AI, Healthcare, and the Power Shift Patients Didn’t Know They Needed
This conversation explores the growing gap between patients and the medical system, and how access to reliable information can fundamentally change that dynamic. A new tool is introduced that functions like a research-backed AI assistant, pulling directly from peer-reviewed medical literature rather than unverified internet sources. The goal is to give patients confidence in what they’re reading and help them communicate more effectively with doctors, especially in time-constrained appointments where clarity matters most.
The discussion highlights a major issue in modern healthcare: incentives are often misaligned. Doctors operate within time, financial, and liability constraints, while patients are left navigating fear, confusion, and a flood of unreliable information. The result is a system where many people feel dismissed, overwhelmed, or forced to advocate for themselves without the right tools. By making medical research more accessible and understandable, patients can move from passive recipients of care to active collaborators in their own health decisions.
The conversation also addresses the risks of general AI tools in healthcare, particularly their tendency to generate confident but sometimes inaccurate information. In contrast, a research-grounded approach prioritizes transparency, sourcing, and accuracy, even if that means saying “there is no evidence.” Looking ahead, the vision is a shift toward more personalized, patient-driven care where individuals are informed, empowered, and better equipped to define their own health goals rather than relying solely on a one-size-fits-all system.
Transcript:
Host
Erica Warren from Insightful Med, thank you so much for being here.
Erika Warren
Hi John, thanks for having me.
Host
So let's get everybody kind of jumping right in. Tell us about insightful med, what it is and and what it does, because it's it's kind of an interesting. We haven't done anything like this on the podcast before, so it's going to be kind of.
Erika Warren
really? Okay. Fun. Insightful Med is a patient advocacy tool, both for patients and for professional advocates. It's a software tool that allows people to ask questions, get information about their medical records or what might be going on. And it's all based in academic medical literature. So you can think of it like,
Host
Mm-hmm.
Erika Warren
an AI chat bot that you may or may not be familiar with, but instead of pulling stuff from who knows where or making stuff up, this is more like a librarian tool. goes out and finds the answer or like an encyclopedia. It goes out and finds the answer to your questions sourced straight from the same information that doctors use from PubMed and other medical sources, clinicaltrials.gov.
drug databases, that type of thing.
Host
So I had a chance to play with it myself. I thought it was really interesting and incredibly useful. for another way, I'll just kind of talk to our listeners about that to kind of think about it is it's like having someone it's like, you know, chat GPT or Claude or Gemini, and that it is very conversational. But instead of them pulling information out of who knows where they're pulling it out of research and they're pulling it out of verified research that
not only could you rely on because it isn't based on somebody's blog that was pulled full of bad information, but you can then take that to your doctor and speak to them in a language that they respect and will take seriously because you have the sources and the research to back up your question.
So, and it's very conversational. You just sit there and say, I'm having this and it responds back and you say, well, can you show me this? And so it takes the barrier out of the research and puts it, puts it kind of squarely in the hands of anyone who's willing to kind of engage with a little bit of typing.
Erika Warren
Yeah, that's exactly right. mean, we built this, my co-founder and I, we are patients and caregivers ourselves. And we're frustrated with the lack of tools made for us. mean, anytime you get a diagnosis or something's going on, like the instinct and uncertainty is to go find answers. And it's very frustrating that there aren't.
places to go that you can trust, to where you have to verify, you can't see where the information's coming from. So our whole approach in building InsightfulMed was to root it in peer-reviewed literature, medical literature. So the bar is here, scientists agree, or at least are debating these advancements. And then to also transparently show you
why you're seeing that information. So if you ask a question, you'll get an answer, everything is cited. It shows you the exact excerpt within the paper and also a link out to the original research. So to your point, not only does it help you feel better about what you're reading and have confidence in it, but it allows you to then have a much more productive conversation with your doctor.
or your care team to say, hey, I read this something. And before they roll their eyes at you, like, and saying, oh no, what did you ask? You can say, oh, it was in this journal. I have it right here. Are you familiar with it? It came out a few months ago or whatnot. And you now are starting to speak a little bit more the language that your clinicians are used to. And we've just heard from people that have been using the tool now for about the last year.
that that makes a big difference when it comes to personal advocacy and even professional advocacy, like being seen as a trusted partner, not just making every doctor's job harder because who knows what you found on the internet. They're much more willing to engage. So that was a goal.
