Breaking News

The FDA-Whoop drama & new details about pharma-telehealth deals

July 17, 2025
Health Tech Correspondent

Good morning health tech readers!

Today, senators uncover details about pharma deals with telehealth companies. Plus: More Medicare tech updates and a look at the drama between FDA and Whoop.

Reach me: mario.aguilar@statnews.com

policy

How much Pfizer and Lilly paid telehealth companies

As pharma companies continue to build bridges with the telehealth companies that can get their drugs prescribed, a new report reveals that some drugmakers are paying hundreds of thousands, if not millions, for their telehealth contracts.

In the last nine months, four senators have peppered Pfizer, Eli Lilly, and five of their telehealth partners with questions about their contracts, hoping to suss out whether they are inappropriately influencing clinicians' prescriptions. Their report published today reveals new details about those eyebrow-raising deals, along with some of the telehealth companies' prescribing behaviors and industry payments outside the contracts.

Read more from Katie Palmer here


telehealth

CMS doesn't heed RPM warnings 

As I discussed on Tuesday, Medicare regulators this week proposed to cover more remote patient monitoring. If the rules are finalized, doctors will now be able to bill in circumstances in which they collect less data and spend less time interacting with patients.

What Medicare did not do was propose any guardrails to prevent abuse despite a growing chorus of policy experts warning that Medicare may be paying for low-value services. Medicare started covering RPM in 2019, and paid over $300 million for RPM in 2022. There was a feeling on both sides of the debate that Medicare might institute new rules, but it did not.

Read more here


Regulation

FDA, Whoop, and the fuzziness of regulation

The Food and Drug Administration warned wearable maker Whoop this week about its new Blood Pressure Insights feature, which the agency believes is a medical device subject to its regulatory review, because "the product is intended to provide a measurement or estimation of a user's blood pressure, which is inherently associated with the diagnosis of hypo- and hypertension." The agency points to the company's statements, like "Higher blood pressure may be an indicator of poor sleep," as evidence.

Whoop launched Blood Pressure Insights in early May, and it has been extremely deliberate in framing it as a wellness feature that is not intended to diagnose or treat disease. The FDA appears to be saying it must review any technology that offers users measurements of blood pressure.

The episode is emblematic of how fuzzy regulation can be around wellness and medical devices. In his response, CEO Will Ahmed pointed to the importance of the "intended use" of a technology. In other cases, FDA lets companies get away with claiming a device that could be regulated is for wellness purposes. For now, Ahmed wrote, "we won't let regulatory overreach dictate how people access their own health data." The company has 15 business days to tell FDA how it has remedied the situation. Popcorn out!

A couple of interesting pieces of context. First, it's interesting to see FDA warning a company in an anti-regulation administration, especially as Ahmed recently met with health secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Whoop executive Kristen Holmes just testified before a House committee. Clearly, whatever strings Whoop is pulling in Washington isn't helping with FDA — yet.

The warning letter came just six days after FDA cleared a cuffless wearable from Aktiia that monitors blood pressure, and it's been reported that Apple has been working on a blood pressure feature for many years. It's conceivable there were complaints about Whoop's feature when others are going through the FDA process. 

Whoop's feature doesn't directly measure blood pressure — it uses PPG, a non-invasive optical technique, to estimate  it. The company claims its algorithms are based on "32,000 sleep sessions from 11,000+ members, then validated the results against clinical readings." Would that stand up to FDA scrutiny? We don't know.

Let me know your thoughts! 



artificial intelligence

AI updates from CMS

Brittany Trang also spent some time reviewing the Medicare physician fee schedule proposed rule and found some info of interest to AI watchers:

  • AI clinical decision support software has long been considered "software as a service" and lumped under a physician practice's indirect costs. But this year, Medicare is asking for feedback on whether it should find other ways to pay for AI software, and where it can get data on how much time doctors spend evaluating AI outputs as well as the quality and efficacy of AI tech (page 319).
  • As part of the quality incentives program called MIPS (which pays doctors extra if they improve their care), Medicare is proposing a new data collection field for reporting AI-attributable patient safety events and near-misses (page 990, with more details on page 1704). Experts I talked to thought this would have a small impact since this is an optional program. But this might be an improvement over the status quo — there aren't many places to report AI-related adverse events besides FDA medical device adverse event reports, especially since the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's "Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare Safety" program was shut down earlier this year as part of the dismantling of President Biden's AI executive order.

industry news

OpenEvidence raises $210 million and more news 

  • OpenEvidence, maker of a generative AI-enabled search engine for medical research, raised a $210 million Series B round led by Google Ventures and Kleiner Perkins pushing the company's valuation to $3.5 billion. The company in February announced a $75 million round. In addition, OpenEvidence announced DeepConsult, a more sophisticated search. The company claims that a DeepConsult query requires "100 times the compute and cost of a standard OpenEvidence search."
  • One more Medicare physician fee schedule bit from Katie: Companies offering virtual diabetes prevention programs — including Omada, Teladoc, Noom, and WeightWatchers — have supported legislation to get Medicare to cover online-only versions of the program. The latest physician fee schedule proposes to do just that through 2029, though it specifies that companies can't use AI to replace time with a live coach. 
  • From Brittany: SandboxAQ, an Alphabet spinout that delivers AI-powered services to other companies, announced a partnership with iOncologi, a cancer therapeutics biopharma company. The companies plan to jointly develop a mRNA-based vaccine for glioblastoma, which they aim to have in the clinic in 18 months.
  • Employer-focused mental health company Lyra Health acquired pediatric mental health company Bend Health for an undisclosed sum. Bend raised $31 million in 2023.

More around STAT
Check out more exclusive coverage with a STAT+ subscription
Read premium in-depth biotech, pharma, policy, and life science coverage and analysis with all of our STAT+ articles.

What we're reading

  • Protein structure competition, of AlphaFold fame, nearing deal to replace lost NIH funding, STAT
  • Medicare proposes 'efficiency' pay cuts that would hit highly paid specialists the most, STAT
  • Epic's AI validation 'cookbook' helps health systems review models' performance, HealthcareIT News
  • Reframing the digital health opportunity, Deborah Estrin

Thanks for reading! More next time - Mario

Mario Aguilar covers how technology is transforming health care. He is based in New York.


Enjoying STAT Health Tech? Tell us about your experience
Continue reading the latest health & science news with the STAT app
Download on the App Store or get it on Google Play
STAT
STAT, 1 Exchange Place, Boston, MA
©2025, All Rights Reserved.

No comments