2 ms·

You have the disadvantage of operating in a space where a lot of people and companies claim a lot of different things, and where cause and effect is maddeningly

You have the disadvantage of operating in a space where a lot of people and companies claim a lot of different things, and where cause and effect is maddeningly difficult to sort out. For example, if you read Slate Star Codex, you can find all manner of posts discussing how psych meds are produced and brought to market, how they can behave in unpredictable fashion, and why claims made by the pharmaceutical industry should be regarded with a healthy dose of distrust. But its author is a trained psychiatrist, and he'd be the first to tell you that psych meds do indeed work. Personally, I've dealt with sleep issues for years with reasonably consistent symptoms. I read various books and tried CBT, therapy, and a variety of meds. A lot of this seemed to either do nothing, or else have strange effects. Eventually I tried some med that got terrible reviews online, which to my surprise pretty much solved my problem overnight. Now I'm overseas for several months without access to this medication, and to my complete surprise my sleep has been fine. Why? Will things stay this way? I wish I could tell you!! All this is to say, for your target market, suspicion and distrust will often be par for the course. Please don't take it personally :)

pedalpete 1y ago
I hadn't heard of Slate Star Codex, I'll check this out. Not taking it personally at all! I'm a life-long chronic insomniac, which is how I got into this. My first reaction wasn't "I'm going to solve this problem", it was 1) is this slow-wave enhancement even real 2) will anyone believe it 3) who is it for? How do we prove it? I had some confidence in slow-wave enhancement because Philips did a bunch of research in this space and tried to launch a product and failed. But the researchers that worked with Philips were at University of Sydney (where we work) and Melbourne, so I had access to some of the top researchers in the world. Also, one of the first researchers I spoke to said he was amazed by the technology, but then I discovered he secretly hated it. He didn't make excuses for why it wouldn't work. He said it did, but made excuses for why we couldn't do it. Why it wasn't safe (which has been proven wrong). That made me go "wow! This guy could have said it doesn't work, but he didn't. He said it works, but we don't know the impact on respiratory function, immune function, etc etc. " That was a powerful moment for me. Then I spoke to some local VCs and med investors I know, thinking, I'm going to need funding, will they just ignore us? One said "this is exactly the sort of thing he looks for". Then they ghosted us, but I sold my other start-up and we funded this :) Lastly, the who is it for....this is the one Philips really struggled with. I think it's the biggest challenge for us. You mentioned your insomnia. We're not an insomnia device. But everyone hears "better sleep" and thinks fall asleep faster, sleep longer. That is a difficult pattern to break out of. I still have insomnia. I'll tell you what is not the cure...bootstrapping a neurotech hardware start-up! :) My belief is that if we stay true and honest about our capabilities, focus on the people we can help, and change the story about sleep. From that base, we can look to continue to expand and help others.

pedalpete 1y ago

I hadn't heard of Slate Star Codex, I'll check this out. Not taking it personally at all! I'm a life-long chronic insomniac, which is how I got into this. My first reaction wasn't "I'm going to solve this problem", it was 1) is this slow-wave enhancement even real 2) will anyone believe it 3) who is it for? How do we prove it? I had some confidence in slow-wave enhancement because Philips did a bunch of research in this space and tried to launch a product and failed. But the researchers that worked with Philips were at University of Sydney (where we work) and Melbourne, so I had access to some of the top researchers in the world. Also, one of the first researchers I spoke to said he was amazed by the technology, but then I discovered he secretly hated it. He didn't make excuses for why it wouldn't work. He said it did, but made excuses for why we couldn't do it. Why it wasn't safe (which has been proven wrong). That made me go "wow! This guy could have said it doesn't work, but he didn't. He said it works, but we don't know the impact on respiratory function, immune function, etc etc. " That was a powerful moment for me. Then I spoke to some local VCs and med investors I know, thinking, I'm going to need funding, will they just ignore us? One said "this is exactly the sort of thing he looks for". Then they ghosted us, but I sold my other start-up and we funded this :) Lastly, the who is it for....this is the one Philips really struggled with. I think it's the biggest challenge for us. You mentioned your insomnia. We're not an insomnia device. But everyone hears "better sleep" and thinks fall asleep faster, sleep longer. That is a difficult pattern to break out of. I still have insomnia. I'll tell you what is not the cure...bootstrapping a neurotech hardware start-up! :) My belief is that if we stay true and honest about our capabilities, focus on the people we can help, and change the story about sleep. From that base, we can look to continue to expand and help others.