Host
Yeah, I think you're accomplishing it. mean, just to paint the picture, you only have 12, 15 minutes with your doctor sometimes. Think of the difference between I read on WebMD or Wikipedia or chat GPT that this could be related to some kind of, you know, lymphoma. What about trying this versus have you seen the MIT study done in 2024 that they, it was a double blind study and they showed that this treatment
has better efficacy, right? And you're like, I have the link for you if you want to look at the research paper. That is a world of difference when talking to a doctor.
Erika Warren
Yeah, totally. And I don't want to scare people into thinking that it has to even be that clinical. Part of what we try to do in the tool is not only help people understand and ask questions because you're right, you only have 12 to 15 minutes. And if you're like me, you're usually like, not thinking of the right things and those 12 to 15 minutes. So when you go home, how do you ask all the dumb questions that you're embarrassed to ask in front of a person or you just need to get through, get some
answers, get some of your own education. And then we also provide a bunch of ideas, both questions for self reflection, because to your health is very dependent on your goals and outcomes. Like how do you want to live? What are your goals? It's not maybe necessarily how do I get cured of this thing? That might be the goal, but how do I live with the symptoms? I've had many, many patients tell us that their doctors get focused on treating when their goal is like,
I just want to be able to go to my grandkids soccer games and not have like a medical or like bathroom emergency like in the middle of the game, right? Like treatment of symptoms and treatment for a disease are two different conversations. So we give you questions to help you reflect and think through what are your actual goals as well as questions to then ask your doctor that are much more specific. And so you don't have to come in and be like,
citing the exact study, can ask a question that's pretty educated sounding and we'll get them to start thinking a little bit differently and more along the lines of, know, couched in the terms of what your goals are. And we help you write notes and other things through trying to take education into advocacy because it's great to know enough about your health, like that's step one, but
Being able to act on it is a different skill set. And so we're trying to bridge the gap between the two.
Host
Yeah, I wasn't. I am and you're right. I wasn't insinuating that everybody has to go in sounding like they have a medical degree. I'm just saying that's the potential that you could do, but you're right. I mean, I've had my own personal situations where you know to a surgeon everything looks like a surgery. So it's like it's like how do we balance this back with like ham in my 40s and I don't need to go like competitive wrestling. You know, like let's let's slow down for a second. Can you walk?
Erika Warren
No, I know.
Yes.
Erika Warren
Totally.
Erika Warren
Yeah.
Host
Can you walk me through the moment where you mentioned your co-founder, where the two of you found that paper about the lung nodule. You told that to me before the podcast. I thought it was really interesting. And what specifically made that a turning point where you thought this has to exist for everybody.
Erika Warren
Yeah, so InsightfulMed came about out of personal necessity and actually its origins were in a different product that we just call Insightful Academic. It's an academic literature discovery tool. It's made for librarians and researchers in academics. It's subject agnostic. basically
like I said, acts sort of like an encyclopedia and discovery tool for people researching all kinds of stuff. And that was something that my co-founder, Mike, built about six years ago now. His wife is an academic. He was very familiar with her struggles and finding other people that were researching and studying similar things to her, if not in medicine. And so he set out to build this tool. And that tool is used by
librarians and academics all over the world, like 40,000 of them every month. And it's something that just lives and we give away for free. It wasn't until his family had their own medical situation with a loved one who was going, had just no clear answers, was getting a bunch of tests done, couldn't figure out what was going on, had some incidental findings. And so after being sent home and told,
to follow up in six to 12 months as a patient, that isn't very satisfying, even if it is the standard of care. Now you're just sent to sit and wait and wonder after all you have these results with these findings. And so what Mike did is he started searching and instead of Googling like the rest of us, he went to Insightful Academic, the discovery.
engine that he had already built to see if he could find something in the medical literature. within the CT scan, the notes had a lot of details and characteristics specific to this lung nodule, which was the incidental finding. And by using that to search through the literature, he found a study that suggested that there was a pretty high likelihood of it being cancerous.
