Before the medical exam the reasoning would have been "any of us could have lung cancer. So we'll all pay so that the one person unlucky enough to have it doesn

Before the medical exam the reasoning would have been "any of us could have lung cancer. So we'll all pay so that the one person unlucky enough to have it doesn't have their finances ruined". After the medical exam the reasoning is "we already know who rolled the dice and lost. Fuck 'em, they can suffer on their own, us lucky ones will help each other out and throw the others to the wolves". I know which society I'd prefer to live in. The more we know about who is and is not going to need care the better we are able to see past the veil of ignorance and let our selfishness and greed make our decisions rather than our sense of fairness and community. Having the information certainly helps providers become more efficient, but that efficiency comes at the human cost of throwing anyone who gets sick under the bus. I'm not so sure health insurance should be allowed to be privatized in the first place; it almost inevitably leads to disgusting moral hazard and disaster. But it currently is privatized so I'd say any information private insurers get is a net loss for society.