Denied Life Insurance as a non-smoker (1 year plus vapist)
- Thread starter Lola69
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Also, why not search out other life insurance companies and tell your insurance company 'If you won't use reason, the next company will!. Your not the only game in town!"
Can't believe all insurance companies are without common sense.
Secondly, why do you need life insurance. There are better investments. for your money.
Can't believe all insurance companies are without common sense.
Secondly, why do you need life insurance. There are better investments. for your money.
Keep in mind that they are entitled to set whatever standards they want, and test for them however they wish as well. This isn't a matter of entitlement like, for instance, eligibility for a government program would be, where for instance you'd be legally entitled to something if not for a condition where the facts surrounding it are in dispute.
So you're only shot is to appeal to the company that there isn't a necessary connection between smoking and nicotine and they should be willing to make this distinction, although you probably won't have much luck to be honest. Of course, who knows how other insurance companies handle this, I've never bought life insurance so I've no idea but having you commit to testing to me sounds pretty draconian.
The good news is, to hell with these .......s, you're life expectancy just went up and this is the one thing that no one can take away from you
Crappy to hear but not surprising and I don't even blame them. I wouldn't insure a vaper myself. Some people are making bold statements like vaping is "safer than smoking." We don't know this for sure people. It definatley seems logical yes and I choose to believe that it is most likely the case myself but the only way we can know for sure is after a LONG period of time has passed and/or if proper studies are done on people vaping heavily with all aspects of physical health being monitored, compiled and assesed against non smokers. In addition to the contents of juice, we don't know for sure if/what is being inhaled when we heat cartomizers or wicks. Obviously we want to believe
^ Disagree to a point , polsmoka.
We know if a component isn't burnt what is in them, and we know the operating temps and burn points of certain components. Since they are steamed and not destroyed it gets pretty basic. There are a few flavorings and people running at higher than normal voltages where the questions arise, so in that i agree with your point, but the "harm reduction" is still massive.
Pig
We know if a component isn't burnt what is in them, and we know the operating temps and burn points of certain components. Since they are steamed and not destroyed it gets pretty basic. There are a few flavorings and people running at higher than normal voltages where the questions arise, so in that i agree with your point, but the "harm reduction" is still massive.
Pig
Just trying to make sense of this; if our assertion (or what we choose to believe) is that "vaping is safer than smoking", wouldn't we want long these long term studies compiled and assessed against smokers (rather than non-smokers)? Isn't that the point that we want to stand out? If I am making a statement comparing vaping to smoking then shouldn't the effects of one be compared to the effects of the other?
I started a thread which asked much the same question, only diff was mine was before I reapplied for a new policy.
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/new-members-forum/164675-life-insurance-non-smoker-policy-they-test-nic-can-i-still-vape-pass.html
Until PV/ecigs are more widespread insurance companies will still lump them into the smoking category, simply because they have an easy way to test for nicotine, which ostensibly means that you are a smoker. Same for NRT/patch/inhaler, etc.
You should be able to reapply after dropping to zero nic for 2-3 weeks, and its still up in the air if the LI company would take your survivors to court if an autopsy found you had nic in your system when you passed. I've got no precedent to back that up one way or the other, but if an insurance company can find anything plausible to latch onto that will keep a payout from occuring, I'd bet they'd fight it.
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/new-members-forum/164675-life-insurance-non-smoker-policy-they-test-nic-can-i-still-vape-pass.html
Until PV/ecigs are more widespread insurance companies will still lump them into the smoking category, simply because they have an easy way to test for nicotine, which ostensibly means that you are a smoker. Same for NRT/patch/inhaler, etc.
You should be able to reapply after dropping to zero nic for 2-3 weeks, and its still up in the air if the LI company would take your survivors to court if an autopsy found you had nic in your system when you passed. I've got no precedent to back that up one way or the other, but if an insurance company can find anything plausible to latch onto that will keep a payout from occuring, I'd bet they'd fight it.
Actually polsmoka, we definitely do know this now! It's been scientifically, clinically proven now that it is many thousands of times safer than tobacco smoke.
No one can ever truly prove that vaping is absolutely 100% safe, no matter how many centuries pass - but then, no one is even making that claim anyway. All we're saying is that it's way, way safer than smoking. And that much at least has been objectively proven now. Dr. Siegel's study results, released in December/January, were just one example that confirmed this.
Case in point: remember when the FDA claimed that e-juice with nicotine contained carcinogens - specifically, tobacco-specific nitrosamines? Well here's what they didn't tell you: a day's worth of e-juice contains about 8 nanograms of tobacco-specific nitrosamines. A pack of Marlboros contains about 126,000 nanograms of the same. (And Marlboros also contain tons of other toxic crap - crap that is not found in e-juice whatsoever.)
