The GLP-1 rebound problem is not patient failure. It is a business-model problem. MEDVi and eMed both have revenue models that depend on you never stopping the drug.
MEDVi’s Structural Problems
Monthly recurring revenue requires continuous refills. Their $1.8B 2026 GMV projection depends on customer lifetime value, which only works if customers keep refilling. A company with this cost structure cannot credibly promote a 12-week taper protocol. The math breaks.
Additionally: no licensed clinician-of-record, compounded oral tirzepatide tablets (zero human absorption studies), marketing violations (deepfaked photos, stolen Reddit images), and zero peer-reviewed outcomes data.
eMed’s Limitations
More credible, but still structurally limited. Capitation model rewards maintenance, not resolution. Published outcomes are on active medication, not cessation. No acupuncture, herbs, or hypnotherapy layer. Built for employer benefit-shaping, not individual patient continuity. No functional labs interpretation.
The Common Structural Conflict
Both companies’ revenue ceiling is the patient staying on the drug. A telehealth-prescribing business model cannot credibly build a plan to get off it without cannibalizing revenue.
A DAOM-led post-GLP-1 protocol has no such conflict. The patient graduating and maintaining independently is the business success.
Start at HolisticDrBright.com for a real post-GLP-1 plan.