Group Health Insurance: What Makes An "Unreasonable" Rate Increase?

You can't pick up a newspaper without reading about the Health Insurers raising rates. Media and Legislators often accuse them of giving out "unreasonable increases."

The CEO of MVP Health Care, a New Hampshire and Vermont HMO, recently talked about the fact that insurance companies are often excoriated for increasing rates faster than the rate of medical inflation.

He relates a story of being in Washington and having a lawmaker tell him that she found it "shocking" that rate increases for insurance premiums would exceed the rate of medical inflation. At the same time she was griping to him and not far away at the Department of Health and Human Services, regulators were busy trying to define the new health care law's "unreasonable" rate increase standard. HHS bureaucrats -- lacking any real world experience -- have suggested that any increase that exceeds medical inflation might be "unreasonable."

Self-serving legislators all over the country, such as the woman he mentioned, decry the "greed" of carriers who are giving out 10-15% rate increases at a time when medical inflation is only 3.4%. And of course the only examples that are EVER reported by the media are the most egregious. News organizations drive readership with shocking numbers, so the larger increases are the ones that get all the attention.

But Is It Always the Carriers' Fault?

Before we run through some math to explain why increases are often larger without netting the carrier any more money, take a look at Massachusetts, where the big three carriers -- Blue Cross, Harvard and Tufts -- have between them earned virtually zero dollars of profit for the last three years combined. At the same time Partners Health Care, owners of Mass General Hospital and several other powerful providers racked up a $195 MILLION profit for their most recent fiscal year. So are the MA non-profit carriers greedy, or is the non-profit health care provider.

Does that lack of earnings suggest that these carriers are inefficient? I don't think so -- these three carriers' average cost of managing claims averages about 10.5% between the three of them. While they're adjudicating claims at that rate, look at national Health Reform legislation that is trying to force rates down to the 15-20% range. So there's a valid argument that Massachusetts insurers are neither inefficient nor greedy.

Rates go up for a couple of reasons, the first of which is that every year America gets older, and older folks use more medical care. The Baby Boomer generation is aging... and until they exit the scene America's average age will continue to rise... that will help.

But in the meantime let's look at an example. Assume a hypothetical company with 100 employees at an average health cost of $400/month.

* 100 employees times $400 each equals $40,000 a month.

* 50 are age 40 or older, with an average health system use of $600/month, $30,000 usage.

* 50 are 39 or younger and use only $200/month each = $10,000 per month usage.

* Total? $40,000 - we're assuming no administrative cost here to simplify the illustration.

OK, that was the situation when the plan was renewed last year. During the year the company laid off 20 employees because of the economy. Of course following industry-standard practices, they laid off the most recent hires -- which also happen to be the youngest employees.

Let's look at the numbers:

* Medical inflation is 3.4%, so the under-40 crowd saw their claims cost go from $200 to $206.80... 3.4% increase, in line with medical inflation.

* There are now only 30 of the younger group, so claims are 30 times $206.80 -- $6,204.00

* The 50 older guys also have a 3.4% increase, so their usage goes from $600 to $620.40 -- again, a 3.4% increase = $31,020 claims

* Total claims = $37,224.40 per month.

* Divided by 80 remaining employees = $465.30 claims per month per employee.

* $465.30 divided by $400 = a 16.3% increase in rates.

* And we haven't even allowed for the fact that each and every one of the remaining employees is a year older... and more likely to use incrementally more services.

No smoke, no mirrors... the carrier is still collecting premiums equal to the claims the group incurs. What the large 16.3% rate increase represents is just the reality of a lousy economy and layoffs done the way they've always been done.

So listen up, Legislators, Regulators: Before you point the finger in an attempt to buy votes with your righteous anger and certainly before you pass some misguided law that regulates the pricing of a product that you clearly don't understand, think twice. Do some research. Find out the truth.

