Finance 101 for Physicians.

Although physicians enjoy extensive educational backgrounds, financial planning typically is not a significant component of the curricula they have completed. As a result, many physicians could benefit from greater financial acumen, and their preparation for retirement might be lacking in light of their relatively high-income levels. This article by a private wealth advisor with 29 years of industry experience provides physicians with the basic building blocks to understand and manage their finances. It focuses on 3 pillars of financial planning: (1) protecting themselves, their families, and their assets; (2) reducing their taxes; and (3) growing their wealth.

Navigating a Pandemic: The Unique Role of the Medical Director.

The sudden emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic in early 2020 presented a unique challenge for medical directors of life insurance companies. Company leadership required quick answers about many issues, but two in particular: 1) the magnitude of the pandemic's impact on the insured lives portfolio and 2) the underwriting of new applicants during a pandemic. This article will describe the experiences of a global team of reinsurance medical directors during a pandemic. It may also serve to provide guidance for medical directors facing a similar challenge in the future.

Making financial uncertainty count: Unit-linked insurance, investment and the individualisation of financial risk in British life insurance.

While most scholarship in the sociology of insurance has focused on the making of insurance risk by investigating mechanisms of pooling and spreading, this article examines insurers' management of financial uncertainty. Based on a large corpus of written sources and 44 semi-structured oral history interviews, this article seeks to describe and explain a shift in how financial uncertainty is dealt with in British life insurance, away from traditional multipolar arrangements revolving around actuarial prudence and discretion, towards bipolar arrangements that rely on explicit risk quantification and the logic of risk-based capital to "individualise" financial risk. The article identifies two factors that were key in bringing about this shift: first, the competitive dynamics that unfolded with the emergence of challenger "unit-linked" insurers in the 1960s, and, second, changes in the professional ecology, as manifested by the changing relations between the actuarial profession and insurance supervisors.

Model migration and rough edges: British actuaries and the ontologies of modelling.

The existing literature on modelling provides two main ways of viewing model migration: a modular view, which seeks to decompose models in their constitutive elements, and thus provides a view on what it is that migrates; and a practice-based view, which focuses on modelling as an activity, and understands a model as intricately entangled with its context of use. This article brings together these two sensitivities by focusing on ontologies of modelling. The paper presents a case study of the appropriation of modern finance theory's 'no-arbitrage' models by British actuaries - a process that gradually unfolded at around the turn of the century and led to significant friction within the UK's insurance industry. We can distinguish two main modelling ontologies: a 'risk-neutral ontology', which underpins no-arbitrage models and holds that the value of financial instruments is determined by 'arbitrage'; and, a 'real-world ontology', which assumes that the economic world consists of real probabilities that may be approximated through a combination of archival-statistical methods and expert judgment. The appropriation of the risk-neutral modelling ontology was made possible by the declining legitimacy of actuarial expertise as 'financial stewards' of life insurance companies. The risk-neutral modelling ontology provided an 'objective' alternative to the traditional actuarial models, which explicitly required actuaries to make 'prudent' judgments. Despite the fact that the no-arbitrage modelling was considered an 'objective' affair, the valuation models that insurers use today are strongly shaped by political compromises, a result of the 'rough edges' of models.

Predicted economic damage from a quick, simple Alzheimer's disease cure.

The estimated 5.8 million Alzheimer's disease patients in the U.S. require an enormous share of national healthcare expenditures. Other nations face similar economic burdens. There have been great efforts, thus far unsuccessful, to discover an effective therapeutic, with 1081 Alzheimer's disease drug trials completed as of May 2019. The pessimism thus engendered has forestalled contingency planning for the potential major economic repercussions of a simple, quick cure. Yet, promising new research spotlighting the possible "trigger" role of infectious agents might allow some or all cases of Alzheimer's disease to be halted, reversed, or prevented with an antibiotic or antiviral compound, possibly even one already approved by drug regulators for other uses. The sudden advent of such an unexpected therapy would theoretically have dramatic impacts, both detrimental and beneficial, on the American economy. The damages would include a $414 billion shrinkage of Medicaid, Medicare and other revenues to all six sectors comprising the healthcare provider category. Nursing homes and skilled nursing facilities are projected to suffer the greatest loss of annual revenue: $51 billion and $16 billion, respectively. This would cause the loss of an estimated 654,000 jobs. Facility mortgage and commercial loan repayments could stop. Other adverse consequences would include detrimental effects on reserves for Social Security and pensions, cutbacks in dementia research funding, and reduced donations to Alzheimer's disease advocacy groups. Insurance company reserves for fixed payment annuities already sold could be jeopardized. However, an Alzheimer's disease cure would also create economic beneficiaries. Medicare and Medicaid would save up to a projected $195 billion annually. Life insurance companies and unpaid caregivers would also benefit financially. By identifying the healthcare sectors likely to be detrimentally impacted by a simple, quick Alzheimer's disease cure, contingency plans can be made in the U.S. and other countries to assist the foreseeable painful transitions for staff and facilities.

