I think it's a mistake to underestimate the imagination of insurance adjusters and bureaucrats when it comes to how personal data could be used.
IOW, the governor of a major state (and the party that likes to tout "small government") is fully onboard with tracking your most intimate health data in order to prosecute people for medical decisions they don't like.
In comparison, use of shopping data to prosecute people will be completely ordinary.
I'd like to see someone get convicted and sue the stores for tracking them without consent.
Everyone thinks surveillance capitalism is only harmful to privacy.
They are wrong — it is literally the enabling technology for a totalitarian state. But sure, by all means, improve your next quarterly profits and nevermind the proto-fascists in the wings drooling over your tools...
[0]https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2023/02/14/youngkin-...
https://www.healthcare.gov/how-plans-set-your-premiums/
It is a political exercise though, seeing as how it was politically acceptable for tobacco users to not be subsidized by non tobacco users, but it is okay for alcohol users to be subsidized by non alcohol users.
Similarly, it is okay for excessive sugar and carbohydrate consumers to be subsidized by appropriate carbohydrate consumers. Or exercise and non exercise...etc
Smokers stink up the area with secondhand smoke while boozers don't have an inherent stinkiness to their activity.