Jim Edholm owns Business Benefits Insurance (BBI), located in Andover, MA. He.is an employee group benefits consultant to companies with up to 200 employees. He has prepared a report titled "How Businesses Can Lower Healthcare Costs, Maintain Benefits and Put Cash in Employees' and Owners' Hands." Request your free copy.

How To Apply For Health Insurance For Your Business In Texas

If you own a small business in Dallas, Houston or anywhere else in Texas and are looking for a health insurance provider for your employees, here’s a standard list of business data you’ll need to provide:

· Employer name. The legal name of your company.

· Address of your business. Insurers need the street address, not a P.O. Box, to determine your region or service area.

· A list of employees you plan to cover. Not all employees will be eligible.

· Tax identification or employer identification number. This is the EIN (sometimes called FEIN) you obtained from the IRS when you started your business.

· Business background. Depending on the size of your business, you may have to provide:

o Date your business started

o Payroll records

· Standard Industry Code (SIC or NAIC), informing the insurer what industry you’re in.

· Quarterly salary and wages for the past two quarters.

· Employee census information. Insurers use this to estimate the health care costs your group is likely to incur. A census does not include health status, race, religion, sexual orientation (even if applying for domestic partner benefits), Social Security number, or U.S. citizenship/immigration status. In order to quote you a rate, insurers will ask you to complete a census form for each of your employees with this information:

o Name

o Age or date of birth

o Number of dependents

o Zip code.

Creating a Schedule

Next, you’ll need to finalize these scheduling details early in the process of shopping for an insurance plan:

· Effective date of coverage. This should be at least six weeks ahead, so you’ll have time to complete the administrative steps, but no more than three months ahead, so the quotes don’t expire. Most employers choose the first of the month to begin coverage.

· Plan cycle. Many plans operate on a calendar-year basis (January - December). Some plans operate on a different 12-month cycle, or your company may have specific busy seasons when you don’t want to deal with insurance issues.

Establishing a Budget

Once you finish creating a schedule, you’ll need to determine how much money you can afford to spend for coverage, and then calculate the cost:

· By percentage of payroll. Calculate an amount as a percentage of your total monthly and annual payroll.

· Per employee per month. Calculate how much you could spend per employee per month. Determine a bottom-line maximum figure, without worrying about such variables as employee contributions or dependent coverage. Based on your budget, you can figure those variables later.

· Consider cash-flow issues.

· Monthly premium commitment. Most insurers require payment on the first day of the month covered. You would pay for April coverage on April 1, May coverage on May 1, and so on. If you’re buying coverage for the first time or replacing existing coverage, the insurer will likely ask for a month’s premium in advance.

· Grace period. Most insurers offer a 30-day grace period on paying premiums. If you’re a few days late, your policy isn’t likely to be cancelled. Ask about your insurer’s grace period and notification policy regarding cancellation.

· Cancellation/reinstatement. If you’re habitually late with payments, your insurer has the right to cancel your group insurance. Most insurers have their own procedures for reinstating canceled polices, so be sure to ask.

· Premium increases. Most premiums are renewed annually, which means the insurer can adjust the price once a year. Some plans allow insurers to increase premiums every six months. By law, you must be given at least 30 days’ notice of a proposed increase.

How to Find Your Health Insurance Plan.

Now that you’ve gathered your information and put together your schedule and budget, it’s time to start looking for a plan.

Brokers Versus Agents

These licensed professionals can help you find and choose the best plan for your business. They know:

· The best products available, and

· State and federal regulations to protect your business from liabilities.

· They’ve also satisfied licensing requirements that require them to keep up-to-date on Texas’ insurance market.

A broker can direct you to products offered by a range of providers. An agent works with only one company and promotes that company’s products. Both may be referred to as “agents” and are licensed professionals in the state of Texas.

The broker or agent will help you:

· Shop for the right plan for your company and provide one or more premium quotes

· Discuss alternatives to help you understand your plan options

· Implement the plan you select

· Service the account, including solving problems with billing, eligibility, and claims

· Do the legwork so you don’t have to spend the time

· Get the most from the coverage you purchase

· Expedite the renewal process

Online Options

The online world is changing rapidly and the number of consumers and employers using the Internet to research or purchase health insurance is dramatically increasing. The Internet makes it easier to shop for health insurance, you can learn about your options from the comfort of your home or office and on your own schedules – without pressure to buy.

