Everything you always wanted to know about the Health Care system. But were afraid to ask.
Category: Matthew Holt
Matthew Holt is the founder and publisher of The Health Care Blog and still writes regularly for the site and hosts the #THCBGang and #HealthInTwoPoint00 video shows/podcasts. He was co-founder of the Health 2.0 Conference and now also does advisory work mostly for health tech startups at his consulting firm SMACK.health.
At some point I had to crawl out of my hole and put pen to paper on the election debacle that just took place, and what the ensuing lunacy might be like for the health care system. So this is my attempt to do just that.
It’s really hard to understand why Trump won this election or why Harris and the Democrats lost. There was a lot of weirdness going on. Remember that before the vote Harris was generally praised for running a steady campaign, the Democrats had tracked to the right on immigration (trying to pass what IMHO was a horrendous bill ), and Harris kept talking about having a Glock, being a prosecutor and campaigned with a Cheney. The swing states (which vote at a much higher proportion than everyone else) all (with the narrow exception of Pennsylvania) voted for Democratic senators. For President they only went 3% against where they were in 2020. Even weirder was that hundreds of thousands of Trump voters didn’t appear to vote down the ballot at all. Yet nationwide the swing was big enough for Trump to win the popular vote. (If you really want to dig in, Charles Gaba has put together a great spreadsheet)
The simplest explanation is that the teeny middle in American politics voted against the incumbent. And the “middle” is getting teenier. In 1964 Johnson got 61% of the vote. Nixon (1972) and Reagan (1984) won with nearly 60% of the vote. Obama’s big 2008 victory was with just 53% of the vote and he won by 7%.
Biden won in 2020 with just over 51% and Trump will end up winning while likely getting just less than 50% of the vote. This isn’t an overwhelming mandate. It’s a small minority of voters switching because they are pissed off with the status quo. This year the bug bear was inflation, which really wasn’t Biden’s fault even though he got the blame. It also appears that a decent slug of Arab-Americans and far left Democrats stayed home or voted for Jill Stein because of Gaza.
And let’s not forget the impact of the Electoral College which reduces turnout outside of swing states (not exclusively). Surely if we had a popular vote in which every vote counts, turnout would be higher, including in the big 2 states that are Dem strongholds (NY & CA).
However, even if you think it’s inconceivable that a majority would vote for Trump because of what happened in 2016 to 2021 (especially on January 6, 2021!), apparently that’s not enough of a disqualifier. He’s going to be President.
So what happens next? Particularly in health care.
My expectation (and hope) is that this is a snake eating its own tail. There are so many repugnant egos circling around Trump that it’s more than likely they’ll turn on each other, and little to nothing gets done. That doesn’t mean nothing will happen.
Andrea Ippolito has combined her personal experience as a mum struggling with breast feeding, and her professional career as an entrepreneur and engineer at Athenahealth building integrations with EMRs. She’s now the CEO of Simplifed which has built a network of lactation consultants, and much more, and has placed it in the workflow of that most important part of health care — pre and post partum. How did she do it and what’s it like? She told and showed Matthew Holt.
This is the week where the digital health landscape debunks to the HLTH Conference in Vegas to meet, do deals, listen to superannuated rappers and generally have a great time. Speaking as the guy who ran the digital health conference before HLTH emerged, I remain extremely jealous of how Jonathan Weiner, Rich Scarfo, Jody Tropeano and team have managed to pull 10,000 people together when Health 2.0 never got past 25% of that size! (And I won’t even mention the premium price they charge!).
But there is something else that HLTH has not been shy in doing, and that is giving a place on the stage for big companies to explain what they intend to do to change the health system. Amazon, Walmart. Walgreens, CVS, Optum and many more have used that premium real estate to explain what they are going to do. And much like the digital health upstarts, the reality has been very different.
Almost all of those companies’ new strategies are in deep trouble.
Amazon was going to build a hybrid telehealth/home based delivery platform. It got up and running and had some sizable employer clients. It also had a strong relationship with Crossover Health which had great worksite clinics. Not hard at all to imagine that becoming a nationwide primary care platform that could take risk and really cut into the business of the incumbent non-profit systems. After all Dave Chase at Rosetta Stone has been preaching this forever. But at the first hint of trouble, Amazon cut & run and bought One Medical. It’s as if their play in grocery was to go mass market but then they decided that they could make more money from the high end Lululemon crowd that shops at Whole Foods. Oh yeah, that was their play in grocery too.
