I find your point about the information asymmetry between insurance companies and consumers extremely insightful. Here is another possible consequence. Insurer

I find your point about the information asymmetry between insurance companies and consumers extremely insightful. Here is another possible consequence. Insurers might choose to protect themselves from this asymmetry by only offering very general medical insurance. Rather than insurance for specific conditions, such as cancer or nursing homes or anything that one might find out that one had a predisposition for, they would only offer insurance for "lack of health", or some similarly-broad language. If they did that, lots of people would buy that insurance, because everyone has a legitimate risk of being unhealthy at some time, so you wouldn't get the situation where people with a genetic predisposition for a disease made up a disproportionate number of the people buying insurance for that disease. That would also have great effects on the availability of good health insurance, because then insurers would have an incentive to cover a large number of conditions. (I know that this would probably not give large number of people good insurance. The insurance industry just sucks.)