[rootusrootus]

IMO it's a misuse of the technology. Controlled remote access was a good idea for doctors to see how therapy was working and adjust when necessary. I'd argue that newer APAP machines are so good at self-adjusting that it's less clear that remote access is necessary. And using it for insurance purposes should never have been permitted to begin with. Price it into the premium and skip the dystopian monitoring part.

Personally, I just bought my machine outright. Yeah, it was close to a thousand bucks. But it's been going strong for years, so I'm happy with the investment. It has never been allowed to connect back to resmed.

[ars]

I agree APAP is so good you no longer need a Dr. involved. People should be allowed to purchase an APAP machine if they want it, with no prescription.

However I disagree about insurance - they are paying for it, so they can chose how they want to monitor usage. If you don't like it, then pay for it yourself, exactly like you did.

Also, the older machines don't have remote access, they have a little card you have to bring periodically to the Dr. so they can confirm to insurance you are actually using it. Remote access was meant to make it less annoying for patients, and cheaper too since you don't have to go to the Dr. so often.

Pricing it into the premium is a terrible idea - it would raise premiums for everyone, for very little gain.

[rootusrootus]

> Pricing it into the premium is a terrible idea - it would raise premiums for everyone, for very little gain.

Enough to matter? Let's put this in context. A typical CPAP machine will go for years before needing to be replaced, and can be purchased retail for about $800. Compared to routine medical expenses, that's nothing. Heck, the reduction in costs for monitoring compliance would probably lead to -lower- premiums, not higher.