Aspartame & Insurance Coverage

I heard the other day that aspartame consumption may soon be part of your insurance questionnaire. We have long known that the potential side effects of the sugar-substitute and even if you haven't read a report about side effects, I'd venture to say that we all know that chemical substitutions for natural foods just aren't good for us. That said, with obesity on the rise while the dieting industry reaches a staggering  $60-billion, it's no wonder we've turned to something that gives us access to something sweet without the calories. It's also then makes sense that the insurance companies are monitoring this chemical consumption with a close watch.

Though I'm not a big fan of aspartame myself, I question the potential of this decision by the insurance companies. On one hand it makes total sense. Consumption of aspartame has been shown by many a cancer institute to cause brain tumours. So it's logical that an insurance company would want to monitor how much of the sweet life you're living and adjust your rates accordingly.

On the other hand, I wonder what impact this could have on the control insurance companies have over its customers. At what point is our diet an acceptable measure of how insurable we are? It makes obvious sense that smoking should be a factor. And though the government is doing a limited job at discouraging smoking at least there has been a big movement to make it socially unacceptable. Based on the toxicity of aspartame it could be logical to put it in the same category. But, if the food industry has it in a large variety of foods, can the consumer be punished to the point that insurance rates are affected? Where do we draw the line on our lifestyle and the support we purchase from the insurance companies. Would it be ridiculous for our rates to go up if you didn't get your 7-8 servings of vegetables a day or 60 minutes of cardio?

I think this is one to pay attention to.