You can rest assured that vaping e-juice with nicotine via your electronic cigarette is no more harmful than drinking a cup of great coffe. Happy vaping friends!
Crappy to hear but not surprising and I don't even blame them. I wouldn't insure a vaper myself. Some people are making bold statements like vaping is "safer than smoking." We don't know this for sure people. It definatley seems logical yes and I choose to believe that it is most likely the case myself but the only way we can know for sure is after a LONG period of time has passed and/or if proper studies are done on people vaping heavily with all aspects of physical health being monitored, compiled and assesed against non smokers. In addition to the contents of juice, we don't know for sure if/what is being inhaled when we heat cartomizers or wicks. Obviously we want to believe
It took the WWI veterans 20 years before an uptick in lung cancer was starting to be seen, and that's smoking non-filter camels and pall malls for those 20 years (see graph) and that's only smoking 100-200 packs a year. Many smokers I know easily polish off 300-400 packs in a year.
File:Cancer smoking lung cancer correlation from NIH.svg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I can understand insurance companies all want to CYA for their own benefit, after all they are in business not to keep us insured, but to make money for their shareholders. My main point of contention is that the current method which determines if somebody is classified as a "smoker" is testing for nicotine.
Nicotine doesn't give you lung cancer. Nicotine doesn't give you throat cancer. Nicotine doesn't even make your breath smell like an ashtray.
It is the DELIVERY DEVICE AND METHOD which causes cancer. If they found some way to "de-nic-enate" some tobacco leaves and let somebody smoke them, they will still eventually get lung cancer.
In the 25 years of contact I've had with people that use nebulizers and other PG-use vaporizer products, I've not seen a single report stating that any long-term effects were negative, much less deadly. This is the stuff you give to people that are DYING OF LUNG CANCER to enable them to get their meds in a vapor form. My grandfather had to do this for 8 years before he passed.
I'd be fine with the insurance companies charging a bit different because I vape nicotine, but I have a big issue with getting lumped into the same category with cig and cigar and pipe smokers just because the insurance company is either unable (or better unwilling) to differentiate between nicotine users that inhale particulate matter and nicotine users that use vaping, NRT, or other form to control their addiction.
There is no actuarial data to support the idea that vapers, even 5 years out (or PG users FOURTY years out) have increased health risks associated with vaping nicotine.
The insurance companies are being lazy, because it is in their best interest to do so. The FDA prolly won't help matters, since they get alot of funds from Big Tobacco and BT would NOT want to see "alternate methods" get a better deal.
As I've mentioned before, if you have a policy, and god-forbid it needs to be acted upon, there is a good chance if the company is able to show nicotine intake they will negate the claim based on fraud. There is a good chance that if you take them to court, they will settle, prolly for less than the insured amount. Not really the best thing to put your loved ones thru after dealing with your loss.
The thread I linked earlier details alot of what I went thru testing the waters. Basically you can get 3-4x the coverage as a non-smoker for the same premium paid by a smoker.
It should not have to be this way. And paying an increased smoker's premium cannot be the only answer.
Last edited:
Hi cactusgirl! No because we already have the data for smokers. VS. non-smokers would tell us if vaping is 100% safe.
Hey you
Rach clue me in I must be missing some info please…Hey renstyle... what other PG vaporizers have been used and for what? Is PG in nebulizers?
Thx.
This one approximates the type/style of the one that my grandfather used for 8 years. His SVN (small volume nebulizer) was ultrasonic, to create an aerosol with PG for the albuterol they were giving him to help with his breathing (the lung cancer basically gave him asthmatic symptoms). For the solution, it was approx 10% USP PG mixed with the medication and distilled water.
Amazon.com: Hudson/Rci Micro Mist Small Volume Nebulizer - With Tee - Qty of 50 - Model 1881: Health & Personal Care
The pulmonologist <sic?> started with the PG from the beginning, explained that the PG assists with the aersol formation and helps with the deposition of medication where it is needed. The PG was absorbed by the body naturally, so breathing it directly into the lungs did not pose a risk, even to somebody with a badly compromised pulmonary system.
The major difference between my GF nebulizer and a PV/ecig is the method of vapor creation, his nebulizer was ultrasonic, while a PV/ecig uses heat. I'd make the comparison akin to breathing "wet" air from a cold-air mister/humidifier vs steam off a hot pot of water. Same chemical in vapor form (water), one created with heat, the other by throwing water in the air.
do they offer any different rates depending on the method of nicotine intake? something more graduated than "smoker or non-smoker"?
- Status
Similar threads
