This article about Pear Therapeutics’ demise is a sobering reminder that the implications of a health tech startup’s success or failure go far beyond the founders & investors for that particular company. It’s bigger than the loss of income experienced by the employees and service providers who participated in good faith, counting on the company for income.
Just as the Elizabeth Holmes/Theranos debacle raised the bar for early-stage medical device investment, Pear Therapeutics’ demise has dampened enthusiasm for digital therapeutics. Some might argue that these are not altogether bad outcomes. Euphoric investing rarely has a happy ending.
Putting a freeze on informed risk-taking, however, harms the industry – and the patients who stand to benefit from the innovations. It doesn’t seem fair to innovators or patients, nor profitable for investors, not to invest in well-designed innovations with clear reimbursement pathways because of due diligence failures in these high profile cases.
Herd mentality based on promise without facts is always dangerous. A reactionary avoidance stance based on others’ failings is equally dangerous.
The full article is behind a paywall, but you can glean the gist from the headline and preview paragraphs.
