Elizabeth Holmes, 30 year old self-made billionaire woman

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I honestly never understood the appeal of the product. Sure, blood draws aren't fun, but they aren't impossible or even particularly difficult. It always seemed like a solution in search of a problem. Then to have it be fake in the end . . . just stupidity all around.

Has anyone seen the HBO documentary that dropped last week or the earlier ABC documentary, Bad Bood? I watched the ABC doc. This story is fascinating for so many reasons.

Re: the comment above— I don’t get the appeal of the product either. It’s a single needle poke, either way, and it doesn’t hurt once the needle is in. Frankly, I’d rather be poked in the bend of my elbow than in a fingertip. Less likely to bump the wound or get infected since your fingers touch everything.

And on a superficial note— her fake voice is creepy as hell, and what’s with that dry, straw hair? Had she never heard of conditioner?

I watched it. I thought The Dropout (podcast) was more thorough in its coverage (listen if you haven’t had a chance).

I get the appeal of the concept- the ability to do bloodwork in remote army camps or rural clinics, etc. Holmes pretended it was about fear of needles and being able to do bloodwork frequently in your own home. She dismissed the people who knew, and told her, that it wouldn’t work.

The biggest tragedy by far was the employee who killed himself.

It’s just astonishing to me how many smart people she bamboozled. That seems to be a trend these days with frauds like the Fire Festival and Anna Delvey.

agree, The Dropout podcast was much more thorough.
How was she able to fool all those rich, older powerful men? Was it her freakily large unblinking blue eyes?

Her eyes changed so much from when she was younger. Contacts and surgery?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I honestly never understood the appeal of the product. Sure, blood draws aren't fun, but they aren't impossible or even particularly difficult. It always seemed like a solution in search of a problem. Then to have it be fake in the end . . . just stupidity all around.

Has anyone seen the HBO documentary that dropped last week or the earlier ABC documentary, Bad Bood? I watched the ABC doc. This story is fascinating for so many reasons.

Re: the comment above— I don’t get the appeal of the product either. It’s a single needle poke, either way, and it doesn’t hurt once the needle is in. Frankly, I’d rather be poked in the bend of my elbow than in a fingertip. Less likely to bump the wound or get infected since your fingers touch everything.

And on a superficial note— her fake voice is creepy as hell, and what’s with that dry, straw hair? Had she never heard of conditioner?

I watched it. I thought The Dropout (podcast) was more thorough in its coverage (listen if you haven’t had a chance).

I get the appeal of the concept- the ability to do bloodwork in remote army camps or rural clinics, etc. Holmes pretended it was about fear of needles and being able to do bloodwork frequently in your own home. She dismissed the people who knew, and told her, that it wouldn’t work.

The biggest tragedy by far was the employee who killed himself.

It’s just astonishing to me how many smart people she bamboozled. That seems to be a trend these days with frauds like the Fire Festival and Anna Delvey.

agree, The Dropout podcast was much more thorough.
How was she able to fool all those rich, older powerful men? Was it her freakily large unblinking blue eyes?

Her eyes changed so much from when she was younger. Contacts and surgery?

+1

She brought the term "crazy eyes" to a whole new level! She didn't even blink!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:80 patents in 10 years. I call BS.

I came in to say this.... The whole platform is suspect and they haven't released any data to be publically scrutinized. They are running LDTs which do not have to go through FDA clearance. You can have all the patents you want but let's see if the have a viable product.

The idea that one can do 30 assays from 25 uL of whole blood is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.

So there was at least one intelligent dcum poster 4 years ago who wasn’t fooled by this Fyre Festival style con job.

This is why I love dcum. There are nuggets of true wisdom hidden in all the chatter.

Albeit tiny nuggets - I agree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I honestly never understood the appeal of the product. Sure, blood draws aren't fun, but they aren't impossible or even particularly difficult. It always seemed like a solution in search of a problem. Then to have it be fake in the end . . . just stupidity all around.

See, I thought the idea was brilliant and I hope there's an iota of truth and someone can push this idea through. Results with a drop of blood! Right now, they take three vials for one test! They took three vials to test my child for lead! And I'm not sure if this is part of it, but I would like instant results to ME and not my doctor holding it hostage. It's my blood, after all.

What idea? There's no idea here?!?! Everyone in clinical knows how much blood/serum is required to run tests and everyone knows how insensitive most diagnostics tests are so it is CONSTATNTLY being worked on. When I heard the NON-IDEA I just laughed and watched the roller coaster from the sidelines. I tried at first to search for patents/journal articles, etc. to see exactly what the NON-IDEA was and since there was nothing there I knew it was a scam.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:80 patents in 10 years. I call BS.

I came in to say this.... The whole platform is suspect and they haven't released any data to be publically scrutinized. They are running LDTs which do not have to go through FDA clearance. You can have all the patents you want but let's see if the have a viable product.

The idea that one can do 30 assays from 25 uL of whole blood is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.

So there was at least one intelligent dcum poster 4 years ago who wasn’t fooled by this Fyre Festival style con job.

This is why I love dcum. There are nuggets of true wisdom hidden in all the chatter.

Albeit tiny nuggets - I agree.

Oh wow, I missed this post, that was me..

[Anonymous]

I’m watching the HBO documentary. What’s up with the guy who has the mustache/beard on one side of his face?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DC born!

http://fortune.com/2014/06/12/theranos-blood-holmes/

Impressive. I think she can become wealthier than Zuckerberg. A very useful and revolutionary service/technology she has pioneered. Potential to really eat away at lab fees.

oooh, zombie thread! after our Brainnnnnns!

Dated 8/15/14...this one did not age well.
I'll skip ahead...she's a complete fraud down to the way she talks, and is headed for trial and maybe 20 years in camp cupcake

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I honestly never understood the appeal of the product. Sure, blood draws aren't fun, but they aren't impossible or even particularly difficult. It always seemed like a solution in search of a problem. Then to have it be fake in the end . . . just stupidity all around.

See, I thought the idea was brilliant and I hope there's an iota of truth and someone can push this idea through. Results with a drop of blood! Right now, they take three vials for one test! They took three vials to test my child for lead! And I'm not sure if this is part of it, but I would like instant results to ME and not my doctor holding it hostage. It's my blood, after all.

What idea? There's no idea here?!?! Everyone in clinical knows how much blood/serum is required to run tests and everyone knows how insensitive most diagnostics tests are so it is CONSTATNTLY being worked on. When I heard the NON-IDEA I just laughed and watched the roller coaster from the sidelines. I tried at first to search for patents/journal articles, etc. to see exactly what the NON-IDEA was and since there was nothing there I knew it was a scam.

Everyone knows humans can't fly either, yet we do. Of course we all want ideas and progress. If her idea had all the components to also improve dx tests, would it work? Can you stretch your brain that this is not how we will be doing this in 100 years? That even though it wasn't EH, it will be someone else? It won't be you; you're too busy being smug to progress anything. Enjoy the sidelines.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I honestly never understood the appeal of the product. Sure, blood draws aren't fun, but they aren't impossible or even particularly difficult. It always seemed like a solution in search of a problem. Then to have it be fake in the end . . . just stupidity all around.

See, I thought the idea was brilliant and I hope there's an iota of truth and someone can push this idea through. Results with a drop of blood! Right now, they take three vials for one test! They took three vials to test my child for lead! And I'm not sure if this is part of it, but I would like instant results to ME and not my doctor holding it hostage. It's my blood, after all.

What idea? There's no idea here?!?! Everyone in clinical knows how much blood/serum is required to run tests and everyone knows how insensitive most diagnostics tests are so it is CONSTATNTLY being worked on. When I heard the NON-IDEA I just laughed and watched the roller coaster from the sidelines. I tried at first to search for patents/journal articles, etc. to see exactly what the NON-IDEA was and since there was nothing there I knew it was a scam.