Implementing the Plan

Review the various plans you’ve chosen for your business:

· Weigh the benefits against the plan costs.

· Research the insurers for:

o Financial stability

o Ease of administration

o Overall quality of service.

· Consider cost-saving strategies.

· Review at least two to three health insurance carriers and plan options.

Action Plan Checklist:

· Sign the contract before the quote expires, usually within 30 days.

· Communicate plan choices to employees.

· Distribute and collect enrollment materials for those people covered.

· Copy and return all original materials for enrollment before the requested date.

If you’re a small business owner who would like to offer an affordable health insurance plans to your employees but can’t afford group health insurance, you should take a look at the revolutionary, comprehensive individual health insurance solutions created by Precedent specifically for young, healthy individuals. Precedent offers affordable, individual health plans with catastrophic coverage, but without a high deductible, and we’ll work with you to make these plans available to your employees at a discount. For more information, visit us at our website, [http://www.precedent.com]. We offer a unique and innovative suite of individual health insurance solutions, including highly competitive HSA-qualified plans and an unparalleled “real time” application and acceptance experience.

Precedent puts a new spin on health insurance. Learn more at [http://www.precedent.com].

Who is responsible for unsustainable healthcare fresh - part I

Who is really responsible for the costs of health care in this country? We have been conditioned to point the finger at the Government, Private Insurance Carriers or medical providers. We have heard endless blame dam, the assault charge and the fury of fault-finding between these parties for many months now. Each would have us believe that others are solely responsible for the problems in our health care system. No doubt, however, it is shared fault and joint responsibility. The Government, major insurers and medical providers, I would suggest three additional parts of conviction:

(1) insurance brokers of
(2) employers and
(3) you and me individually.

There was and there will be many more question of the role of the first three parties have had in the creation of the current situation. My intention in this series of three is to expose the role of the three groups of the latter and suggest how these groups can become really part of the solution.

Health insurance brokers

To include brokers in this discussion may seem incriminating because it is my job. However, I do so with a clear conscience because the approach my business takes when representative of our customers. Last week I was discussing trends in Health Plans franchise high with one of our representatives local carrier insurance she told me that she had recently heard a broker him, said "I do not sell this product to one of my clients." The broker who made this comment was referring to a top Plan coupled with an HSA health franchise and the comment was made in the context of its commission. The carrier REP has transfixed the broker to admit showing does not a plan of some of its clients because of the impact it would have on its Board.

The use of a high deductible Health Plan (HDHP) strategy will generate a reduction in substantial and immediate bonuses - usually between 30 and 50%. You guessed it. The reduction in premiums: a corresponding reduction in the commission to the broker. How brokers are honest and ethical enough suggest a strategy aimed at their client that will lead to a sizable pay cut for them? Unfortunately, this is how the system is designed and creates an inherent conflict of interest unless the brokerage firm is built on a different model. A model which measures the success based on the savings to their customers. In this model, the broker will look always all first take advantage of the savings created by health plans of forthrightness in the construction of a proposal rather than looking at as a last resort or only if the client requests about these plans.

The Government actually provided some very good options for the employer health care plans. Flexible of spending accounts (FSA), accounts of health (HSA) savings and the arrangements for health (HRA) provide different ways of achieving premium savings and tax savings. If properly designed, these favourable tax plans may result in the equivalent coverage or higher for employees at a price lower than the employer. A well-designed plan accomplishes these win/win results must be performed by a broker who specializes in the design and administration of these plans, not a broker that simply suggested later or at the request of the client.