Erika Warren
And so they ended up going, taking the paper, going to get a second opinion and then ultimately getting a diagnosis. so had they waited six or 12 months, like things wouldn't have been better. Yeah. I mean, that's the standard protocol. think one of the things that's sort of frustrating as patients and probably doctors, right, is
Host
And that was the suggestion to wait six to 12 months.
Erika Warren
Most of our medical practice is designed to be population based. So 80 % of the time, works, right? Because doctors have limited amount of time. They have to see a bunch of people. Like the ability to personalize medicine has not been something that's really been easy to do on a grand scale. And so that's how it works. And then it's like, but if you're not
in the 80 % of the time, you're in the 20 % of the time that this wasn't the right option. You don't know that until the first course of treatment works, you know, didn't work. And so in this case, a lot of that is in the literature. It's in papers, it's in studies. It's just that how care is practiced is not the same as everything that we know in science, right? It's just the systems haven't caught up. And so
Host
Yes.
Erika Warren
We've been trying to say like, all right, well, you know, I don't think I think my doctor cares a lot about me, but I doubt that they care more about me than me. And I have all this time and worry and I'm going to be researching anyway. So how can I actually help and collaborate in my care and be, you know, part of the team?
to sort of either advocate for what I want for my life or help on the research. Now that we have a lot of tech and tools that can help bridge the gap between the medical information and the research. mean, a lot of this wasn't possible until really LLMs and large language models came about and this information started to be much more accessible to people. It has previously been gated.
Host
Yeah.
Erika Warren
And so we take advantage of that as well. It's like, how do you put the same information that doctors review and access in front of the hands of patients? Not to tell them that they're doing their job incorrectly or to be sort of divisive or adversarial, but to be collaborators because the system that allows them to care for us is like flawed in many ways. And that's a much bigger challenge to improve.
So how can we like chip away at that in this way?
Host
I think you're touching on something that comes up a lot even on this podcast, which is that, know, healthcare tools are not built for patients. And there are, I don't know how else to phrase it, but they're kind of broken incentives, right? For the healthcare providers. What are those and how do they actually show up in the real patient experience from what you've seen?
Erika Warren
correct.
Erika Warren
Yeah, mean, particularly in the US, a lot of the incentives are financially driven and that is what causes this wedge or like no longer perfect Venn diagram overlap of patient incentives, doctor incentives, hospital incentives. And that's like terrible. I don't really think that healthcare should be a capitalistic pursuit. think everybody like health is a human right.
But we don't have that system in place in the US to make it scalable. So like where we've heard and seen this come up, because we've, we are built specifically for patients. We want patients to be the primary patients and patient. Yeah, the primary user. But before we got here, we had talked to health systems and providers and we would hear things like, well, if
Host
user.
Erika Warren
the hospital gives access to this tool, then it increases our liability. So like the information and the handouts need to be reviewed by the legal team. And I was like, that's why they're not very useful. They've all been like redlined to death because the paper that you get in the handout when you walk out of your appointment is generic and like that great for like a baseline, but not helpful when I have more specific questions about me is.
43 year old female, like getting this paper about general pop, right?
Host
Right. That's the challenge with a capitalist version of medicine, is, you have, you have malpractice lawsuits that they have to worry about. So it's, it is, is, it's kind of the chicken and egg thing where it's like, once something has to collapse a little bit.
Erika Warren
Yeah.
