Doc Holliday:

"My view is that only factors that relate to behaviors that one can change should impact premiums. So age and gender wouldn't count."

Human physiology is much more complicated than that. There is nothing in the human body that is always, 100% of the time responsive to changes in behaviors..

The belief that, if people just did x,y & z and had a,b & c results on lab tests that they would never get sick is ridiculous. There is no consistent indicator that guarantees a low risk in regards to health insurance. Therefore, charging people simply because they look fat to someone is simple bigotry.

Being fat is not a sin. Being fat is not something that everyone needs to be 'cured' of.

I completely agree. That's basically my main point: taxing fat is profiling. It's no different than police officers arresting people of a certain race. It's a statistical shortcut doctors take to determine health that isn't accurate.

And the "behaviors" that people want to tax is a huge oversimplification. I gained weight once in grad school and at my doctor's appointment, two points were made. First, the doctor asked me why I gained weight. I said I wasn't sure but it seemed to start when I was training for a half-marathon and running more than I normally did ("normally" meaning I previously had a more varied workout, not that I didn't have a workout). She said this is common- when you train for performance you tend to eat more, but not necessarily burn it all, and my muscle mass had probably decreased as a result of reducing weight training in favor of running. If that is taxable behavior, fine tax me. Second, the doctor said, "but you should lose weight. the key is simply to eat less calories than you burn." I said, "come on, you're a doctor, you can't possibly believe it's that simple." She said, "I don't. But no one really knows anything else about it, so as a doctor, that's what I have to tell you."