the premium to know that they won't be hit with hard times if you aren't there. If you don't have children, it probably isn't worth so much. For me - single, no kids, no dependents to speak of - I haven't bothered taking out a life insurance policy; there's no point. If I had children, it might well be a different story.

It might not make sense for your circumstances, and that's fine. But insurance is all about identifying and managing risk - pay a small amount on a regular basis, just in case you have a need for a much larger sum for some unexpected reason. If you can afford the hit of the larger sum, that small amount may not be worth it. If you can't, it may be.

I just don't know about this

[OutOnARock]

Its like the auto insurance companies wanting to monitor everything I do in my car.

These should be things that one has to "opt-in" for.

I don't want the "discount" for being on an electronic leash......

There is just something about this that rubs me the wrong way.

useless data sources

[sweet reason]

a friend of mine mentioned that when he wears his fitbit on his right hand and plays his ukulele, his recorded activity level goes through the roof. so getting those insurance discounts while sitting on your couch will be easy. ditto for posted food choices. when the company figures that out their next move will be to become big brother.

Re:useless data sources

[Entrope]

This comment is much funnier if I take "plays his ukelele" as a euphemism.

An example of stupid

[judoguy]

This is so dumb. A tracker would show me as terribly inactive because I can't wear one when I work out. I train and compete in judo and bjj. Hard training, fantastic exercise but you can't wear a damn bracelet or sensor while doing this.

A fitness tracker, like the stupid BMI calculation, would show me as layabout. Every actual measure of my health shows me to be in great health. I'm 65 and compete successfully at a world level in judo and bjj for my age. This is the classic case of how vs what. Look at the actual thing to be measured, not a poorly defined process that tries to look at how something MIGHT be measured. .

another corporate conspiracy ?

[swell]

Back around 1950 a major insurance company with an excellent reputation and very low premium rates set stringent requirements for its customers. Agents would fill in the forms with the usual information for clients; age, address, some medical background, etc. But potential clients had to qualify for the insurance policy. Like any company; older people would pay more for life insurance. People with accidents would pay more for auto insurance. But unlike other companies, many medium risk clients were simply not allowed to buy from this insurance company. At any price. And all approved clients got low premiums and were happy.

But they went beyond that. Agents had a secret checklist for every potential client. Things you might never guess could disqualify you for the money saving policy. One item that has stuck in my memory all this time is this: any potential client who enters the agent's office wearing boots is automatically disqualified.

Actuaries must have determined risk factors far beyond the norm. Perhaps they consulted psychologists and did unusual surveys to come up with odd criteria. Nevertheless, insurance companies take risks and need to protect themselves. If you want cheap insurance from a reliable company, expect to prove that you are worthy.

Re:Progressive Snapshot Hacks

[omnichad]

They're way more likely to pay the claim and drop you

Yeah...that won't work for the life insurance ones. Everyone gets dropped after the first claim.