Should those eschewing vaccination pay more for life insurance?

Should those eschewing vaccination pay more for life insurance?

  • Yes

    Votes: 170 64.9%
  • No

    Votes: 92 35.1%

  • Total voters
    262

Dave

Honorary Master
Joined
Aug 31, 2008
Messages
57,981
I dunno about life insurance. But if you were offered the vaccine and don't take it, and then get sick enough to need healthcare, should you be refused?

I mean, you obviously don't believe in science, why would you want doctors attending to you? Just do the thoughts and prayers thing.

You have a point there. A voluntary refusal of the vaccine could be taken to mean a voluntary refusal for all covid treatment.
 

Swa

Honorary Master
Joined
May 4, 2012
Messages
29,741
Why is this question even being asked here?

The entire point of the being an actuary is to answer questions like this. They will do a statistical analysis of the relevant risks and make a judgement on that basis. That's how all insurance works.

It should have nothing to do with public opinion. Or are we politicising that now as well?
The question is should an experimental prophylaxis factor into it? It never has before except on an overall scale. There are plenty of other medications which could be argued would reduce the chance of death like statins for the elderly but we don't insist on those. It's again only the vaccines getting the attention like a cult.
 

Cius

Executive Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2009
Messages
7,034
Yes. However it should be fair in terms of the actual increase in risk of death. I believe early numbers show its is a similar risk as smoking from a life insurance perspective, so then load it like they are smokers.
 

alanB

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2008
Messages
547
The question is should an experimental prophylaxis factor into it? It never has before except on an overall scale. There are plenty of other medications which could be argued would reduce the chance of death like statins for the elderly but we don't insist on those. It's again only the vaccines getting the attention like a cult.
My point is this question should have nothing to do with public opinion or politics.

Any insurance product needs to be priced in terms of the actual statistical risks associated for the population insured. Which is why we have the role of actuary, who runs the numbers and can then quantify costs vs income and thus expected profits.

If you misprice an insurance product you lose money. If you use statistics that are not a real representation of the population you are sampling - you lose money.

What your personal opinions are, or political affiliations, have nothing to do with it - it's hard maths.

It very similar to a casino. If you get the stats right (which is much easier in a casino context, because you can control the probabilities for each game), you print money, if you get the stat's wrong you lose money. It's got nothing to with anything else.

So asking us here what we think is relevant IMO.
 

Cage Rattler

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2005
Messages
541
Pricing a product. Often easier said than done. In the nineties was involved in the very first HIV research for insurance policies in SA. A lot of it was educated guesstimates at the time which was subsequently refined over the years. Our pricing was quite a bit out with hindsight. I think quite possibly a similar case here as long term covid experience, never mind the vaccine experience, is unknown at this stage.

Re the casino, I had created a gaming engine for a online casino (developed in Argentina). Biggest challenge was getting the random number generator pass the Nevada Commission.
 
Last edited:

Swa

Honorary Master
Joined
May 4, 2012
Messages
29,741
My point is this question should have nothing to do with public opinion or politics.

Any insurance product needs to be priced in terms of the actual statistical risks associated for the population insured. Which is why we have the role of actuary, who runs the numbers and can then quantify costs vs income and thus expected profits.

If you misprice an insurance product you lose money. If you use statistics that are not a real representation of the population you are sampling - you lose money.

What your personal opinions are, or political affiliations, have nothing to do with it - it's hard maths.

It very similar to a casino. If you get the stats right (which is much easier in a casino context, because you can control the probabilities for each game), you print money, if you get the stat's wrong you lose money. It's got nothing to with anything else.

So asking us here what we think is relevant IMO.
I didn't say public opinion matters here so you're missing the point. Making a condition based on experimental data flies in the face of those very concepts. The reason is not because it makes sense statistically as there are other measures which makes more sense but rather because opinions and politics have already entered it.
 

gboy

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
1,606
I am A Type 1 diabetic, with great suger control, good A1c , yet I am loaded quite a bit on life insurance. I also don't get disability insurance. So yes, I believe that if you are putting your self at risk, even though there is a freely available solution to mitigate the risk.

If someone takes a out a huge policy and then decides to intentionly contract Covid, in order to off himself, how will that we handled.
 

pinball wizard

Honorary Master
Joined
Feb 9, 2010
Messages
27,859
If someone takes a out a huge policy and then decides to intentionly contract Covid, in order to off himself,
Are you a child? I mean only a juvenile would entertain this as a realistic possibility.
 

gboy

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
1,606
Are you a child? I mean only a juvenile would entertain this as a realistic possibility.
Actually no, and I take exception to that, I am a very well educated 35 year old, and I have seen stranger things happen.

- a wife slowly killing her husband with mercury by buying thermometers at builders warehouse and breaking them and putting it in his food.

- everything is a possibility, I mean people get themselves killed by police, known as suicide by cop.
 

pinball wizard

Honorary Master
Joined
Feb 9, 2010
Messages
27,859
Actually no, and I take exception to that, I am a very well educated 35 year old, and I have seen stranger things happen.
I take exception to the fact that you call yourself very well educated and at the same time think suicide by covid is a realistic idea.
 

grok

Honorary Master
Joined
Dec 20, 2007
Messages
24,500
I think those that don't eschewing looting should pay more when shopping at Makro..

That infamous Mercedes guy should definitely pay a hefty premium at Woolies, no more Daily Difference specials for him!
 

deweyzeph

Executive Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
8,875
At the end of the day the only thing that matters (from an insurers point of view) is whether or not non-vaccinated people have a higher risk of dying from Covid or not. The answer to that will be guided by cold, hard empirical evidence, not speculation or philosophical culture war debates.
 

Corelli

Expert Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
2,061
I have to say, Im starting to loose school friends and friends my age with the Delta variant. Its certainly wiping people out especially in the 30s and 40s region this time. I know some countries have started to give a 3rd booster shot.

As for Life insurance, yip thats a risk. Otherwise it will become like abroad where in some places, you need to show your vaccine card to book a hotel, or a trip, or goto the mall.
 

Spizz

Goat Botherer
Joined
Jan 19, 2009
Messages
27,556
The question is should an experimental prophylaxis factor into it? It never has before except on an overall scale. There are plenty of other medications which could be argued would reduce the chance of death like statins for the elderly but we don't insist on those. It's again only the vaccines getting the attention like a cult.

Funny how no-one else is 'arguing' for them except a few crackpots. Yet borders are opening and a semblance of normality is in sight thanks to these 'experimental prophylaxis. Just why do you think that is?

Man, I'd love to see you trying to get into Germany or France.

"Are you fully vaccinated sir?"

"Yes, I had and Ivermectin, garlic and beetroot smoothie for breakfast"
 

alanB

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2008
Messages
547
I didn't say public opinion matters here so you're missing the point. Making a condition based on experimental data flies in the face of those very concepts. The reason is not because it makes sense statistically as there are other measures which makes more sense but rather because opinions and politics have already entered it.
We are actually saying the same thing IMO.

If the media is misrepresenting the efficacy of the vaccines, that should show up in the stats.

My point is insurance companies should ignore politics and media narratives and focus on the real statistics. If those show that the company is exposed to more risk from unvaccinated people, then it makes sense to increase the prices for those people. But if the stats do not actually show that, then public opinion and media narratives etc should be irrelevant.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Swa
Top