Survey Kaiser/insurgencies 2009 report-employer sponsored health benefits, we better understand why employers have adopted of HDHP and what were the results:

72% of companies offering an HDHP said the main reason for which they have begun to offer this option was to save on health care costs
49% of the companies offering an HDHP has reported that the result of more success has been the control of health expenditure
A further 27% reported that the result of more success has been encouraging employees to be better consumers of health care (who, in passing, ultimately led to reduce health care costs)
82% of employees enrolled in a HDHP reported being either very satisfied or somewhat satisfied with the plan while only 3% reported being very dissatisfied

Here is the surprising statistics.

Only 5% of the companies currently offering an HDHP say "very likely" to offer an HDHP with a HRA next year
Only 6% of the companies currently offering an HDHP say "very likely" to offer an HDHP with an HSA in the next year

(Kaiser Family Foundation, and 2009, pp. 166-167)

Why few companies is planning start HDHP offering when the results were so favourable to employers and employees? Brokers did not do a fairly good job of promoting these types of plans and educate their customers about the financial benefits of the use of a HDHP. Whether due to a lack of knowledge of the product or a desire to preserve their commission, there is fault with the brokerage industry to be more aggressive with the reform of positive health that the Government has already adopted. Brokers must be sufficiently well informed and ethical enough to recommend, design and implement these plans for the benefit of their clients. Employers must find a broker who is competent and ethical enough to recommend, design and implement these plans for their business.

Reference

The Kaiser Family Foundation and research in health & Educational Trust (2009). Employer benefits 2009 annual survey (electronic Version). 166-167.

Scott is a Consultant of benefits for the benefit of Design Specialists, Inc. (BDS) in their Office in Phoenix, AZ. BDS is a broker of full services and a Director of third party specializing in the design and administration of high deductible health plans that help businesses save money on health care without cuts to the coverage of employees. Prior to joining the BDS, Scott has more than 12 years of experience as Manager of human resources and CFO.

Experience of Scott and the balanced approach that it can work effectively with the CFO and HR managers to achieve the often competing objectives of HR and finance. In addition, responsiveness and organisational skills of Scott to manage the process of renewal and registration for customers in an orderly manner and timely at the time. Scott likes to help businesses save thousands on their health expenditures without cuts that have a negative impact on employees.

http://www.bdsadmin.com

Choosing Health Insurance For Your Small Business

With small businesses employing the majority of the workforce, the health benefits they offer is vitally important to millions of workers. When evaluating which health insurance plan is best for your employees, make sure you shop around. The large variety of plans and coverage options available can be difficult to navigate, but these options allow small businesses to tailor plans that best fit the needs of their employees.

When considering a health insurance plan for your small business, it's important to note that insurance carriers calculate rates according to the following case characteristics:

Age of employees - Older employees are assumed to have more expensive and more frequent health-related claims, so generally speaking, an older workforce means steeper health plan costs.

Gender - Women typically incur more medical costs than men at younger ages, while males incur higher costs as they age. If your small business has a young, predominately female workforce, or one that is older and mostly male, expect to pay higher premiums.

Number of plan participants - As the amount of plan participants increases, the administrative cost for each individual decreases.

Industry - Certain factors, like unsafe working conditions, subject small businesses to higher costs. And even high employee turnover can result in a more expensive plan due to higher administrative costs for the insurer.

Geographic area - Health care costs vary by region due to differences in cost of living, medical practices and the amount of medical competition in the area.

Since the above factors affect health insurance rates, you can expect premiums, deductibles, coinsurance percentages and copayments to vary drastically from plan to plan. Shop around and do your research to ensure that you get the best plan at the best price for your small business.

Richard Monello is the President and CEO of Custom Health Plans, a full-service Texas health insurance agency offering the most cost-effective and affordable health insurance solutions for individuals, families, small businesses and the self-employed.

Acquired rights under the new health care legislation

Introduction

The health care legislation signed into law on March 23, 2010 is officially known as the "Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act." Gaining widespread use is the abbreviated "Affordable Care Act," and when used in context, simply "The Act." (1)

The Act is immense in scope and complexity, affecting every aspect of the delivery and financing of health care in the United States. Many of its provisions took effect the day the bill was signed, while hundreds more will be implemented in the coming years, most notably in 2014 with the establishment of state-based insurance exchanges, coverage mandates for individuals, and penalties for employers who do not provide their employees with proscribed levels of health care benefits.

