A Resolute Advocate of 'Disruption Theory' in Digital Health Submits IPO Prospectus

Although the term “disruption” may grate on people’s ears, it remains the original mission of mobile health startups. The existing healthcare system is fraught with problems; excessive accommodation to the status quo will only relegate companies to the role of mere vendors. Only by mobilizing patients to drive systemic change can mobile health entrepreneurs justify their existence. With so many industries already disrupted, how much longer can healthcare hold out?

Subversion Is the Courage of “Nonconformity”

In recent days, I have repeatedly heard warnings from heavyweight investors and executives: mobile health should downplay the notion of “disruption.” Disruption is neither the goal nor the viable path forward; framing mobile health as disruptive to healthcare will harm entrepreneurs. Given the stature of these speakers, it is safe to assume they were not merely offering polite platitudes. Indeed, similar views are widely circulated within the industry: mobile health startups have rushed in en masse, yet their products are incomprehensible to patients, dismissed by physicians, and overlooked by the government… Attempting to disrupt the well-established healthcare industry—is this not a recipe for self-destruction? The only viable path for mobile health lies in collaborating with the existing system and positioning itself as an adjunctive tool in medical care.

Blame it on the runaway bestseller *The Innovator’s Prescription*. No matter who enters the healthcare industry, they are branded with the label “disruption.” Yet, as talk of it outpaced action, the term gradually fell into disrepute. China has always emphasized hierarchy and seniority. How could anyone tolerate brash, inexperienced entrepreneurs arrogantly claiming they would overturn the interests of established insiders who have spent decades climbing the ranks? Moreover, these startups are riddled with their own problems—spanning products, technology, user stickiness, payment models, medical validity, and legal compliance. They are so fragile that a single finger could topple them, yet they still clamor about “disrupting” others. Furthermore, what exactly constitutes disruption? Does it require hospitals to close and doctors to lose their jobs, or does online appointment booking suffice? And how much disruption is enough? Can we quantify it like saying “62% of the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation has been achieved”?

I’ve heard the advice, but I still advocate that mobile health must strive for disruption, and I firmly believe it can disrupt healthcare. The ambition to disrupt should be the original aspiration of every mobile health entrepreneur. Startups have limited resources; their greatest opportunity lies in breaking conventions to win over patients. As long as we benefit patients, it is no major issue if we are unwelcome within or even provoke the established system. Didn’t Uber’s founder say that all innovation begins with illegality? If we grow by conforming to the existing system, early survival may indeed be easier, and with access to suitable resources, growth can be promising. However, over time, we risk becoming merely a supplier to the current system, and collusion with it will erode our courage for change. Many mobile health projects discuss profit models from the outset, designing products around the interests of large hospitals and pharmaceutical companies. While this appears to balance multiple stakeholders’ interests, it is fundamentally opportunistic. Admittedly, China’s healthcare market is vast, and serving as a supplier to the system is a viable model with stable profits and controllable risks. But this should not be the goal for all entrepreneurs—at least, it is not mine.

Breaking Through the Iron Wall Is the Only Chance for Survival

China’s healthcare system is riddled with problems. Despite significant state spending, there has been little to show for it. Highly educated professionals within the system have managed to dissatisfy all three key stakeholders: the government, physicians, and patients. If the system itself is dysfunctional, should it not be open to disruption? Disruption does not mean replacing doctors with algorithms, shutting down hospitals, or causing widespread unemployment among physicians. Rather, it means breaking away from entrenched yet irrational and inefficient practices, while naturally phasing out uncompetitive hospitals and doctors. For instance, while many claim that patient interests should take precedence over those of doctors, which in turn should outweigh hospital interests, the reality is often the exact opposite, with patient interests frequently relegated to the bottom priority in countless scenarios. If your venture does not aim to disrupt aspects of the current system that disadvantage patients, but instead dreams of finding a rare win-win-win-win scenario for medical insurance providers, hospitals, doctors, and patients, or simply caters to hospitals and insurers, your business may survive but will lack significant scale and impact. True opportunities lie only in disruption. Consider this: if Jack Ma had focused on serving Shanghai No. 1 Department Store or Wangfujing Department Store, would Taobao exist as it does today? If Didi Chuxing had positioned itself solely to serve traditional taxi companies, would it have achieved its current market position?

