←back to thread

I wasted $40k on a fantastic startup idea

(tjcx.me)
851 points swyx | 1 comments | 18 Jan 21 20:01 UTC | HN request time: 0.205s | source
Show context
ddevault[dead post] ◴[18 Jan 21 22:31 UTC] No.25827485[source]▶
This is a case-study in how capitalism fails. It is not a system that maximizes efficiency. Here we have a product which materially improves peoples lives and health, which fails because no one is incentivized to pay for it. If we had a nationalized system it would be a no-brainer for the government to pick up the bill.

Capitalism sucks in general terms, but healthcare and capitalism is an awful, evil combination.

ska ◴[18 Jan 21 23:44 UTC] No.25828143[source]▶
> Here we have a product which materially improves peoples lives and health

Assumes facts not in evidence, I'm afraid.

Seriously, people who have been working on evidence based medicine for decades at this point have been struggling with the fact that what he describes as easy "slurp up a bunch of trials data, do the analysis" is actually pretty hard to get right, for a bunch of reasons.

replies(1): >>25828297 #
ddevault ◴[19 Jan 21 00:02 UTC] No.25828297[source]▶
Maybe it wouldn't have worked, but saying so much is also an exercise in speculation. It was well-received by doctors and patients, there was interest in exploring it further, and even though it may not have panned out - we will never know for sure, because of broken capitalist incentives.
replies(1): >>25828326 #
ska ◴[19 Jan 21 00:06 UTC] No.25828326[source]▶
> which materially improves peoples lives and health

Agreed, saying this is an exercise in speculation. Apologies I could have been clearer.

I'm not saying it was a bad idea or couldn't have worked, just that this had not been demonstrated - and it's a big stretch to assume it would.

replies(1): >>25828353 #
1. ddevault ◴[19 Jan 21 00:09 UTC] No.25828353[source]▶
I don't know if it's a stretch, but I agree it's a presumption. It's not material to my point, in any case.