Walmart, Walgreens and CVS were all going to create mass-market primary care, and move to accepting risk primarily from Medicare Advantage. I interviewed Walmart’s then head honcho of health care, Cheryl Pegus, on stage at HLTH two years ago when she waxed lyrical about how Walmart was the answer to the lack of primary care all over the deep South and rural America. The joke was that by the time of that panel she had already quit and was moving to fresher pastures at JP Morgan! Around a year later Walmart declared that it couldn’t staff its clinics, was losing a fortune on each one, and it tossed the whole business.
Walgreens paid a fortune for VillageMD, then even more for Summit Medical (which included CityMD in NYC). At one point in late 2021, VillageMD CEO Tim Barry told me that their main issue was the execution risk of having to open more clinics per week then Starbucks did at the height of its expansion. Walgreens made a minority investment then kept doubling down on its bet. But three years later it has written off the whole amount ($8bn or so) and its stock price is in the toilet. It’s worth less now than doctor network Doximity!
Both of these companies and CVS have shown that it’s really hard just to get the basics right opening clinics in retail stores. That’s despite the fact that most Americans have no primary care doc and can’t get an appointment with a regular one, and that there’s a captive audience walking into their stores every day picking up their meds.
CVS has the added issue of trying to integrate a decent sized insurer into its operations just at the time when the Medicare Advantage gravy train looks like it is running out of steam. CVS’ CEO Karen Lynch took over Aetna recently and then this past week was dispatched to the cheap seats herself. (Don’t feel too bad for her, she’s getting $4m a year to “consult” with the board). Two things have hit Medicare Advantage. First the government is starting to look into risk adjustment upcoding. CVS, you may recall, bought Signify Health, a company specializing in sending nurses into seniors’ homes to perform said upcoding. Secondly, Medicare Advantage plans had surprisingly little information about and control over their members who were being cared for by their non-risk bearing delivery system (which is to say, most of it). They appeared to be totally surprised that post pandemic procedure numbers ratcheted up and were powerless to stop it. Well, Wall Street noticed.
Similar problems have hit Optum, the engine behind United HealthGroup’s profitable growth for the past decade or so. It’s not just the biggest health tech company in America, it’s also the biggest medical group owner—even if CEO and bumbling Englishman Andrew Witty doesn’t seem to know how many doctors it controls. They are being exposed in Stat on a weekly basis for basically semi-frequently causing their doctors to lie about their patients’ health status, just as the Wall Street Journal accuses their associated health plan of inventing diseases and procedures—all to bill the government more. You can argue back and forth but it does appear that the strategy of buying every medical group it can see and provider fracking appears to have hit a bumpy road.
So if the venture-funded digital health upstarts are no longer changing the world, and the big retailers and Optum aren’t setting the world alight, who is taking the upper hand? Well, I expect that intermingled with the ex-pop stars and amazingly beautiful actresses on stage this week (sorry, but I love Halle Berry!), we’ll see a rash of big incumbent non- & for-profit systems. Look at their numbers. Procedures are heading up. ERs are filling up. Operations are profitable or in some cases, very profitable, corporate jets are being bought, and “reserves” –AKA hedge funds–are growing well due to being stuffed full of Nvidia stock.
All of which leads me to believe that sadly HLTH isn’t about the future of health as much as it’s a retread of its past. Still, I’ll catch you at the parties if you’re there….
Pete Hudson is one of the OGs of digital health. As an emergency room doc he was fed up with his friends bothering him with their medical problems and he created a tool called iTriage, which helped patients figure out what condition they had, and where to go to deal with it. This was fifteen years ago and we’re now starting to see the evolution of that. Pete is now a venture capitalist and an investor in Transcarent–the sponsor of a new video series on THCB. This is part 2 of our conversation (part 1 is here) and we dive much more into AI and what Transcarent’s Wayfinding tool and other AI like it could do to change health care and the patient experience–Matthew Holt
Chris Darland is CEO of Peerbridge Health, which is the maker of a “3 lead to 12 lead” EKG patch that can give a better view of overall cardiac health than what’s on the market now–which tend to specialize in AFIB. Chris thinks that the Peerbridge Cor product will lead to a new world where for a much lower price we can have much better data on many more people who are at potential risk for heart disease and much more. I talked with him to discover what’s coming and what the impact might be on the overall health care system. Will we have fewer bypasses and stents? Maybe…Matthew Holt
Pete Hudson is one of the OGs of digital health. As an emergency room doc he was fed up with his friends bothering him with their medical problems and he created a tool called iTriage, which helped patients figure out what condition they had, and where to go to deal with it. This was fifteen years ago and we’re now starting to see the evolution of that. Pete is now a venture capitalist and an investor in Transcarent–the sponsor of a new video series on THCB. We had a long conversation about the evolution of digital health, what went right, what opportunities got missed, and what to expect next. This is part one of our conversation, and allows two guys who were there close to the start of this world to survey what’s happened since–Matthew Holt
I was having a fight on Twitter this week and it hit me. America 2024 is Japan 1989.
