From reports of a recent technology conference in Bangkok it would seem that hell hath no fury like an investor who bought the hype.  In his ‘emperor’s-new-clothes’ moment of clarity a pioneering mobile broadband operator vented his fury at the inadequacy of the massively promoted technology.

Around the world investors (and the ventures they have backed) are learning that bottom lines are rather more important than headlines.  And as they leave their conference platforms in search of somewhere to lie down, they might perhaps ponder why it was they ever invested in some scheme rooted in the defiance of science.

The telecoms industry is no stranger to what a Formula One racing commentator described as an ‘excess of ambition over adhesion’.   But unlike F1 fans, safe behind the crash barrier, the customers who bought these over-sold technologies, end up paying for the damage.

Nor is the telecoms sector alone in its addiction to wishful thinking.  There is, as Dr Kathy Sykes on BBC TV brilliantly demonstrates, a massive alternative health industry that thrives despite (or maybe because of) its distance from scientific rationality.

In the case of digital delusion, part of the underlying problem can be pinned on the narrowness of technical education.  Treating, for example, wireless frequencies as a common utility, sweepingly overlooks the massive diversity in their propagation behaviours in different built environments – but this is normally only an issue for regulatory economists practicing their art at some distance from ‘A Level' science.

What really scuppers an otherwise sound project is a major change of requirements imposed by managers who are neither engineers nor economists.  When the dust settles on piles of discarded technology the historians will probably point to the fateful day when the plan for a fixed-location wireless broadband technology – a slightly beefier version of localised WiFi – was changed to add mobility, and then never really recovered from being pre-engineered to use frequencies that do not support higher speed mobility or indoor penetration very well.  The position is different for established mobile operators.  Their favoured technology choices may also have failed to meet expectations but at least they think they can afford retro-fit stop-gap or get-well plans. 

Much the same could, and probably will, be said about the continuing attempts to add new broadband capabilities to old narrow-band copper lines.  Such is the commitment to millions of miles of now valuable copper buried beneath footpaths that its wholesale replacement by fit-for-purpose fibre is beyond the brains of business suits and must be championed by local governments who feel the need to deliver economic growth, societal cohesion and effective 21^st century community services such as education and health.

Which brings us around to the growing enthusiasm for a combination of telecoms and health services – the development of ‘Connected Health’.  The basics are sound.  Shift more expertise and capabilities closer to the patients and their family caregivers, and free up expensive hospitals and doctors for delivery of more difficult treatments.

Technically the data flows needed to support the expected range of sensors and monitors are easily below the capacity limits of known technologies – even in situations where many multiple data-streams may be running concurrently.  The flexibility to create higher speed data flows for instant video consultations with your doctor, or to receive some health education training, is also not beyond available technology in some urban settings.   Even the cross-cultural challenges of fusing together network and systems designers with clinicians are not a show-stopper.  No, what would really scupper the future of the Connected Health movement would be an attempt by some mega-global corporation to put its arms around the whole idea and hype it to hell.

That’s why the European Connected Health Campus – rooted in open access multi-partner collaboration – is such a huge step forward.  It will provide a space to nurture innovation (and avoid a land-grab) and enable technologies and practice techniques to develop into things that really work at all levels for all stakeholders.  It may seem like a dream but there’s no need to hype something that really works.  No need to encourage digital delusions. No need to attempt the defiance of science.

(C) ABFL Groupe Intellex 2008