Everyone knows humans can't fly either, yet we do. Of course we all want ideas and progress. If her idea had all the components to also improve dx tests, would it work? Can you stretch your brain that this is not how we will be doing this in 100 years? That even though it wasn't EH, it will be someone else? It won't be you; you're too busy being smug to progress anything. Enjoy the sidelines.

You completely misunderstand the point. No one is saying this is impossible. It is and will be possible one day. But you can't just make it happen by dropping out of college without the most rudimentary background in the field, put on a costume, change your voice and say, "I think I can, I think I can". Again, WHAT IS THE IDEA? What did she figure out, what nuance did she exploit to increase the sensitivity several logs over the current state of the art? I'll tell you again, there never was an idea.

[Anonymous]

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/02/inside-elizabeth-holmess-final-months-at-theranos

The only thing that upset her was when they took away her company-paid mansions and private jet. Wow.

"Someone had to be paying for all those Birkin bags."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m watching the HBO documentary. What’s up with the guy who has the mustache/beard on one side of his face?

The side of his face is covered in burn scars.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I honestly never understood the appeal of the product. Sure, blood draws aren't fun, but they aren't impossible or even particularly difficult. It always seemed like a solution in search of a problem. Then to have it be fake in the end . . . just stupidity all around.

See, I thought the idea was brilliant and I hope there's an iota of truth and someone can push this idea through. Results with a drop of blood! Right now, they take three vials for one test! They took three vials to test my child for lead! And I'm not sure if this is part of it, but I would like instant results to ME and not my doctor holding it hostage. It's my blood, after all.

What idea? There's no idea here?!?! Everyone in clinical knows how much blood/serum is required to run tests and everyone knows how insensitive most diagnostics tests are so it is CONSTATNTLY being worked on. When I heard the NON-IDEA I just laughed and watched the roller coaster from the sidelines. I tried at first to search for patents/journal articles, etc. to see exactly what the NON-IDEA was and since there was nothing there I knew it was a scam.

Everyone knows humans can't fly either, yet we do. Of course we all want ideas and progress. If her idea had all the components to also improve dx tests, would it work? Can you stretch your brain that this is not how we will be doing this in 100 years? That even though it wasn't EH, it will be someone else? It won't be you; you're too busy being smug to progress anything. Enjoy the sidelines.

You completely misunderstand the point. No one is saying this is impossible. It is and will be possible one day. But you can't just make it happen by dropping out of college without the most rudimentary background in the field, put on a costume, change your voice and say, "I think I can, I think I can". Again, WHAT IS THE IDEA? What did she figure out, what nuance did she exploit to increase the sensitivity several logs over the current state of the art? I'll tell you again, there never was an idea.

I think we actually agree then. There was an idea. It was a good one, but she had nothing to back it up so it was only a malformed dream. The idea itself is good, and timely, and needed. She wasn't the one to do it. Someday, somebody will.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I honestly never understood the appeal of the product. Sure, blood draws aren't fun, but they aren't impossible or even particularly difficult. It always seemed like a solution in search of a problem. Then to have it be fake in the end . . . just stupidity all around.

See, I thought the idea was brilliant and I hope there's an iota of truth and someone can push this idea through. Results with a drop of blood! Right now, they take three vials for one test! They took three vials to test my child for lead! And I'm not sure if this is part of it, but I would like instant results to ME and not my doctor holding it hostage. It's my blood, after all.

What idea? There's no idea here?!?! Everyone in clinical knows how much blood/serum is required to run tests and everyone knows how insensitive most diagnostics tests are so it is CONSTATNTLY being worked on. When I heard the NON-IDEA I just laughed and watched the roller coaster from the sidelines. I tried at first to search for patents/journal articles, etc. to see exactly what the NON-IDEA was and since there was nothing there I knew it was a scam.

Everyone knows humans can't fly either, yet we do. Of course we all want ideas and progress. If her idea had all the components to also improve dx tests, would it work? Can you stretch your brain that this is not how we will be doing this in 100 years? That even though it wasn't EH, it will be someone else? It won't be you; you're too busy being smug to progress anything. Enjoy the sidelines.