The topic of the fight was right-wing VC Peter Thiel. In 2001 he put a ton of Paypal stock allegedly worth less than $2,000 into a Roth IRA. The Roth IRA was designed so that working stiffs could put post tax cash into an IRA, grow it slowly and take out money tax-free. (For traditional IRAs you put in pre-tax money and get taxed when you take it out). You may have read the story in ProPublica. Magically Thiel earned less that year than the max allowable income limit (around $100K) to contribute to a Roth IRA, and magically that stock was within weeks worth much more and then, later, hundreds of millions more. Since then Thiel has invested those Paypal returns in Facebook, Palantir and much more, and that Roth IRA has billions of dollars in it that can never be taxed.
My twitter adversary was saying that Thiel obeyed the law. I doubt it, but that’s not really the point. When the Roth was introduced it wasn’t meant to be a loophole that Silicon Valley types could use to hide billions from tax. But neither my twitter “friend” nor Peter Thiel want to take responsibility or pay their fair share.
Japan in 1989 was wealthy and successful and heading off a speculative cliff which it’s since taken 3 decades to dig out of. There were numerous academics pointing this out, but the most interesting analysis was The Enigma of Japanese Power written by a Dutch journalist named Karel van Wolferen. Here’s a summary from wikipedia with my emphasis added
Van Wolferen creates an image of a state where a complicated political-corporate relationship retards progress, and where the citizens forgo the social rights enjoyed in other developed countries out of a collective fear of foreign domination….Japanese power is described as being held by a loose group of unaccountable elites who operate behind the scenes. Because this power is loosely held, those who wield it escape responsibility for the consequences when things go wrong as there is no one who can be held accountable.
In Thiel’s case a collective network of tax accountants, junk philosophers, and purchased politicians like JD Vance ensure that no one has to be accountable. Ultimately Thiel doesn’t feel responsible for paying what he owes. Of course the exposure of Trump’s tax cheating shows that he doesn’t either. And many people find this OK.
Meanwhile I got into it a little with Jeff Goldsmith on last week’s THCB Gang about why hospitals are still paid per transaction when it would be much better for them to be paid some kind of global budget for the services they provide and for doctors to be paid a salary to exercise their best judgment rather than be tempted into providing care just because they get paid for it. Both COVID and the recent Change Healthcare outage put health care providers in a terrible situation financially because they depend on being paid fee-for-service via claims for individual transactions. Did the leadership of America’s hospitals and doctors come out asking for a change to the system? No, they just got a government hand out and begged for a return to standard operating procedure. No one can rationally look at how we pay for health care in America and say “give us more of the same” but there’s no leadership to change it at all.
Talking about lack of leadership, Amber Thurman died in Piedmont Henry Hospital because no-one on the medical team was prepared to give her the D&C that she desperately needed. They were scared of going to jail under Georgia’s draconian anti-abortion law. There are many, many guilty parties here.
The Democratic convention wrapped with a fine speech from Kamala Harris, star power from the Obamas and Clintons, and a bunch of Republicans telling their ideological brethren that it was better to be a Democrat than a Trumper. More importantly no Beyonce/Taylor Swift duet–as we were promised by Mitt Romney.
There was a lot of talk about some aspects of health care. But overall if Harris wins, don’t expect much change to the current health care system.
Why not?
First there’s the pure politics. The Dems need to win back the House (probable but not certain) and hold the Senate to pass legislation. Right now they have a 51-49 edge in the Senate. Most likely that goes to 50-50 as the Republicans will definitely pick up Joe Manchin’s seat in West Virginia. There’s a series of seats the Dems currently hold in close races (Montana, Ohio, MIchigan, Nevada, Arizona) that they’ll need to keep to maintain it at 50-50, and it’s hard to see any pickups from Republicans (perhaps Florida or Texas if you squint really hard). The good news is that Manchin (WV) and Sinema (AZ) will soon both be gone, so the Dems that will be there won’t be as difficult to persuade to follow a Presidential agenda. But that will still leave Walz as VP to do what Harris did and pass a bunch of deciding votes under reconciliation, which massively limits what the legislation can do–it has to be “budget related.”
