Building Better Health

Wellness is being reshaped by data, devices and digital health tools promising optimisation at every level. But as technology accelerates, a sharper question is emerging: are we actually becoming healthier, or simply more measured? Hannah Lanel, founder of The Fore, integrated wellness platform redefining how modern health is delivered, challenges the industry’s fixation on optimisation. A nutritionist and behavioural science specialist, she argues that the real gap in health is not information, but integration – and that people are too often treated as fragmented symptoms rather than whole individuals. The Fore brings together nutrition, movement, therapy, recovery and behavioural science in one model, reflecting a wider shift towards personalised, evidence-led wellbeing. Lanel discusses the limits of optimisation culture, why behaviour matters more than data alone, and how the future of wellness may depend less on technology – and more on how we learn to live with it.

What market gap led you to build The Fore?
The Fore was built to address what we believed was the biggest gap in the industry: the absence of an integrated, personalised, efficient and not overly complicated approach to wellness. We believe that wellness should work for you, not the other way around. Our philosophy is that every body tells a story and no two people have the same biology, history, behaviours or goals, so why should they receive the same advice? Additionally, all too often, people are treated as a collection of symptoms rather than as whole individuals. They move between practitioners, receive conflicting and confusing advice that they are then expected to piece together alone. I created The Fore to bring together nutrition, movement, therapy, recovery and behavioural science under one roof, allowing every aspect of a person’s health to be considered as part of a connected whole. 

Which area of healthtech or wellness innovation feels most overhyped right now?
I think the current obsession with optimisation is one of the most overhyped trends in healthtech. We have more devices, more data and more biomarkers than ever before, yet we’re not necessarily becoming healthier. Wearables, continuous glucose monitors, AI health coaches and endless tracking all have enormous potential, but somewhere along the way we’ve started believing that if something can be measured, it must be optimised, and in doing so we’ve begun outsourcing our agency over our own health. I don’t think we’re suffering from an information deficit. We’re suffering from an interpretation deficit. People don’t need another metric. They need help understanding which metric actually matters, and then turning that insight into meaningful, sustainable action. We’re walking around in the most sophisticated biological machines on the planet, yet many people no longer recognise when they’re genuinely hungry, tired, stressed or full because they’re waiting for a device to tell them. At its extreme, this relentless pursuit of optimisation begins to resemble a form of digital orthorexia, where the pursuit of perfect health becomes unhealthy in itself. Technology should help us reconnect with our biology, not disconnect us from it. The goal isn’t to become better at tracking health. It’s to become better at living it.

How do you keep your approach evidence-based in such a fast-moving industry?
We don’t chase trends. We ask a much simpler question: What does the evidence actually say? The wellness industry moves incredibly quickly, but popularity has never been a reliable indicator of effectiveness. We rely on high-quality scientific evidence, including systematic reviews, meta-analyses and established clinical guidelines, rather than single studies, influencer opinions or the latest social media trend. That said, evidence doesn’t exist in isolation. The strongest research in the world still has to be applied to the person sitting in front of you. At The Fore, we combine the best available scientific evidence with clinical expertise and the individual’s lifestyle, health history, goals and preferences. Two people with the same diagnosis may need entirely different approaches because their lives, motivations and barriers are different. We also recognise that science is constantly evolving. Being evidence-based doesn’t mean becoming fixed in your thinking. It means being willing to adapt as better evidence emerges, while remaining transparent about what we know, what we don’t know and where the science is still developing. Ultimately, we’re evidence-led, but people-centred. Science provides the foundation, but it’s understanding the individual that turns evidence into meaningful and lasting change.

What does behavioural science unlock that most health businesses overlook?
Most health businesses focus on telling people what to do. Behavioural science focuses on understanding why they aren’t already doing it. Knowledge has never been the biggest barrier to better health. Most people already know they should sleep more, eat more vegetables and exercise regularly. The challenge lies in motivation, habits, environment, identity and competing priorities. When you understand how people make decisions in the real world, you stop designing programmes for perfect humans with unlimited willpower and start creating systems that work for busy, imperfect lives. That’s where lasting change happens.

How do you see wellness platforms fitting into the wider UK healthtech ecosystem?
I think the future lies in integration rather than competition. Wellness platforms shouldn’t be trying to replace healthcare; they should be extending it. The NHS faces extraordinary pressures, particularly around chronic disease, where lifestyle factors play a significant role. Technology-enabled wellness platforms can provide ongoing education, coaching, monitoring and behaviour change support between clinical appointments, helping people stay healthier for longer and making interventions more effective when medical treatment is needed. The greatest opportunity is creating a continuum between prevention, early intervention and clinical care rather than treating them as separate worlds.

Where will the biggest shift in health and wellness come from next: technology, regulation, or consumer behaviour?
Consumer behaviour will ultimately determine whether any innovation succeeds. Technology will continue to advance rapidly, particularly through AI and personalised health, and regulation will become increasingly important as the industry matures. But neither matters if people don’t engage with healthier behaviours in ways that fit their everyday lives. I think we’re moving away from the era of optimisation and towards one of practicality. People are becoming more sceptical of miracle solutions and more interested in approaches that are realistic, evidence-based and sustainable. The businesses that thrive will be those that make healthy choices feel easier, not more complicated.