Yeah, there's liability. There's also the financial incentives. We'd heard sometimes like, this is great. I love this, but I don't offer this treatment or this service. So if I put it in front of patients, they're going to leave my practice and go somewhere else. And so like you have this fee for service, like incentive that gets in a way, then you can have insurance. Like does your insurance cover all of this stuff? What does the process look like to get into that? And so
I mean, those are real barriers, but the first line of defense, to me at least, and you know, as a parent and a caregiver, it's like, I want to know what the information says, like unbiased of all of these other constraints, like, tell me what, what I'm working with, and then we'll add the constraints on and I'll see what mountains I can move, right? Like if it's coming to life and death or quality of life, like
I want to know, I don't want somebody to protect that information or keep that information from me because my insurance doesn't cover it or my doctor doesn't offer that treatment or whatever.
Host
or even not just that the insurance doesn't cover it, this other procedure, which might not be in your best interest, reimburses at 20 times the cost of the one that is proper for you.
Erika Warren
Right. Yeah. So, you know, information is information. Let's start there and then then let's have a conversation about how we make it happen. Right. And, you know, what systems need to come down to make that happen. So, yeah, the incentives are wild and not aligned with patients, unfortunately, not with our interests.
Host
Not always, sometimes they line up, yeah, but it's not predictable enough to rely on it. I completely agree. You know, in many ways, insightful med could be looked at as kind of an antidote to tools like chat GPT. Where do you think, I have my own opinions on this, but I want to hear what you think people are being misled about AI and healthcare right now. It's a really kind of weird dynamic landscape at the
Erika Warren
Yeah, it's people have a lot of opinions and it can be a somewhat polarizing topic. I think part of the challenge is, at least from the people that I talk to, AI is a very broad term and people don't really understand how the technology, the underpinnings work, especially something like ChatGBT. So if you allow me to do my...
Host
and get on your soapbox, go ahead.
Erika Warren
Again, I might slow back for a second. mean, I think this is where the...
the heart of your question lies in. Because we hear when we read articles that are like, don't do this, do do this, it's good for this, but it's like, nobody is explaining why. And I come from an education background. If you don't explain why, no one's going to listen to you. They don't want to just be told things. It's the same argument we have with doctors being paternalistic. It's like, take the extra time to explain and then people can better self-serve, right?
Large language models are a type of AI, it's a type of generative AI. ChatGPT is a large language model. All that means is that they're generative on text. And the way that they work, and this is a very simplified version, is you can think about it as like a really sophisticated autocomplete. They have consumed tons and tons and tons of content to make a map of language. So they're experts in how we talk because they've consumed all this content.
And what they do is try to predict the next word in the sentence in your output based on your input. So they just run this model over and over again to create sentences like an autocomplete does. That's what a large language model is. It's a probabilistic reasoning model. And that's also why hallucinations and things that are not accurate can come back in the answers. may, it's not like doing research. It's not checking up facts. Yeah.
Host
Let's slow down. So when you say hallucinations, I'm familiar with what you're talking about, but if someone isn't like knee deep in AI, what does that mean?
Erika Warren
It means that it's made up. It's not based. It's a sentence that's generated, but it's not necessarily factual. There's no, it's just created. And so sometimes, and you've probably read news stories about this, the ChanCHiBT or LLMs will go as far as to also generate or make up citations and sources because they believe that's the next thing that's supposed to be
in the answer. And so that this is where things get risky because it feels like you're reading something credible and then you go click on the link and it's dead. And it's like, well, did it ever exist? Is it no longer there? Like, where did this come from? That is not transparent to you.
Host
Right.
Host
Right.
Host
Yeah, I have a I have a son in high school so I've had to kind of teach him. You know if you're going to use chat GBD as a research tool and say like OK well what year was something found in America if it can't find it easily it'll just make up a source and give you a junk link and then we do a little bit of our own research and it's like well actually it wasn't made up and then we'll go back to chat GBD or Claude or whatever and say hey that seems wrong and and the the the
Erika Warren
Yeah.
Host
AI will actually say, I thought you just wanted an example. I didn't know you wanted a real fact. It'll kind of forgive itself. But imagine doing that with a medical question. That's incredibly damaging.
