Why won't insurance companys help pay for the new "stop smoking" pills?
January 5th, 2009 | by Jeff Trikoleti |
Given the huge impact smoking has on morbidity rates, health insurance claim payments and insurance premiums, it seems to be common sense that health insurers would cover smoking cessation drugs.
Unfortunately, most do not, unless the state where the contract is issued requires it. My state is one of these. Companies rely upon the short-sighted arguments that the drugs are expensive, sometimes don't work if the person fails to take them consistently and that this is a "lifestyle improvement issue," typically not covered by health insurance.
If you feel very strongly about this issue, speak with your state delegate and urge him or her to propose adding this as a "mandated benefit" in your state.
I hope this helps.
7 Responses to “Why won't insurance companys help pay for the new "stop smoking" pills?”
By m2 on Jan 6, 2009 | Reply
because the best way to stop smoking is to not do it
if your doctor writes a prescription for the pills and you have a prescription plan it will be paid..
my sons was paid for through his union..but he started smoking again..
the habit isn't just the addiction..it is the social thing as well..
so it has more..than just.. that going on..
his friends smoke.. it is social..
References :
By blondie_23_8 on Jan 6, 2009 | Reply
Because smoking is a luxury or lifestyle. It is not a health problem, but a habit. They didnt buy the cigarettes, so why should they pay for you to quit.
References :
By J&C H on Jan 6, 2009 | Reply
No stop smoking pill has yet been proven to work. If it is prescribed by your doctor, they may. They will not pay for weight reduction pills either. I guess they consider both as self inflicted wounds.
References :
By Suzanne on Jan 6, 2009 | Reply
Given the huge impact smoking has on morbidity rates, health insurance claim payments and insurance premiums, it seems to be common sense that health insurers would cover smoking cessation drugs.
Unfortunately, most do not, unless the state where the contract is issued requires it. My state is one of these. Companies rely upon the short-sighted arguments that the drugs are expensive, sometimes don't work if the person fails to take them consistently and that this is a "lifestyle improvement issue," typically not covered by health insurance.
If you feel very strongly about this issue, speak with your state delegate and urge him or her to propose adding this as a "mandated benefit" in your state.
I hope this helps.
References :
By C R on Jan 6, 2009 | Reply
Insurance companies pay
-To treat medical conditions
-For treatments known to work
-For treatments potentially necessary to a large number of their insureds
For example, thirty years ago, they wouldn't pay many of the costs of outpatient surgery because few people had them and they were deemed experimental.
Having gone through a smoking ban television campaign recently, I now know only 20% of the population smokes. That would mean non-smokers, the other 80%, would be paying premiumium dollars for experimental cures for those who willingly chose the habit that's killing them. Besides, there are tons of over the counter remedies.
All of these things are against fundamental insurance principles.
References :
By mbrcatz17 on Jan 6, 2009 | Reply
Because most people who quit smoking, start smoking again. They have NOTHING to gain, and EVERYTHING to lose.
References :
By zippythejessi on Jan 6, 2009 | Reply
Because if they're new, they're VERY expensive, and not a medical necessity.
References :