What would a “good” WebMD look like?
A better question might be: Why is the private sector responsible for providing accurate health information? As this article shows, the incentives for people running medical websites and the people reading them are not aligned. I'd say the UK NHS website and symptoms/medications pages hit the nail on the head - <a href="https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/" rel="nofollow">https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/</a>. It has no advertising and provides short, easily readable and actionable information on the majority of conditions and the correct way to use and take many different sorts of medication.<p>And crucially - if the information present is not sufficient, clear and obvious UI elements that direct the next best steps to get the help you need, whether that be ringing the non emergency helpline or immediately going to A&E. (It's been commented on before, but the new UK government sites are very consistently structured and open source their design systems <a href="https://service-manual.nhs.uk/design-system" rel="nofollow">https://service-manual.nhs.uk/design-system</a>)