Erika Warren
Right. And like, wouldn't it be nice if I told you that in the first place? I don't know is not a thing that LLMs say, generally. And so I think they're extremely powerful. I use them every day. The challenge is knowing what are the great tasks for generative LLMs. It's usually brainstorming, copy editing. It's just things that
you don't know the answer to that you can't verify easily either by doing additional research or because it's an area that you are already an expert in, that's where the risk comes in because it sounds very confident. Like it is overconfident almost to a fault. And then when you say, hey, that's wrong, it'll be like, oh, you're right. It's very also very agreeable. So it can be sort of like addicting to talk to because it
just says nice things to you. And it's to verify. I'm not a medical expert. I can't argue with it being right or wrong, right? And so that's the risk, and that's what we try to overcome.
Host
Yeah. Yeah.
Love you.
Host
We talked about incentives. I mean, the incentive for the AI is to get you to continue to using it, right? So.
Erika Warren
Yeah, totally. Cause there's ads now or a subscription. And if you don't, if you use it so much, then you have to pay for more because it's a usage based subscription model. And if you don't pay for it, now there's ads all over them. So the way that they then monetize is being able to keep you there in your eyeballs and doing more searches. And so all of those incentives come into any product that you're using. Right. It's the same reasons like
WebMD, when it first came out, had a completely different layout. Now everything's broken across 30 pages because all those pages have ads on them. there's lots of different ways that the products get worse when the financial incentives behind them. You can usually explain it if you figure out where the money is coming from. Just trace the money in health care.
Host
Speaking of which, don't know if it was clear, but I'll just repeat, InsightfulMed is free, right?
Erika Warren
It's free. Yeah, it's free for now. We are trying to get it in the hands of people that can use it the most. We will likely move to a patient pay model in the future. Always having a free option, but for additional features like syncing medical records and that type of stuff where there's a cost for us, significant cost for us. We want to make it easy for people to use, also make sure that
we can continue to provide reliable information to everybody. there's always a question of like, why patients, why not someone else? And it's exactly this. like, if we, you know, I don't, I want it to be free for everyone. And I know that if I go get ad money or pharma or someone else to pay for this, the incentives start to come into question because they are the buyer.
Host
What's it?
Erika Warren
no longer the user and when the buyer and the user are the same person, we guarantee that our incentives are completely aligned, the company's incentives are completely aligned with the user, with the patient.
Host
I was not able to stump cause I didn't use it extensively enough, but you mentioned, you know, that chat GPT and all these LLMs don't like saying, I don't know what happens with insightful med. If there is no accurate research on a new found disorder, disease or condition, does it just say, I don't know?
Erika Warren
It'll say whatever the answer is. So if you ask it something that there's no research on, it'll say there's no research on that topic yet. Here's what the research says. Or we've had people, this is sometimes funny, had somebody call one time and say, your tool's wrong. And I was like, my gosh, like, tell me, like, what did you search? And they said, I searched for, you know, something. And I said, well, what did it say? And it said that that was not a...
treatment that was backed in the science. And I was like, wait, that sounds like an answer. And they're like, well, I want it to say that I don't, disagree. need it. I need evidence that supports this thing that I want to do. And I was like, whoa, that I can't help with. Right. So like, I don't make up science. This is just, again, you know, acting like a librarian tool. And so sometimes it's in the eye of who's reading it, but it'll, it will not.
hallucinate things that are not there. If you ask it a non-medical question, it can't answer that, right? Like that's not in the medical literature either. And so, which we try to just really adhere to this is the information, like in an unbiased way that's present. And it can be sometimes controversial. Like there's all types of topics that, I mean, if it wasn't, it wouldn't be science. We would have it all sought.
solved. you know, I think about things like vaccines and stuff that's in the news, right? You ask it, are vaccines safe? It'll say yes. And here are the studies that say that. And here's ones more recently that like suggest whatever, you know, I don't know, I'm not familiar with the specifics of it, but it will give you the information in an unbiased way.
