Will pharma contribute to a fairer distribution of innovation, or will it reinforce the divide?

As biometric tracking, AI-driven insights and consumer wellness tech give people unprecedented control over their health, the balance of power in healthcare is shifting. In this second article in a series where we consider what will define the reputation of the pharma industry by 2030, we look at the potential impact of personalised healthcare.

Healthcare is being reshaped by a new kind of ‘patient’; consumers who collect their own data, monitor their own biomarkers and ‘buy’ health directly from technology platforms, not through healthcare professionals (HCPs). The rise of wearables, genetic testing and personalised supplements is redefining how people think about care.

We are witnessing the rise of the ‘health autonomist’. These are individuals who treat health as a consumer-managed domain, rely on self-generated data and digital tools to make decisions, and act independently of traditional care pathways.

Ipsos’ latest global pulse reveals the extent to which this shift has become widespread. Across 30 countries, 59% of respondents say that people in their country now make health decisions without consulting HCPs, and 68% try to find out information on their own rather than relying on HCPs.

McKinsey estimates that approximately 20% of consumers in the UK and the US look for personalised products and services that use biometric data to provide recommendations. Weight-loss products such as GLP-1 agonists have already shown how quickly demand moves beyond traditional medical channels when consumers are willing to pay out of pocket. Health is fast becoming a lifestyle choice rather than a clinical pathway, with people taking control and using self-direction in health management.

The most powerful shift is happening around who owns and interprets health data. Smartwatches, genetic services and nutrition apps are producing health insights that consumers trust and act upon, but which rarely enter formal healthcare records.

This decentralisation of data is changing the traditional hierarchy of influence. In many cases, Apple, Google or Withings now occupy the front line of patient engagement, with pharma positioned further upstream. These companies speak directly to consumers in the language of lifestyle, not illness.

If pharma does not take part in shaping the standards around data use, it risks being seen as a reactive supplier to a personalised health system.

The democratisation of data was once expected to close the health gap. In reality, it may widen it. Wealthier people can purchase health optimisation through genomic profiling, precision nutrition or subscription-based preventative care. Those without such means remain dependent on national systems that move more slowly.

We are already seeing this play out in Europe’s weight-management market, where early access and convenience are determined by disposable income, not medical need.  In the future this dynamic could extend to cardiovascular, metabolic and cognitive health, with affluent consumers buying into personalised, data-driven health programmes.

If this trajectory continues, the industry’s reputation will hinge on how it responds to inequality in access. Will pharma contribute to a fairer distribution of innovation, or will it reinforce the divide?

To maintain public trust and relevance in this new health economy, pharma can take several tangible steps:

• Recognise and accept that change is coming. Data, technology and well-being companies are disrupting healthcare. Time is running out to stop tweaking old models and embrace the future of the health autonomists
• Champion ethical data use. Lead the development of shared European standards for transparency, interoperability and patient consent
• Collaborate with tech, not compete. Building partnerships with digital health platforms and wellness brands allows pharma to contribute medical rigour and evidence to spaces that are often lightly regulated
• Expand access to precision care. Develop scalable, lower-cost versions of personalised medicines; for example, by using AI to identify populations that could benefit from tailored treatment pathways within public health systems. Build effective market access programmes to secure reimbursement and uptake
• Reframe communication. Shift from reactive disease awareness to proactive health empowerment. The narrative should be that personalised medicine can improve population well-being, not just longevity for the wealthy.

The next five years will determine whether personalised medicine becomes an equaliser or a luxury. Pharma needs to act now to be part of the reinvention of healthcare. Its reputation will be shaped by its willingness to build a future where personal data and precision therapies benefit everyone, not just the health autonomists that can afford them.