This is a good example of what the information revolution is supposed to be achieving, but it comes with the same perils that the article is talking about. I mean, we all research health information on the internet, and hopefully we are good at picking out reliable sources, but it's also true that there is a huge amount of misinformation available.

For instance, the anti-vaccination movement has been very active on the internet, and that is definitely a negative for public health.

More generally, it can be very hard to sort out genuine experts from dilettantes. This is ultimately why we still need governments and health authorities, and why it is so important to approach the internet with cautious skepticism even as we gain a lot of value from the information it makes available.