Host
It's good to hear. I appreciate the candor about it. You've seen both sides. You've, mean, you're being in education and also being involved in this now. What do most people underestimate about what it's like to be a patient trying to navigate a complex or chronic condition?
Erika Warren
Yeah.
Erika Warren
There's a lot, right? So the first challenge is nobody wakes up with this like as a plan, right? You don't plan to have like, oh, I'm going to be sick. And so you can't like prepare. So usually this is a very reactive experience and in less than 24 hours, you are now trying to become an expert in a thing that you know nothing about while also being sick and like stressed and having the emotional burden of that. So.
That's one big problem. The other part is like many people, especially within chronic and complex care, if they're labs, like if it's not something that's easily measurable that doctors are used to, they can feel gaslit, right? Because how do you talk about my level of pain or how I feel, or I just don't feel well. Like this has come up a ton studying women and hormones and a lot of
complex chronic conditions where there's not a measurement that like a lab level that will measure those things. And so it can be very frustrating to feel bad and feel like no one is listening to you and also not knowing where to go. And forget that you have to, if you do figure out where to go, you have to wait six, seven, 10 months to maybe get into a specialist or get a referral. So there's a ton that people
underestimate, I think, and then on the caregiving side, that's like a whole other conversation.
Host
Yeah. Well, speaking of the caregiving side, you know, just cause I speak to advocates so often there, there's a not insignificant percentage of advocates that worry tools like this could replace them. Why do you think that fear comes up and where do you think that we as people and advocates remain irreplaceable?
Erika Warren
Well, mean, advocates, I didn't even know that they existed until they started using this tool. And then I was like, oh, this is cool. I wish I knew that this, I we have a very similar problem, right? Like advocates are hard to find until you're sick. then like, you know, many times it's challenging to bring on board. We need to build awareness earlier. Why they're like,
Host
Awareness. Yeah
Erika Warren
Many advocates are already using this tool because it saves them time and lowers their time on research tasks so they can spend more time on everything else that they do, like actually in-person care with families, with doctors, in appointments. Like no tool is going to replace a human in that. This is just the admin side. The other thing that we see advocates use it for a lot is on billing and
disputes. So if you had a patient who you're helping and they need to, they had a procedure done and it wasn't covered by insurance. Well, what are the contraindications? Like why was that decision made? How do you build the case? Like again, you're trying to cite sources. Many people don't challenge their medical bills, but many of them that are challenged actually are overturned. I think I just saw a status like 7 % are
of bills are disputed and 90 % once disputed are overturned. I don't remember the exact source of that, but it's like, well, advocates probably know that, but the way that they get overturned is being based on something credible as well as with like the doctor's prior authorization and like notes of why it was medical necessity, right? So those are things that like this tool doesn't replace judgment. And that's what both advocates and clinicians have.
It's just a way to have more information because our brains are not computers and they're not encyclopedias. And I'd argue that that's a poor use of our time anyway, because we'll never be as good as a computer at those types of tasks. So how do you use this as a tool in your box? It's human in the loop will never be, is irreplaceable.
Host
Yeah, I also think even even prior to that, there's always going to be people who don't have anyone and the idea of doing the research themselves, even if it was aided by something like insightful med might be overwhelming. So I see it as a tool for advocates more than a challenge to them. So I'm with you on that completely.
Erika Warren (31:40.9)
Yeah, I mean, there's a, was in, I had family in a hospital a couple months ago and the, just the coordination as a caregiver of like keeping everybody else in the loop of what's going on is also a huge burden. And so I was using the tool more as here's what happened. Like here's what the test results say, explain, you know, to family, just here, read it.
I don't have time to respond to this text thread. Every time somebody comes in, I'm in the hospital or I'm setting up home care or I'm working, taking care of the rest of my family, right? And so there's some just coordination of information that tools like this can help with as well and just alleviate some of that burden. Again, that's some, not a lot of what patient advocates are doing.
on the day-to-day clinical side and billing side, the stuff that people don't know about, not necessarily how to communicate with extended friends and family.
