Feature 6 | Acquisition International, September 2025 How Startups Should Actually Build AI That Customers Trust It’s a Saturday afternoon. You feel a headache coming on. Not serious enough to panic, but annoying enough to need a solution. You check the medicine cabinet. The paracetamol has expired. The GP is closed. So you do what almost everyone does now. You reach for your phone. Within seconds, you’re buried in answers. Google suggests one thing. ChatGPT suggests another. A retailer chatbot recommends a product you’ve never heard of. Warnings conflict. Ingredients overlap. Dosage advice varies. Suddenly, choosing nothing feels safer than choosing wrong. That moment of friction is easy to dismiss as a poor user experience. It isn’t. It’s a preview of what happens when AI scales faster than trust in healthcare commerce. This isn’t a technology problem. It’s a credibility problem. And AI is about to expose it. The Weak Link No One Wants to Talk About AI is accelerating across every industry, and self-care is no exception. However, healthcare e-commerce has a hidden fragility that most people overlook. It relies entirely on accurate product data. AI can only work with what is attached to a product record. Ingredients. Claims. Usage instructions. Contraindications. Age suitability. Interactions. Even basic category labelling. Yet across brands and retailers, that information is still too often incomplete, inconsistent, or simply incorrect. One platform lists an ingredient, another misses it. One implies a use case, another contradicts it. A third repeats a claim that is not even approved. Those disconnects are not cosmetic. They are the foundations that the entire experience sits on. When AI sits on top of fragmented data, it does not fix the mess. It amplifies it. If the data says the wrong thing, the model will repeat the wrong thing, confidently and at speed. In healthcare, that is not a minor UX bug. It is a safety risk. This is why I keep coming back to a simple reality. The quality of the AI experience depends on the quality of the underlying product data. Right now, that foundation is not strong enough to support the agentic future we are racing toward. And once trust breaks, there is no easy reset. People do not give you infinite chances with their health. If a recommendation feels unreliable, the consumer retreats. They either self-diagnose in isolation or abandon the category completely. Either way, the system loses. AI Is Becoming the Decision Layer, Not Just the Search Tool Right now, people still search for products. Very soon, they will ask an assistant what to do. Instead of scrolling results, they will say, “What should I take for this headache?” or “What do I need for dry eyes?” and expect one clear answer. We are watching a shift from “show me options” to “choose for me.” AI shopping agents are becoming the first line people consult, whether the industry is ready or not. The pace of this will surprise a lot of people, because it is not waiting for perfect regulation or universal comfort. It is happening because it is convenient, and convenience always wins adoption. This future has two possible paths. Path 1: Confusion and mistrust: Consumers bounce between assistants, pulling from different datasets. Recommendations contradict each other. People lose confidence and retreat into self-diagnosis. Path 2: Clarity and safety: Consumers use an assistant inside a trusted retail or pharmacy environment. It draws from a verified OTC catalogue, follows humanwritten safety rules, asks clarifying questions, and escalates anything uncertain to a professional. Same AI interface. Completely different outcome. The difference is not the cleverness of the model. It is the discipline of the data and the human guardrails that sit underneath it. This is the part many people miss. In healthcare, you do not need a freerange genius. You need a supervised system that behaves safely. What “Human-Led AI” Actually Means Human-led AI is not about humans babysitting chatbots.It is about humans owning the truth that AI depends on. In healthcare, AI can scale decisions, but it cannot be left to define what is clinically correct, compliant, or safe. That responsibility stays human. In practice, this starts with the foundations that consumers never see. Traceability, verified supply, authenticity in-market, and product data that is clean enough to be trusted everywhere it appears. If any of those layers are weak, AI does not quietly fail. It fails loudly, at speed, and in a way that damages trust on behalf of the brand. This is where AI is genuinely powerful. It can automate the heavy lifting, spot inconsistencies, monitor marketplaces, and surface risks long before a human team could. However, the job of defining “correct,” setting safety thresholds, and continuously verifying what the system is allowed to recommend must be human-led. AI accelerates the work. Humans make it trustworthy. Many teams working in OTC e-commerce face this exact problem. AI can scale operations and surface issues quickly, but human experts still carry responsibility for verification and compliance because that is what keeps the consumer experience safe and reproducible. The specifics vary by brand, but the model is always the same: scale with AI, govern with humans. Why This Is a Startup Advantage, Not a Constraint This is also why the startup advantage in regulated markets is often framed the wrong way. People assume startups win by removing humans and letting AI run faster. In trust-heavy categories, the opposite By Ash Shah, Managing Director of World Products
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTUyMDQwMA==