Suggestions
Nikhil Krishnan
Founder of Out-Of-Pocket
Nikhil Krishnan is the founder and "Thinkboi" at Out-Of-Pocket, a platform aimed at making healthcare more accessible through humor and relatable content. He has a background in sustainable development and business management, having graduated from Columbia University in 2014. His professional experience includes roles such as the Strategic Partnerships Manager at TrialSpark and Senior Industry Analyst at CB Insights, where he focused on digital health and biotechnology trends.
At Out-Of-Pocket, which he founded in February 2020, Krishnan uses memes and humor to educate people about the complexities of healthcare operations. His approach aims to demystify the healthcare system and engage a broader audience.14 He is also active on Substack, where he publishes a newsletter that has gained significant traction, reaching tens of thousands of subscribers.23
In addition to his current venture, Krishnan previously founded Get Real, a platform designed to facilitate structured online-offline friendships, and has held various internships in organizations like Uber and the Earth Institute.14 His work emphasizes a blend of humor and critical analysis of healthcare, making complex topics more digestible for the general public.
Highlights
we have 2 banner ads remaining across all the Out-Of-Pocket newsletters in the next few months.
One of them is for next week - we're offering it at a discount for whoever can move quickly.
First come, first serve - shoot me a DM if you're trying to get in front of a healthcare audience
Should health insurance should be covering things like food, housing, etc. for people?
The argument for yes is easy - all of these things affect health downstream so it's in their favor to do so. And this is one of the most commonly held beliefs for people that join the healthcare 101 course we run, so it's one of the first things we talk about.
A practical reason they don't is because most health insurers expect you to churn every ~2 years, and so upfront investments like this don't make sense unless they can see an ROI within that time period (which does happen, e.g. uncontrolled diabetes)
But there's a more ideological question to debate. And that's whether:
-
You want health insurance carriers to be the deciders on who is allowed to receive the social safety net
-
Whether $ going through the administrative labyrinth of health insurance is the most cost-effective way to give that money to people for specific needs like food. $1 almost immediately turns to $.85 before it reaches the person, is that better than just giving a voucher directly?