Host
Yeah, that's a huge part. That quarterbacking of the medical team is not. It's not a small task for many, many people. So yeah, and I don't see AI taking that over anytime soon. This person likes the facts. This person likes an email. It's like it's it's all. It's a whole thing. Well, let's let's kind of future vision for a second. If this works exactly the way you hope.
Erika Warren
No.
Host
What does or how does the patient experience look different, let's say five years from now? I usually say five to 10, but things are just moving way too fast for that. Five years from now, or even three years from now, what does it look like? How does it change?
Erika Warren
mean, my hope, whether this is by patients using it or we changed the healthcare system so things like this can be part of the actual care, is that this information helps personalize treatment and care and really focuses the conversation. So when you walk in the room, your doctor is talking to you, John, about your goals and you have all the latest information.
on the science of what's available and where we've moved from this very generalized population-based medicine into something that's much, much more personalized. And I think the way that we can push on that fastest is by patients taking the lead, right? We've already talked about the financial incentives that make that much harder from the system perspective and just the pace of things.
but there's nothing stopping patients doing that. And if we get to a place where there's more personalized medicine and people are more educated, the research is deep on it being preventative care, better, like health being better, costs going down. So I think incorporating tools like this and even ChachiBT can get you part of the way. The challenge is you just don't know what parts right or wrong, but.
All of this is rolling towards a way that I think people end up getting better care, access to information, at least in knowing when to go advocate or hire someone and what to do. All of those barriers are coming down. And so I think we'll see better health outcomes coming from this type of thing in the future, which would be amazing, right? Like that's the whole point. Like that's what we want to see happen.
Host
Sounds exciting. Healthier people living longer, making it cheaper, making it easier like that's the yeah.
Erika Warren
And giving them agency, you know, I think that's the other thing that also always feels lost too, is all of a sudden you wake up and you were used to managing your life and now it's you've lost all sense of control. Maybe that was sort of a fake sense of control in the first place, right? But you still have agency over what you're going to do about it. And that how do we give people agency without giving them?
Host
Sure, yeah.
Erika Warren
information first, like that's the bedrock. And so even, I always like to say is like people say like, the doctor makes you healthy. It's like, no, like the doctor is triage, right? Like no, who gives you health? Like health is what you eat. If you exercise what you do in your life, like doctors are like point in time, like look ins to say like, no, no, like don't do that or do more of this.
they are triaging a system, but you are the one that's responsible for health. so again, I think tools like this can help people get more comfortable with that and talk about like, what are some of the trade-offs and what do they want their life to look like? And again, that agency that goes along with health.
Host
Is there anything we haven't covered that you'd want people to know about? mean, I think it was such an interesting conversation, Erica, about insightful med. I am curious to see, know, do you have a timeline in mind of anything or is it just open and come use it and see for yourself?
Erika Warren
Yeah, it's open, come use it. It's insightful. We have a fun play on words, right? So it's I-N-C-I-T-E-F-U-L med.com. So citations are part of the name. Free to use, free to create an account. We are, the other thing I didn't mention is it's language agnostic. So if English,
You're probably not listening to this if English isn't your first native language, but the tool doesn't care. We've seen, I think, 14 different languages. People ask questions, anonymous questions in 14 different languages. So again, when you talk about sort of like one thing people sometimes ask is like, is this just, does this help with standard barriers to care? Like, what about rural people? What about people that, you know, don't normally go to the doctor? It's like, yeah, man, like this.
this could do wonders all over the world. And some folks are finding it there as well. And so, yeah, I encourage people if they're curious to give it a try. We love to hear from folks. We're constantly trying to make it better based on their feedback and understand what other problems they struggle with when it comes to their health and think about ways that education technology may be able to help.
So yeah, if you try it, you can reach out to me. I'm at hello at insightfulmed.com. Love to hear from folks.
Host
And again, it's insightful. It's I N C I T E F U L E D dot com. Erica Warren. Thank you so much for being here today.
Erika Warren
Thanks, John. It was great to talk to you and reach out to the GNA community.
