The Fallacy of Vitamins vs. Painkillers in Product
Why this popular analogy oversimplifies user needs—and how to think more holistically.
When I was building my last startup Otterspace, I pitched to hundreds of investors during fundraising. One of the most recurring questions I heard was, “Is your product a vitamin or a painkiller?” I quickly realized that most investors seem to crave clear-cut painkillers—products that solve urgent, must-fix issues—while often dismissing products viewed as mere “vitamins,” which improve but don’t necessarily fix a pressing pain. As a founder, I found this analogy limiting and short-sighted, prompting me to share my observations here.
Having also worked at SoundCloud and now in the Crypto space (Safe), I’ve seen firsthand how different products blend painkiller and vitamin elements.
In this article, I’ll share why the vitamins vs. painkillers analogy can be misleading, how Nir Eyal’s Hooked helps us understand habit formation beyond this dichotomy, and a simple matrix you can use to evaluate where your product or features may lie on the spectrum.
The Vitamin vs. Painkiller Analogy: A Quick Refresher
• Vitamins: Products or features that enhance a user’s life in a gradual or aspirational way. They’re seen as “nice-to-haves” that deliver long-term value, but they don’t always solve an immediate, pressing pain point.
• Painkillers: Products or features that solve a critical or urgent user problem—users will adopt them quickly because they feel an immediate need or “pain” that must be addressed.
This framework is popular because it’s simple. It helps product managers and entrepreneurs think about which user problems to address first. Investors often latch onto painkillers, believing they have a clearer path to product-market fit. But reality is often more complex.
The Fallacy: Why It Oversimplifies the Product Puzzle
It Over-Simplifies Real User Needs
Users have a range of problems and motivations, some urgent, others aspirational. A product might start as a painkiller (solving a single acute problem) but evolve into a platform offering broader “vitamin-like” improvements. Conversely, a product seen as a vitamin might become indispensable if market conditions or user priorities shift.
It Neglects Emotional & Psychological Factors
Beyond functional pain points, many users make decisions based on deeper emotional or social triggers—such as identity, status, or community. Labelling something as “just a vitamin” can miss the fact that it fullfills intangible needs that drive habit formation. Think of social media: it may not solve an immediate “pain,” but it addresses our need for connection and validation.
It Encourages Short-Term vs. Long-Term Tension
By focusing solely on urgent pains, you can secure early traction but risk overlooking ongoing engagement. Pure “painkiller” products often see users churn out once the main issue is resolved. Meanwhile, purely “vitamin” products can struggle to win immediate adoption if they don’t also address a more pressing need that hooks users initially.
It Ignores Complex Multi-Use Cases
Many products solve multiple problems with varying degrees of urgency. A project management tool can fix a day-to-day pain (aligning tasks, deadlines, and communication) while also offering long-term enhancements like analytics and performance insights. Classifying it strictly as one or the other loses important nuance.
Hooked by Nir Eyal: A Broader Lens on Habit Formation
I recently read Nir Eyal’s Hooked which explores how products create habit loops by linking user triggers to actions, variable rewards, and user investments. While some triggers are driven by pain (e.g., loneliness, frustration, or disorganization), others stem from aspirational needs (e.g., self-improvement, curiosity, or the desire for community). Eyal’s framework shows us that:
• Painkillers can provide the immediate or negative (boredom, fear, anxiety, loneliness, or frustration) trigger relief that compels a user to form an initial habit.
• Vitamins can tap into positive or aspirational triggers that maintain user engagement over the long run (think consistent self-improvement or social bonding).
By blending both immediate relief and ongoing enrichment, you can design products that not only attract users in moments of urgency but keep them coming back for deeper value.
A Simple Evaluation Matrix
Use the matrix below to determine whether your product or a specific feature leans more toward a painkiller or a vitamin. Good products often blend elements of both.
For Painkillers: Track activation rate, short-term retention, and time-to-first-value.
For Vitamins: Track long-term retention, engagement depth, and user satisfaction (NPS, CSAT) to see if users are deriving ongoing benefits.
Bridging the Gap: Painkillers ‘with’ Vitamins
The most resilient products often combine elements of both. They hook users by alleviating a clear, urgent issue—then foster ongoing engagement by offering deeper, long-term value. Drawing on two examples from my career, SoundCloud and Safe Wallet, here’s how these dual approaches can play out:
• SoundCloud initially addressed a painkiller need by giving creators an easy, free way to upload, host, and share their music—solving the immediate pain of distribution and discovery in a crowded market. Over time, it evolved to include more vitamin-like features, such as advanced analytics, community tools, and promotional capabilities. These incremental enhancements helped artists grow their audience, engage with fans, and refine their creative process, making SoundCloud an enduring platform rather than just a quick fix.
• Safe Wallet tackles a pressing problem for crypto users by providing a secure, multi-signature wallet that alleviates the fear of losing funds through a single compromised key. This addresses the urgent “painkiller” concern of protecting digital assets. Over time, Safe has incorporated vitamin-style benefits, such as modular extensions, advanced transaction features, and an evolving governance model that offers deeper involvement in on-chain asset management. These additions encourage users to remain active in the ecosystem, well beyond simply securing their funds.
This dual strategy satisfies immediate user pain while also fostering a habit-forming relationship built on ongoing improvements. By addressing urgent problems up front and layering in aspirational features over time, you can create products and platforms that endure well beyond their initial hook.
Conclusion: Beyond the Binary
While it’s tempting to classify every product or feature as a vitamin or a painkiller, real-world user needs—and behaviours—are rarely so clear-cut. As my fundraising experience with Otterspace highlighted, investors may fixate on painkillers, but they can overlook the long-term potential of products that also serve as vitamins. Successful products often blend both approaches, addressing immediate pain points to secure early adoption while simultaneously offering long-term, enriching features that foster sustained engagement and loyalty. Nir Eyal’s Hooked underscores the importance of creating habit loops that integrate both urgent needs and aspirational desires, enabling products to resonate deeply with users.
By applying the evaluation matrix to assess urgency, willingness to pay, and retention patterns, product teams can gain a more balanced view of their offerings’ positioning and strategically develop features that cater to both short-term relief and long-term value. Embracing a blended approach ensures that products not only solve pressing problems but also continuously enhance users’ lives, paving the way for enduring success and user loyalty.