Healthcare is arguably the “Internet Plus” sector with the highest technological barriers and the greatest operational complexity. The most frequent criticism of mobile health is product homogenization, with unclear benefits for both patients and physicians. However, these are merely characteristics of the industry’s early stage; one should not conclude that mobile health is nothing but a scam. The mindset within the traditional healthcare system tends to favor medical technologies while dismissing non-medical internet technologies. In reality, by influencing the behaviors of hundreds of millions of patients and healthy individuals, the internet exerts reverse pressure on the healthcare system, turning long-held aspirations—such as cost reduction, tiered diagnosis and treatment, chronic disease management, mutual trust between doctors and patients, and personalized medicine—into realities. If mobile health encourages ten million people to walk an extra 1,000 steps each day, the resulting health value exceeds that of several top-tier tertiary hospitals. For instance, while current wearable devices may not yet achieve medical-grade precision, this will cease to be an issue as technology advances; indeed, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has already approved numerous medical-grade wearables. Many consider online consultations unreliable, yet U.S.-based companies like Teladoc and HealthTap, offering similar online consultation services without particularly sophisticated technology, have gained acceptance in the more strictly regulated American market. Online consultations can triage and manage a substantial number of patients who do not need hospital visits, thereby indirectly reducing the burden on hospitals. With future technologies enabling convenient video consultations and even home-based sensor setups for patients, how much difference will there really be between online consultations and traditional hospital outpatient visits?

Many people, especially those with a medical background, hold Chunyu Doctor—a platform developed by media professionals—in low regard. It was only after launching my own startup that I realized operating such a seemingly low-barrier product is, in fact, a highly sophisticated endeavor. The vast amount of data it accumulates will unlock numerous monetization opportunities in areas such as personal health records, medical big data, private physician services, health insurance, and service-oriented e-commerce. Furthermore, mobile chronic disease management platforms, exemplified by diabetes care, may appear fraught with challenges. However, at a time when hospitals and physicians have virtually no capacity for patient education, these platforms may represent the sole hope for improving patients’ quality of life and reducing the costs associated with chronic diseases.

China’s mobile health products do not lag behind the United States by a technological generation; the primary constraints lie within public hospitals and the medical insurance system. As long as policies open even slightly, user stickiness can be achieved, and the value of mobile health will skyrocket. Those who currently look down on mobile health are viewing it through a static lens. In the future, it will not be academicians but rather mobile (smart) healthcare that resolves the challenges of medical insurance cost overruns, strained doctor-patient relationships, and uncontrolled chronic diseases.

Disruption is the General Trend

The mobile disruption of healthcare that I advocate is, in essence, a disruption of the outdated technologies, processes, mindsets, and closed interest groups within the medical sector. The essence of medicine—“to cure sometimes, to relieve often, to comfort always”—will remain unchanged. Just as WeChat, Taobao, and Baidu have disrupted many hidden rules across various industries, healthcare will be no exception. The current immaturities of mobile health do not overshadow its inherent potential; much like how early automobiles, despite being inferior to horse-drawn carriages in speed, comfort, and maneuverability, ultimately replaced them entirely.

I firmly believe that every aspect of future healthcare will be mobile and intelligent, and anyone or anything that hinders mobility will be disrupted. I advocate for disruption, but I disdain those who constantly talk about it merely to deceive users and investors. The ambition to disrupt should remain in one’s heart; strategically, we must aim to disrupt, but tactically, we must remain humble. Disruption in healthcare will not happen overnight. Countless mobile health projects will themselves be disrupted in the process of driving change. Yet, it is enough that we once harbored the aspiration to disrupt.

Author Profile: Liu Qian, a senior executive at a Fortune 500 pharmaceutical company and a veteran in pharmaceutical marketing, is also a prominent medical influencer on Weibo under the handle “Magic Heart, No Magic Tricks.” This article was submitted by the author to VCBeat. Please credit the original author when reprinting.