Which leads us to what we have been hearing from Harris and her campaign about health care? We’ve heard a lot about issues that have impacts on health, specifically creating affordable housing and fighting child poverty, but little that is directly related to health care itself. Really only two issues stand out. Abortion and reproductive rights, and drug prices.
Clearly Harris will take a swing at reversing Dobbs and passing a national right to abortion. This will need either a packing of the Supreme Court (my favorite) or ending the filibuster or both. Either of these will be incredibly tough to pull off constitutionally and politically and will take huge amounts of political oxygen. Of course the cynics would say, the Democrats are better off leaving this as an issue to use to beat up the Republicans on. But if it gets done, womens’ and reproductive rights will only be back where they were in 2022.
Regarding the cost of drugs, there will continue to be much justified bashing of big pharma, but the extension of insulin price controls is something that (eventually) the market via CivicaRX and others is getting to anyway. Meanwhile the IRA gave Medicare the right to negotiate drug prices and the results are not exactly earth shattering. For example, CMS says it’s negotiated the cost of blood thinner Eliquis from about $6,000 a year to under $3,000 This sounds good until you realize that the price is only that high because of patent games the manufacturer BMS plays in the US, and the price in the rest of the world is under $1,000. We’ll hear more about this as the price cuts come into effect, (although not till 2026!) and more drugs get negotiated, but overall this isn’t exactly an earth-shattering change.
Finally there’s already a guaranteed fight about extending the premium subsidies for ACA plans. These were first in the pandemic American Rescue Act, then extended in the IRA, but they currently are scheduled to end in 2025. It’s hard to imagine them not being extended further whatever the makeup of the Senate, assuming a Democratic House of Representatives. (A Marjorie Taylor Greene speakership does give me pause!). But again there’s nothing new here and the overall flavor of expensive premiums and high deductibles in the current ACA marketplace won’t change.
So what’s not going to happen? Virtually all the interesting stuff we were promised by Harris and for that matter Biden in 2020. You may have missed the one actual “policy-first” speech at the convention which came from Bernie Sanders. To be fair a lot of his agenda was already in the Biden legislation. That was no accident as Biden deliberately reached out to him in 2020 and 2021 and enacted a pretty radical agenda on infrastructure, climate, industrial policy and more. And when I say radical I mean milquetoast social democrat by European standards! But what wasn’t in that agenda? No Medicare for all, which Bernie ran on in 2019/20 and brought up again at the convention. Who else proposed that in 2019? Why, a certain Kamala Harris. That never made it into the Biden agenda. We didn’t even get legislation introduced about lowering the Medicare age to 60, which was a campaign promise. There’s been no conversation about any of this from Harris or from Biden before he withdrew. It’s just a bridge too far.
Which leads to the stuff that gets debated about in THCB and elsewhere as to how the system actually works. There’s been nothing about Medicaid expansion (or its continued contraction). No talk about reining in hospital consolidation. No mention even of insurers gaming Medicare Advantage or private equity buying up physician practices. Nothing about the expansion of value-based care.
What we can expect in a Harris administration is more of the same from CMS and potentially a slightly more aggressive FTC. That will mean continued efforts to veer slightly away from fee-for-service in Medicare, a few more constraints on the worst behavior in Medicare Advantage, and possibly some warning shots from the FTC about hospital monopolies. But the trends we’ve seen in recent years will largely continue. We’re not getting a primary-care based capitated system emerging from the wreckage of what we have now, and unlike the Clinton and even Obama administrations, there’s not even any rhetoric from Harris or Biden about how that would be a good idea.
So politically I don’t think the Harris administration will be very exciting for health care. And if the other guy wins, as Jeff Goldsmith wrote on THCB last month, expect even less.
Phil Fasano is CEO of Recuro Health. Phil was CIO at Kaiser Permanente in the glory years when it rolled out Epic/Health Connect, which was at the time the biggest roll out of an EMR and was instrumental in creating Kaiser’s system of virtual care. A decade+ later the concept of telehealth and virtual care has been battered around, notably in the stock price of Teladoc and others. However, Phil is now leading a smaller organization called Recuro Health which is delivering extensive primary hybrid care to small & medium employers, has more then 1 million lives on the system, and is profitable. Is this the future of digital health? Maybe, and it’s well worth listening to his approach–Matthew Holt
You digital health fans remember that halcyon time. In 2019 a few digital health companies went public, and then somehow got conflated in the pandemic meme stock boom, with the harbinger event being the August 2020 sale of Livongo to Teladoc that valued it at $19bn and early in 2021 rather more, as Teladoc itself got to a market cap of $44bn in February 2021
Venture money poured into digital health as a fin de siecle for the ZIRP, that had been going for a decade, combined with the idea that Covid meant we would never leave our houses. The vaccine that became generally available at the start of the Biden Administration in 2021 put paid to the idea that telehealth was the majority of the future of care delivery.