You completely misunderstand the point. No one is saying this is impossible. It is and will be possible one day. But you can't just make it happen by dropping out of college without the most rudimentary background in the field, put on a costume, change your voice and say, "I think I can, I think I can". Again, WHAT IS THE IDEA? What did she figure out, what nuance did she exploit to increase the sensitivity several logs over the current state of the art? I'll tell you again, there never was an idea.

I think we actually agree then. There was an idea. It was a good one, but she had nothing to back it up so it was only a malformed dream. The idea itself is good, and timely, and needed. She wasn't the one to do it. Someday, somebody will.

We agree that the testing may be possible in the future. We disagree in whether she had a "good idea" and specifically one worth billions of dollars. I can state chemotherapy is too dangerous and untargeted so we are going to used 3 logs less of chemo which will specifically target cancer cells....

uh ok... that's common knowledge... can someone throw a billion dollars at me cause after all that's "a good idea", maybe I'm a "revolutionary thinker" all of a sudden...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I honestly never understood the appeal of the product. Sure, blood draws aren't fun, but they aren't impossible or even particularly difficult. It always seemed like a solution in search of a problem. Then to have it be fake in the end . . . just stupidity all around.

See, I thought the idea was brilliant and I hope there's an iota of truth and someone can push this idea through. Results with a drop of blood! Right now, they take three vials for one test! They took three vials to test my child for lead! And I'm not sure if this is part of it, but I would like instant results to ME and not my doctor holding it hostage. It's my blood, after all.

What idea? There's no idea here?!?! Everyone in clinical knows how much blood/serum is required to run tests and everyone knows how insensitive most diagnostics tests are so it is CONSTATNTLY being worked on. When I heard the NON-IDEA I just laughed and watched the roller coaster from the sidelines. I tried at first to search for patents/journal articles, etc. to see exactly what the NON-IDEA was and since there was nothing there I knew it was a scam.

Everyone knows humans can't fly either, yet we do. Of course we all want ideas and progress. If her idea had all the components to also improve dx tests, would it work? Can you stretch your brain that this is not how we will be doing this in 100 years? That even though it wasn't EH, it will be someone else? It won't be you; you're too busy being smug to progress anything. Enjoy the sidelines.

You completely misunderstand the point. No one is saying this is impossible. It is and will be possible one day. But you can't just make it happen by dropping out of college without the most rudimentary background in the field, put on a costume, change your voice and say, "I think I can, I think I can". Again, WHAT IS THE IDEA? What did she figure out, what nuance did she exploit to increase the sensitivity several logs over the current state of the art? I'll tell you again, there never was an idea.

I think we actually agree then. There was an idea. It was a good one, but she had nothing to back it up so it was only a malformed dream. The idea itself is good, and timely, and needed. She wasn't the one to do it. Someday, somebody will.

NP
no, there was no idea. there was a desire. i want to cure cancer. that's not an idea, much less a "good, timely, and needed" one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am very interested to see if she serves time. Ive work SV and Ive been a part of a few labs that definitely were secretive and often times we implied things before we could actually accomplish them. However we always actually accomplished the task at hand within a few months...working 24/7 and being so intensely stressed of course! It seems her product never had a prototype that even worked. And the lies and the PR just kept building. I found her VERY pompous and she offered no one protection in the end. She aligned herself with powerful people but none of them scientists of course! Because they would be too interested in the product. Im still shocked she went to Walgreens with no working prototype. Giving people false readings really is criminal. I read she is facing UP to 20 years. Which really seems very low when you think she is responsible for false lab reports for many AZ people. Especially on syphillis...lovely!

f convicted, the pair—who were also linked romantically—face fines of $250,000 per count, plus restitution of over $100 million, and decades in prison. The maximum statutory penalty for both conspiracy to commit wire fraud under 18 USC §1349, and for wire fraud itself under 18 USC §1343 is 20 years per count, and each count could be served consecutively.