Archive for December 4th, 2007
Well, let’s start out with the clear and simple truth. Smoking does impact your life insurance rates and not by just a little bit. Should it?
We’ve talked at length about the problems with smoking and the myriad of health issues it causes or makes worse. From the obvious like lung cancer and COPD, to obscure but no less deadly things like the impact that smoking can have on prostate cancer.
If you smoke, you are not more likely to get prostate cancer, but if you smoke and get prostate cancer you are far more likely to die from the cancer.
So how is smoker’s mortality determined? I’m sure the mortality tables have it broken down quite scientifically, but here’s a sobering tool that will at least throw a number at the whole issue that might get your attention.
I’ve noticed with smokers that there tends to be an attitude of denial about the loss of a few years. After all, that few years comes from the end of your life and we all have to go sometime. What’s the big difference between death at age 75 or 82? I can tell you that my parents are age 84 and 85, and while they feel they’ve lived a long full life and are ready to go whenever the Lord calls, they are enjoying their children, grandchildren and great grandchildren more now than they ever have. Would there have been a difference for them? I think either one of them would tell you that they would not have wanted to miss out on say the last 8 years of each other, or the joy of their family.
Bottom line. Smoking shortens life. In later years it will make it less comfortable. It will double or triple your life insurance rates. It will cause people to hold their noses around you or walk away.
December 4th, 2007
I really think there must be some confusion. Men’s Health has decided that Denver and Colorado Springs, Colorado’s two largest cities, are respectively the number one and number three drunkest cities in the country. Ouch!!
Right up front I want you to understand that I am a Colorado patriot of sorts, except for the Broncos. I’m a little miffed at the Rockies too. Anyway, I’m thinking that this whole survey is somehow skewed by altitude with Denver being over 5000′ and Colorado Springs over 6000′. How else could such a healthy, outdoorsy kind of place end up so stinking drunk.
Of course that 60 mile stretch of highway between the two cities is an awfully accident prone stretch of Interstate 25. Probably from people trying to make it back from a ball game in number one to the relative safety of number 3. They should get an apartment in Aurora and then they wouldn’t have to drive very far and be in a much safer number eighteen.
All kidding aside, I’ve talked about this mindset in the Rocky mountain states before. And while, as a whole we are toward the healthy end of most scales, that doesn’t do much for you if your liver falls out from over use. Probably not much fun being healthy and sitting in jail after a DUI bust either.
Bottom line. Colorado is a great place to live. Because of the great out door recreation and clean air, we are a healthy bunch and probably enjoy overall lower life insurance rates because of that. Looks like we may need to clean up our life styles more than just a little bit though. On the upside, Salida Colorado was voted one of the America’s 10 best outdoor towns today. Don’t be fooled into moving here by that article. The reason it is such an “outdoor” town is that 95% of us are homeless and living under bridges. And we all got kicked out of Denver and Colorado Springs for drinking too much. Beware!!!
December 4th, 2007
After the FDA recently took rather extreme action by forcing Avandia to boldly mark it’s bottles with warnings that the drug can cause heart attacks, Avandia took another hit.
It seems that some studies had shown an increased incidence of broken bones among women who used Avandia. Newer studies have isolated the reason. “The drug, say scientists, boosts the action of osteoclasts, cells that weaken bones.”
The scientists involved in the study did stress that this was not a reason to discontinue the use of Avandia, that other drugs could be used to offset this downside.
I’m no scientist. Not a doctor either. But it seems to me that Avandia wouldn’t be my drug of choice for treating diabetes. The added risk of a heart attack added to, at the very least, the added nuisance of having to take more drugs to offset side effects would have me questioning my doctor about alternatives.
Bottom line. Controlling your diabetes is essential for long term health and we know it’s the key to lower life insurance rates, but at what cost are we willing to pay for control? That’s two strikes in the last month. One more and I suspect Avandia will be out.
December 4th, 2007