In helping our clients understand and comply with the provisions of The Act - and owing to its complexity and multi-year implementation - we've found it most effective to address The Act in chapters, as it were, with advance learning and planning periods of three to six months--three to six months, that is, with the major exception of planning for "grandfathering" - in particular, the advantages of grandfathering as it relates to the new non-discrimination rules that will apply to all health plans, including fully-insured plans, on the policy anniversary following September 23, 2010, unless the first plan is grandfathered. For this provision, planning should be accomplished as soon as possible.

About Grandfathering

Under The Act, health plans that have been in continuous effect since March 23, 2010 can avoid several costly requirements of the legislation by adhering to strict guidelines that allow them to continue under current regulations, i.e., to remain "grandfathered."

Grandfathered status does not exempt a health plan from existing federal and state law, e.g., COBRA, Cal-COBRA, and FMLA, nor does it exempt it from all of The Act's provisions; However, avoidance of The Act's requirements as they pertain to the nonâ??discrimination rules of Internal Revenue Code Section 105 (h) may be of paramount importance to the financial well-being of the use.

Moreover, grandfathered status exempt employers from yet-to-be-defined requirements for the establishment of "internal claims appeal and external review processes," as well as new "modified community rating" provisions.

New Requirements for Health Plans

Effective with the first policy anniversary after September 23, 2010, all health plans, whether grandfathered or not, must comply with the following new requirements:

-No limit on lifetime benefits

-No limit on annual benefits (except as permitted by The Act)

-Extension of dependent coverage to age 26 (or older if required by state law) (2)

-No exclusions for treatment of pre-existing conditions for persons under age 19

-Designation of Primary Care Providers and direct access to OB - GYN providers and emergency services as needed

Health plans in effect on March 23, 2010 that do not remain grandfathered must also comply with the following new requirements, both at renewal and in perpetuity:

-Provide first-dollar coverage for in-network preventative care

-Establish internal claims appeal and external review processes (3)

-Conform to the non-discrimination rules under IRC Section 105 (h) (4)

And it's this last requirement - conformity to the stringent rules of IRC Section 105 (h) non-discrimination - that can present an employ with the greatest cost increase under the entire sweep of The Act The rules for non-discrimination under Section 105 (h) are extraordinarily complex, and the penalties for non-compliance extraordinarily punitive. (5) Indeed, $100 per day for each individual "to whom the failure relates" to the lesser of 10% of the plan's costs or $500,000.

Changes after March 23, 2010 that Will Not Cause a Loss of Grandfathered Status

-Changing premiums (payable to the carrier).

-Complying with federal and state law.

-Increasing benefits.

-Voluntarily complying with The Act.

-Changing plan structure, e.g., switching from a Health Reimbursement Arrangement to a traditional plan, if benefits are not reduced per the rules on page three herewith.

-Changing provider networks.

-Changing a prescription drug formulary.

-Making changes to accommodate a merger or acquisition, as long as the merger or acquisition is not performed solely to allow a group to move from grandfathered one plan to another with impermissible reductions in benefits or increases in cost sharing.

-Changing administrators for ASO (Administrative Services Only) groups.

Changes after March 23, 2010 that Will Cause a Loss of Grandfathered Status

-Changing from one insurance carrier to another.

-Increasing the co-insurance or percentage of any other cost-sharing feature above the levels at which they were set on March 23, 2010.

-Increasing any fixed-amount cost-sharing, e.g., whatever and out-of-pocket limits, above the level in effect on March 23, 2010 by a percentage that exceeds the sum of medical inflation plus 15%. (6)

(-Increasing co-payments above the levels in effect on March 23, 2010 by an amount that exceeds the greater of: a). the sum of medical inflation plus 15%. However, b). $5, increased by medical inflation.