Nonetheless between mid 2021 and early 2022 Jess DaMassa and I were reporting on VC funding in a show called Health in 2 Point 00 (later Health Tech Deals) and every week there were several deals for $100m and up going into new health tech companies.
Things don’t look so pretty now. Even while venture money was flooding into digital health, those public companies, as exemplified by Teladoc, started to see their stock price fall. While it was actually a good year for the stock market overall, in 2021 the digital health sector fell by around 60%. It kept going down. 2022 was worse and although one or two individual companies have recovered (Hi Oscar!), nearly two years later the market cap of the entire sector remains in the toilet.
Of the list that I’ve been following for years there’s only 11 broadly defined digital health companies with a market cap of more than $1 billion–that is only 11 public unicorns
What’s worse is that only one company on that list is decently profitable, and that’s Doximity. It made over $170m profit on revenue of less than $500m last year and trades at 10 x revenue. But Doximity always was profitable, going way back to 2014 (long before its IPO), and although it’s doing cool stuff with AI and telehealth, it’s basically an advertising platform for pharma.
There is no such thing as a profitable public digital health company in the mainstream of care delivery or even insurance–unless of course you count Optum. Which means there’s almost certainly no profitable VC-backed private company either.
Which leads me to this month. You remember those huge rounds that Jess & I used to report on and make fun of? They’re back.
I get it. The stock market is hot and all those pension funds are trying to put their winnings from Nvidia somewhere. VC looks a reasonable bet and there have been a few tech IPOs. If you squint really hard, as STAT’s Mario Aguilar did, you can pretend that Waystar & Tempus are health tech IPOs, although a payments/RCM company and a diagnostics company which are both losing a ton of money wouldn’t give me confidence as an investor.
But the amounts being thrown around must give anyone pause. Let’s take a few examples from the last month. Now these aren’t a knock on these companies, which I’m sure are doing great work, but let’s look at the math.
Digital front door chatbot K-Health raised at a $900m valuation. This round was a $50m top-up but it has raised nearly $400m. It says it’ll be profitable in 2025, and has Elevance as its biggest client. Harmonycares is a housecall medical group, presumably pursuing the strategy that Signify and others followed. It raised $200m, so presumably has a $500m+ valuation–Centene bought an earlier version of the company for $200m a decade ago and sold it to some investors two years back. Headway is a mental health provider network that uses tools to get providers on their system and markets them to insurers. It raised $200m at a reported $2.3bn valuation.
You can look at that list of public companies, including ones taken private like Sharecare, and see that there are lots of telehealth chatbots, medical groups and mental health companies on the list. Any of which probably have similar technology buried inside them. I’m sure if you shook Sharecare hard enough all those technologies would fall out given the number of companies it acquired over its decade plus of expansion.
But let’s take mental health.
Amwell acquired a mental health company called Silvercloud, and a chatbot called Conversa. Its market cap is bouncing around between $250m & $350m and it has more than that in cash–which means the company itself is worth nothing! The VCs who put money into K-Health and Headway could literally could have bought Amwell for about what they invested for a fraction of those companies. Is Headway doing more than the $250m a year in revenue Amwell is putting up? Headway’s value is nearly 6 x the value of Talkspace which is bringing in about $150m a year in revenue. And if you consider BetterHelp to be 50% of Teladoc — which it roughly is — Headway is 3 x the value of BetterHelp which is doing $1bn a year in revenue. Is there any chance that Headway is doing close to those numbers? Maybe somone who saw the latest pitch deck can let me know, but I highly doubt it.
Now of course these new investments could be creating new technology or new business models which the previous generation of digital health companies couldn’t figure out. They might also have figured out how to grow profitably–although as far as I know Doximity stands alone as a profitable company that took VC funding it never needed and never used.
But isn’t it more likely that they are in the market competing with the public companies and those private companies that got funding in 2020-22, have similar pitches, similar tech and are similarly losing money?
I am a long time proponent of digital health and really hope that technology can change the sclerotic health care sector. I want all these companies to do well and change the world. Maybe those VCs investing in those mega rounds are more sensible than they were in 2022. But given the state of the digital health sector on the current stock market–which is otherwise at all time highs–I just don’t know what the exit can be, and it pains me to say it.
