He is already going to likely get denied or rated. And if you get a physical they do not test for cancer unless you ask them to run a blood profile. If someone is in reasonable health there is little risk to getting a physical.
I unlike you qualified my statements not once but twice. It is what I would do, again what I would do. I very clearly outlined the 2 year contestability risk. I could "materially represent" that I am an alien from mars and they will still have to pay out after the 2 year period.
If you really wanted to be safe, lets say you need 500k in coverage. Go get a 500k term policy that is convertible to permanent coverage. After a brief period go get a policy where you disclose all doctors, also for 500k through a different company (assuming you get accepted). Pay the premium for 2 years and drop it. No risk to not getting a payout...
By he you mean me, as I am the OP. Anyway...
Seeing as how I am the OP I have qualified my statements many many times over during the entire thread. My main problem with your reasoning is that no good could possibly come from it. You say it is little risk, but it is absolutely no reward, so the ratio of risk to reward is infinite. I will not take that bet. I have no pre existing conditions on record that will disqualify me from obtaining insurance, other than admitting to MJ smoking. What you are suggesting will in no way help me, or anybody else for that matter. What you are suggesting has the potential to backfire drastically. Maybe you won't get diagnosed with cancer, but maybe you will. Maybe you also will be recorded as having high blood pressure, or any number of other conditions that could affect your rate. What you will not get diagnosed with is anything that will IMPROVE your rates beyond what the insurance company will independently determine. It's just like talking to the cops; You can try to rationalize it all you want but the fact of the matter is it CANNOT possibly help you, it can ONLY hurt you.
If I was going to go to a new doctor, and hope to get a clean bill of health, and then intentionally lie on my application form by omitting other doctors, why wouldn't I just cut out the middle man and omit my doctors records all together? Or only give them the info from my long past dr that I haven't been to in 7 years and claim I have had no doctor visits since then?
Another flaw in your reasoning is the MIB. Anything you do with the insurance company can potentially be reported to the MIB where it will remain on your record for 7 years. Getting caught intentionally lying to the insurance company will be reported to the MIB, and also likely end up with a canceled policy even if i'm not dead. Then the problem is that any other insurance company I applied to would have full access to my MIB file which would state all that information that I intentionally left out.
If you do have some kind of pre existing condition, or are a tobacco smoker you could potentially benefit from visiting the dr and getting a clean bill of health. However I would still strongly caution against going to the dr before locking in your rate. The thing with insurance companies is that you can redo the physical to get better rates after your policy is in place. For example if you get a policy as a smoker, then you quite smoking, and have some documentation from your doctor that you have in fact quit smoking and your health and lungs are improved, you could potentially retake the physical with the insurance company and qualify for a lower premium. However by going to the dr before you lock in your rate you run the risk of actually increasing your premiums.