-Reducing use contributions toward any tier of group health insurance coverage or group health plan by more than 5% below the contribution rate on March 23, 2010.

-Eliminating all (or substantially all) benefits to diagnosis or treat a specific condition.

-Imposing an annual or lifetime limit on benefits if an annual or lifetime limit had not been previously imposed on all benefits; or, for plans that previously imposed a lifetime limit on all benefits, imposing an annual limit that is lower than the lifetime limit. or, for plans that previously imposed an annual limit on all benefits, decreasing the dollar value of that annual limit.

Conclusion

Employers should preserve their rights under The Act by planning now - well in advance of their renewal - to determine if it's in their best interest to retain grandfathered status for their health plans, and if so, then to manage them with extreme care.

(1) The health care legislation is actually comprised of two new laws: The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (H.R. 3590) as amended by the Health Care and Education Affordability Reconciliation Act of 2010 (H.R. 4872).

(2) Grandfathered plans may exclude

(3) Per the requirements of IRC Section 503.

(4) The Act does not actually extend IRC Section105 (h) to fully-insured health plans. rather, it adds Section 2716 to the Public Health Services Act which, for the most part, mirrors IRC Section 105 (h).

(5) Penalties are imposed in the form of an excise tax under the provisions of IRC Section 4980D.

(6) The Department of Health and Human Services currently assumes an annual medical inflation rate of 4% for 2011â??2013 (simple interest), so that to retain grandfathered status, maceutical, whatever, and out-of-pocket limits may not be increased by more than 19% above 3/23/10 levels at the first post 9/23/10 renewal, nor by more than 23% above 3/23/10 levels at the second renewal, nor by more than 27% above 3/23/10 levels at the third renewal, etc.

Who is Responsible For Unsustainable Health Care Costs? - Part II

Part 1 of this three-part series answered this question by addressing the fault of health insurance brokers. Part II of this series shifts to the culpability of employers who provide insurance to their employees.

The employer-based health insurance system that we are familiar with in this country is very unique. No other industrialized nation has anything quite like the American system which developed as a means to circumvent wage controls that were imposed by Congress during World War II. Since that time, employees have come to expect fringe benefits such as health insurance as part of their total compensation package. In this system, we entrust our employers with some very important decisions that largely determine what our cost of medical care and access to medical care will be. We rely on our employers to make good decisions that will afford us better access and cost control than we would have on our own.

A very disconcerting pattern that I see as I interact with Human Resource and Finance Executives is that heavy workloads and apathy prevent decision-makers from spending the time necessary to make and implement good decisions on behalf of their employees. All too often, the decisions are made late in the game without a proper decision-making process and the path of least resistance is taken. That path of least resistance is usually to simply renew the current plan and absorb the customary double-digit increase or to weaken the plan in some fashion to save money. Shortsighted decisions such as these lead to higher premiums and/or higher out-of-pocket costs for employees.

The average Employer Premium Contribution in 2009 is $4,824 for single coverage and $9,860 for family coverage (The Kaiser Family Foundation and HRET, 2009, p. 2). The cost of benefits can easily add 10% or more to the total cost of compensation for an employee. We are not just talking about the cost of free sodas in the break room here. These decisions merit the best decision-making skills of HR and Finance executives. A thorough and responsible decision-making process includes the following:

Internal research to learn about trends and best practices in benefits
An early dialogue with the broker - a good broker will initiate this dialogue several months in advance of the renewal
Exploration and discussion with other brokers and administrators to make sure your broker is the best option for you and to allow healthy competition to work in your favor
A willingness to make changes to plan design, carrier, and/or broker in order to contain rising costs without sacrificing the quality of coverage

I am an HR Professional and I have been through years and years of health insurance renewals on the employer side prior to coming to the brokerage side. During those years as an HR Director, I was at times guilty of rushing the process, guilty of being closed-minded, guilty of making dangerous assumptions, and guilty of not doing my due diligence before making decisions that would bind my company and employees for another year.

