A woman I met recently had tried everything: facials, supplements, detoxes, diets, and several random Instagram recommendations.
She wasn’t unwell in the way medicine defines illness. Her reports were largely normal. But she was constantly tired, her sleep was unpredictable, her energy fluctuated, and she carried that vague, persistent sense of not feeling okay.
Not sick enough to be treated, not well enough to feel well. This is the space the wellness industry claims to fill. But increasingly, it seems to be missing it.
Sign up for Open Magazine’s ad-free experience
Enjoy uninterrupted access to premium content and insights.
Wellness has never been more visible. There is a treatment, a protocol, or a product for almost every modern discomfort or perceived ailment – fatigue, poor sleep, low mood, dull skin, slow recovery.
The language is persuasive: optimise, restore, rebalance. And yet, the number of people who feel fundamentally “off” doesn’t seem to be declining. If anything, it is becoming more common to exist in this in-between state: functional, but not thriving.
Part of the issue is that the industry has quietly shifted its objective. It no longer sells health; it sells the experience of getting better.
The distinction matters. Health is slow. It is built through repetition. Consistent sleep, nutrition, movement, and stress management over long periods of time, often without immediate visible change.
Open Magazine Latest Edition is Out Now!
The Abandoned Kejriwal
01 May 2026 – Vol 04 | Issue 69
Brain drain from AAP leaves Arvind Kejriwal politically isolated
Read Now
The experience of getting better, on the other hand, is immediate. A treatment can leave you feeling lighter, brighter, more energised. Something has been done. There is a result you can point to. Over time, both providers and consumers begin to optimise for that feeling.
Success becomes measurable in short-term signals – glow, energy, weight, recovery- rather than long-term outcomes that are harder to see and slower to change.
But those signals are not the same as health. None of this makes wellness redundant. If anything, it makes it more necessary. But it does require a shift in how it is practiced and what we expect from it.
There is also a structural problem in how wellness is consumed. It is approached like a menu.
People select treatments based on what they have read, seen, or been told a facial for skin, an IV for energy, a therapy for recovery.
Each intervention exists in isolation, disconnected from a larger plan. This is convenient, but it is not how health works. Real change requires sequencing.
It requires context. It requires time and patience and consistency and monitoring and sessions.
It requires an understanding of what is driving the symptom in the first place, and then a series of interventions that build on each other over time.
That kind of approach is slower, less predictable, and harder to package. So it is often bypassed and skipped for something that looks quicker and is packaged more shiny.
There is also an uncomfortable dynamic at play. People say they want long-term health, but behave in ways that prioritise immediacy.
We are far more likely to commit to something that produces visible change in weeks than something that quietly improves metabolic health over months.
We reward outcomes we can see and feel quickly. The industry has adapted to this reality. It has become highly effective at delivering short-term wins – the kind that reassure you something is working – but less effective at sustaining change once that initial effect wears off.
In more mature wellness markets, there has been a gradual shift away from one-off interventions towards continuity of care.
In parts of Europe and the US, longevity clinics and integrative practices are increasingly structured around long-term protocols which include regular monitoring, personalised plans, physician-led oversight, and a clear sequence of interventions rather than isolated treatments.
The emphasis is less on what you do once and more on what you do consistently. The outcomes are not always immediate, but they tend to last.
That shift is still nascent in India, where wellness continues to sit somewhere between indulgence and optimisation, rarely crossing into true preventive care.
But the difference is not in access or technology. It is in approach.
Wellness was meant to bridge the space between feeling unwell and seeking medical care.
Instead, it has created a new category of its own: one where people move from one solution to another, feeling better for a while, but never quite arriving at health.
If the industry is to evolve, it will have to move beyond isolated treatments and towards something more structured preventive care that begins before symptoms escalate, comprehensive care that looks at the body as a system rather than in parts, and continuity that extends beyond a single session or solution.
From the inside, it is clear how hard this shift is to build and how necessary it is.
Until then, we will continue to optimise for feeling better, instead of actually being well.
(The writer is CEO and Founder of Elixir Wellness)