Revolution Health was a big sponsor at BlogHer '07 in Chicago, less than 18 months ago. They had Steve Case, former chairman of AOL, at the helm, driven by personal passion stoked by personal experience in the world of health care. They had at least one really smart blogger/doctor in the person of Dr. Val Jones. They clearly had money. And they seemed to have a mission that went beyond just becoming WebMD lite. They did seem to want to be a truly Web 2.0-embracing agent of change in the health care world online.
Apparently, it's nice to want things, but it doesn't mean you'll last.
And John from e-patients.net shares his insights from working at Web 1.0 failed med-start-up drkoop.com to theorize about why. In a way it's simple: the vast majority of such start-ups fail...statistically, this was likely to happen. I think most of us expected a better outcome based on the pedigree behind the venture, but perhaps that pedigree contributed to a sense of hubris...over-reaching, over-commitment, over-promising? And a little less freedom to focus on organic, sustainable growth.
"Organic, sustainable"? Sounds like something I should be writing about on my green blog, but sometimes it applies to business too.
Not a fan of Val Jones - found her opining to be matriarchal, judgmental (blame the patient, patient as consumer instead of as a patient) and often wrong about clinical situations. However, she's educated as a protestant minister, if I recall, and her medical clinical experience is very thin - I'm not sure she practiced beyond serving a basic residency, so maybe this informs her viewpoint.
As I perceived her to be the physician voice for Revolution Health, I wonder if my perception was more widespread than noted in the health blogosphere?
I also found the Revolution Health model to be somewhat intrusive for people who came to the site looking for information but not particularly a medical home. The Web MD site always seemed to have what was needed in an appealing presentation and interactive form, and I just never gravitated to Rev. Health for any particular need. Maybe it was at least in part a marketing/niche issue....
Posted by: Annie | September 27, 2008 at 10:36 AM
I agree. I find my own online health needs to be transactional...I go when I want info on a particular symptom, and then I'm out. I'm not particularly looking for community...and if I were I'm not sure i'd go to a big site, but rather might try to find a blog community around the issue I was dealing with. Think that would probably feel more safe and intimate.
Posted by: Elisa Camahort | September 27, 2008 at 10:43 AM
I agree with Annie re: Val Jones. I wasn't a regular reader of her blog or Revolution Health, but when I did look at I found her blog had little medical insight, and what medical advice she offered was often simply wrong. It was mostly about her life - and was about as far from a "Revolution" in health care as possible. Good riddance to them, and to her, I say.
Posted by: Liz Thomas | September 28, 2008 at 05:22 PM
I'd just like to remind folks that if you want your comment published here, it can't cross the line into potential libel, i.e. making strong accusations...this is especially suspect coming from anonymous commenters.
Apparently Revolution Health is a hot button issue for some people, which I can appreciate. But there is a difference between stating a personal opinion and stating harmful facts without a single citation and without being up front about who you are.
Them's the rules here, and most people follow them just fine.
Posted by: Elisa Camahort | September 29, 2008 at 08:53 AM