The best renewal experience I ever had, though, was the year I took the time and effort to truly make the best decision. It was the year that I put my time constraints and assumptions aside in the interest of finding real solutions. In that year, solutions were found and decisions were made that led to a 30% savings for the company and yet better coverage for the employees. These win/win outcomes were very gratifying and well-received, especially in a year when the company would have otherwise been forced to cut benefits or pass on more cost and liability to the employees. Those outcomes were only possible though, because of a willingness and determination to find solutions to the problem of rising health care costs.

HR professionals clamor for the same recognition and respect that other leaders in the organization get. These are the types of outcomes and decisions that will vault you as an HR professional to a higher level of respect and influence within your organization. It will not come to those who always accept status quo and allow problems to get worse every year. Approach your next renewal season with a determination to make it the best renewal ever by solving the nation's problem of unsustainable health care costs for you and your employees.

Reference

The Kaiser Family Foundation and Health Research & Educational Trust (2009). Employer Health Benefits 2009 Annual Survey (Electronic Version). 2

http://www.bdsadmin.com

Google and Microsoft's New Battleground - Your Health

The concept of online patient medical records is taking off after Google recently released 'Google Health' and Microsoft a few months earlier released 'HealthVault'. AOL was first out of the block with 'Revolution Health' but hasn't made quite the same splash as the big two behemoth's.

Online medical records will allow patients to access their complete medical records (have you ever wondered what's in your paper file, now you'll know) wherever they go. With most people moving many times in a life time and seeing many different doctors this will lead to more informed and better healthcare decision making as their complete records follow them wherever they go.

Currently when people move they usually just start a new file with their new doctor, leaving their medical history behind. When they also see different specialists these doctors will likely not see the patients complete medical history and just base decisions on the current diagnosis, including emergency situations. Now these doctors will have a lifetime of medical history at their fingertips instantly.

This also cuts down on a great deal of administration expenses and delays which may be reflected in lower healthcare insurance premiums if implemented.

The technology has been available for years to make this a reality for everyone, it will improve patient healthcare decisions and cut down on administration expenses. So why haven't we put everyone's medical history online previously?

For starters, current healthcare records are primarily on massive amounts of paper, about 14% is currently stored on a computer in the USA. Transferring the mountains of medical records to a digital format is no small task and could induce more than a few cases of carpal tunnel syndrome typing all that data in. Most other industrialized countries have 50-90% of their records currently stored on a computer.

So why has the USA been so slow to put medical records on a computer?

In the USA hospitals are really business's, and they don't want to share information with their competition. Why should they help a patient/customer go see another doctor at another hospital? So they will drag their feet as long as possible.

Despite this Google and Microsoft are getting many people to volunteer and join their programs. These eager volunteers may be in for a bit of a surprise down the road.

Medical record privacy laws were written 12 years ago and addressed doctors, pharmacists and patients. There are no references to anything that may cover Google and Microsoft. In other words you will need to trust these large multi billion dollar corporations to look out for your best interests. Most of you are probably having a good chuckle after that last sentence.

Why should you care if Google or Microsoft sells or grants access to your medical records to the highest bidders?

Those bidders will be insurance companies and it would be pure gold to them. They could raise premiums or even deny you health insurance based on the slightest medical problems you have, and if you have a 'suspicious' gene it gets worse. Now you can adversely affect your children and relatives seeking medical insurance as they may be deemed carriers of this questionable genetic trait because of their relation to you.

Then employers will be bidding on those precious records. Perhaps they will conclude you are likely going to cost them a lot of medical expenses, therefore you can forget about a promotion or if you are applying for a job you're out of luck.

These online medical records have the potential for great benefits but until legislation to protect patients catches up with the technology those early volunteers signing up are in for a big surprise down the road, after all, Google and Microsoft are interested in the health of their bottom line, not your medical health.

Paul Fezziwig is a contributor for Healthcare Reviews, http://www.healthcarereviews.com, a free patient resource to rate and review their doctor, hospital, dentist and more.