Genetic testing and insurance in Australia.

BACKGROUND: Genetic testing offers great benefit for the diagnosis of genetic conditions and to identify and manage risk for conditions such as familial breast cancer. However, potential personal insurance implications exist for some patients who undergo genetic testing in Australia. Currently, insurance companies offering risk-rated products such as life insurance can use genetic test results to discriminate, which may adversely affect applicants' ability to secure a policy. Many comparable countries have banned or restricted life insurers' use of genetic results, while Australia still permits it. However, the industry proposes to introduce a moratorium limiting the use of genetic results for life insurance underwriting in mid-2019. OBJECTIVE: This paper explores the implications of genetic testing for risk-rated insurance for the general practice workforce in Australia. DISCUSSION: Advancements in technology and decreasing costs have resulted in rapid expansion in genetic/genomic testing, which is set to become part of mainstream healthcare. General practitioners (GPs) in Australia will have an increasingly significant part to play in the expanded use of this testing, and it is therefore important that GPs are aware of these issues.

How are genetic test results being used by Australian life insurers?

In Australia, the USA and many Asian countries the life insurance industry is self-regulated. Individuals must disclose genetic test results known to them in applications for new or updated policies including cover for critical care, income protection and death. There is limited information regarding how underwriting decisions are made for policies with such disclosures. The Australian Financial Services Council (FSC) provided de-identified data collected on applications with genetic test result disclosure from its life insurance member companies 2010-2013 to enable repetition of an independent examination undertaken of applications 1999-2003: age; gender; genetic condition; testing result; decision-maker; and insurance cover. Data was classified as to test result alone or additional other factors relevant to risk and decision. Where necessary, the FSC facilitated clarification by insurers. 345/548 applications related to adult-onset conditions. The genetic test result solely influenced the decision in 165/345 applications: positive (n = 23), negative (n = 139) and pending (n = 3). Detailed analyses of the decisions in each of these result categories are presented with specific details of 11 test cases. Policies with standard decisions were provided for all negative test results with evidence of reassessment of previous non-standard decisions and 20/23 positive results with recognition of risk reduction strategies. Disclosure of positive results for breast/ovarian cancer, Lynch syndrome and hereditary spastic paraplegia, and three pending results, generated non-standard decisions. The examination demonstrates some progress in addressing concerns in regard to utilisation of genetic test information but the self-regulatory system in Australia only goes some way in meeting internationally recommended best practice.

The consequences of chronic kidney disease mislabeling in living kidney donors.

Despite numerous studies that substantiate its long-term safety, barriers to kidney donation persist. These include issues of insurability after donation and its consequent financial and emotional burdens. We present 2 cases in which mislabeling of kidney donors as having chronic kidney disease shortly after kidney donation adversely affected their insurability. A concerted effort should be made to affect public policy such that insurability and the psychosocial well-being of living donors are protected.

A study on the effect of exclusion period on the suicidal risk among the insured.

An exclusion period (usually from 12 months to 2 years) is usually found in life insurance policies as a precautionary measure to prohibit people from insuring their lives with the intent to kill themselves shortly thereafter. Several studies have been conducted to investigate the effect of exclusion periods on the risk of suicide among the insured in the US and Australia. However, while Hong Kong has experienced an increase in the number of suicides among the insured, little is known about the dynamic between the exclusion period and suicide in Asia. Here we make use of death claims data from one of the major life insurance companies in Hong Kong to ascertain the impact of a 12-month exclusion period on suicide risk. We also use utility functions derived from economic theory to better understand individual choices regarding suicide among the insured. More specifically, we sought to determine whether there is a greater risk of suicide immediately following the 12-month exclusion period. We also examined whether the risk of suicide claims was higher than that of other non-suicidal claims. The study period for this investigation was from January 1, 1997 to December 31, 2011, during which time there were 1935 claims based on 1243 deaths. Of these, 197 were suicide-related claims for 106 suicide deaths. The mean number of life policies held by suicidal claimants and non-suicidal claimants was 1.6 and 1.4, respectively. The average/median size of the claims (total payment made on all policies held by the insured life) was HK$665,800/426,600 and HK$497,700/276,200 for suicidal and non-suicidal deaths, respectively. The policy lifetime of the claims, or the number of days from policy issuance to suicide occurrence, ranged from 38 to 7561 days, with a mean of 2209 days, a median of 1941 days, and a standard deviation of 1544 days. The peak density of suicide claims occurred on day 1039 of the policy. Our results revealed that suicide claims tend to occur earlier than other claims and that there is a greater risk of suicide observed following the 12-month exclusion period. Some suggestions are made in terms of extending the exclusion period, which is anticipated to significantly reduce suicide at the global level.