Lock up your Children!
Do not wear a smart watch or fitness tracker or buy one for others.
In March this year we wrote an article for The Australian about the dangerous combination of wearable technologies that tracked vital health statistics and moods, the insurance industry, and artificial intelligence.
The scenario we painted was one where health benefits and lower insurance premiums would be used to ‘market’ wearable tracking devices to an unsuspecting population and an unprepared legislature.
Health professionals, we predicted, would promote the likely reduction in adverse ‘episodes’ or ‘events’, while insurers would offer lower premiums to those who ‘met the goals’ and nobody will look further than the immediate and obvious benefits.
But a bleak future for society is easily painted and frighteningly close.
Fast forward a decade or two, and in my childrens’ lifetime, insurers are making billions by reducing their risks, insuring those that wear the devices. At the same time there’s a cohort of the population who had been wearing them but no longer need to because the insurers have discovered how unhealthy or genetically predisposed to poor health they were, refusing to insure them. These ‘uninsureds’ cannot attract a partner, or secure a job because no employer wants to take the risk either (or their insurers won’t let them) and lo-and-behold we give birth to an underclass.
Patent applications indicate Apple would like to analyse the tone of your voice to determine if you are happy, sad or angry. Tracking your mood is billed as being necessary to send targeted ads to you. AAMI’s Safe Driver app appears to be a game that gives you points for safe driving. But what else could Apple do with information about your mood? AAMI’s app is claimed to surreptitiously track hard braking, hard acceleration and whether you are using your phone while driving.
Have an accident in the future while angry and accelerating hard, and the other driver might never be at fault.
You might decide in the future to throw your wearable tracking device in the garbage bin. Too late – everything has already been recorded, from the moment you turned on that seemingly innocuous device you received for Christmas (or were ‘issued’ by your insurer).
The purpose of today’s blog post is to point out that the Australian Financial Review today reports that; “A watch that watches your health could save you money”.
On page 7 of today’s AFR, journalist Ruth Liew reports: “Your being watched. Your breathing, heartbeats, the hours that you sleep and wake are being monitored by an intel-built smart watch on your wrist.”
“And if your proven to be healthy and hit the set goals, you could save hundreds of dollars in insurance premiums each year.”
“That is the new proposition by life insurance giant MLC, which has become Australia’s first insurer to use smart watch technology to track customer’ habits and reward them for good behavior.”
“David Hackett, executive general manager insurance at MLC: “It’s a potential game changer for the industry. For too long, companies have relied on old ways to do business.”
Most worryingly, the AFR reports unwitting government complicity; “The Federal Government has opened the door to allowing companies to offer different health premiums to customers based on their personal risk factors.”
So will my premium rise and will I be priced out of life and or health insurance altogether if I chose not to wear a device?
It will be hard to resist the imminent massive global momentum that pushes you towards compliance and we haven’t even discussed the warnings about artificial intelligence and what AI might do with your personal health information.
But resisting compliance today might just be a better outcome for society in the long run.
You can read the Australian article here.
Roger Montgomery is the founder and Chief Investment Officer of Montgomery Investment Management. To invest with Montgomery domestically and globally, find out more.
Lawrence Shamrakov
:
I don’t know what MLCs plans are, but I do know of another insurer that implements a program that allows you to optionally share your health with them (including statistics such as mentioned above).
If you choose not to participate on the program, premiums are no higher than they were before the program. If you do, you’re not penalised for not taking care of yourself. However, there are financial benefits for keeping good records such as premium discounts and rewards. It has also been used in South Africa for some time (where that program was pioneered)
Not all organisations are inherently evil.
I do believe that there needs to be some regulation when it comes to activities like this, and where possible it should be voluntary and not disadvantage those who choose not to participate such as the above example.
Paul Muscroft
:
Good on you Roger – I totally agree. The only way to fight something like this is to educate people and broaden their world view. We will all grow older (hopefully) and frail and suffer health issues at some point. As will our children and parents. Any $ benefit now will be obliterated by future ‘smart device’ actuarial adjustments. Can you also imagine the stress of finding your device is out of charge and knowing that big brother is asking why you have gone offline – you have 6 hours to rectify before your insurance premium starts to increase! I also think we are VERY poorly served by the technology journo’s who are far too blinded by the latest technology offerings (esp from Apple) and very rarely discuss these wider issues.
Roger Montgomery
:
Thanks Paul for taking the time to paint that picture and to articulate the tension so succinctly.
Lucien Heffes
:
Very interesting and highly plausible. However, I suspect that 80% of the concerns raised are already achievable with the ubiquitous smartphone. If privacy and risk transperancy are issues then it’s already a problem. Smart watches are just the cream on top.
Roger Montgomery
:
ATtached to your body, there’s a lot more that can be garnered about your health, especially if one day the watch communicates with something implanted!
Lucas Hainsworth
:
That’s some second level thinking right there.
Obviously there are two responses
1) If you have nothing to hide, then why are you so afraid – these are the people who will not see the control aspect of what is happening until the last stage
2) What I do in my own time and my own information is private
I’m personally somewhere in between the two. With a strong tilt towards privacy and choice.
I hope that whoever reads my messages (and I am 100% sure someone somewhere does), looks at my keystrokes and checks out my meta data learns something from me.
!
Roger Montgomery
:
Thanks Lucas. I have nothing to hide either, but I cannot predict whether the current status quo I live in and enjoy will be maintained.