We are having an impact

Last week I wrote about a proposed bill that could kill the friendly PC model in California as we know it. That would have a major impact on venture-backed digital health companies, costing them tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees to unpack their existing structures. Some may have struggled to gain further investment with such an uncertain regulatory future.

Here’s that post, available in full to paid subscribers.

Shortly after writing the piece, I got a note from a top digital health lawyer I’ve been corresponding with noting that the article was getting noticed, along with the work of groups like the American Telemedicine Association. I’m told the ATA was the first to engage and request specific changes. Now, I have a positive update for you. The language of the California bill was amended at the request of the author. Peruse the link here and check out the screenshot below.

Can we breathe a collective sigh of relief?

Well, probably but not definitely. Quinn Shean, one of the regulatory experts I’ve been speaking with put it this way in an email exchange this morning: “As these changes were made at the request of the author, it is very unlikely they will be put back in. Though I will not stop watching until session gavels out because its California and I’ve seen crazier things happen.”

My POV: There are digital health companies doing fantastic work to add convenience to our lives, bring down the cost of care and deliver on a better patient experience. Those companies are already struggling enough as it is in an uncertain market. There are very real concerns with PE-backed health care that we can and should discuss, but let’s not throw the baby out with the bathwater and forget that there’s also companies doing a lot of good.

If you’d like to subscribe to support this kind of work, I’d be immensely grateful. I started this newsletter to be able to write about the wonky topics that really matter to digital health, as well as to sift through the noise. You make that possible.