Elizabeth Holmes, CEO of Theranos, finally charged

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She also charmed a lot of 70 and 80 years olds who sat on her board and gave the operation a successful sheen, e.g. George Schultz.. (Never mind that most of them were ex military and ex government -- not medical or tech experts)

From fortune in 2015: Board includes Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, former Secretary of Defense Bill Perry, former Secretary of State George Shultz, former Senators Sam Nunn and Bill Frist (who, it should be noted, is a surgeon), former Navy Admiral Gary Roughead, former Marine Corps General James Mattis, and former CEOs Dick Kovacevich of Wells Fargo and Riley Bechtel of Bechtel.

Her dad was at USAID and had access to those old fogies. But a legit tech startup should have had more people from the biotech world on its board. Quite the failure of corporate governance.

yes. early on she approached some legit biotech investors and were blown off immediately. i am ready to hate on SV bros as much as the next person, however, this was not typical SV bullshit. it was all possible because of these powerful but close to demented figures. i think grandson of one of those who actually brought the company down, and his own grandfather basically disowned him. like, he literally sided with holmes, even when the fraud exposed.

He sided with Holmes because he invested his fortune. He was already out (potential) billions according to the pre-IPO Theranos was circulating. Now its his millions on the line with the company going into liquidity instead of just losing an IPO.

[Anonymous]

Love the npr podcast series on her: “The Dropout”

[Anonymous]

Is this broad in prison yet? How can she not have gone to jail for basically defrauding a ton of investors and customers?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is this broad in prison yet? How can she not have gone to jail for basically defrauding a ton of investors and customers?

Nope. She’s out. And since 2018 she’s gotten married and also just had a baby.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Bumping this up.

Is anyone else following this story? Her trial begins next month. Her baby was due this month. I’m watching it all closely but no one else seems to be. Let’s discuss!!

Baby????

I totally missed this. Last I had ever heard was I think when her lawyers were thinking of arguing mental state or something.

Time to google!

[Anonymous]

I'm a research biologist who so wanted her technology to work, it could have revolutionized medical care and jump-started so much research.

I told my husband one day, who has a lot more experience with clinical research than I do - he took one look at the original New Yorker article that explained her start-up in detail, snorted his coffee out of his nose, and told me there was no way in hell it would ever work.

I got so mad. We had an argument about it.

And now look who's right. Grr. I hate it when he's right

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm a research biologist who so wanted her technology to work, it could have revolutionized medical care and jump-started so much research.

I told my husband one day, who has a lot more experience with clinical research than I do - he took one look at the original New Yorker article that explained her start-up in detail, snorted his coffee out of his nose, and told me there was no way in hell it would ever work.

I got so mad. We had an argument about it.

And now look who's right. Grr. I hate it when he's right

Ask him why so many people were fooled - including the actual scientists she had working for her company. Or did they just not care?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm a research biologist who so wanted her technology to work, it could have revolutionized medical care and jump-started so much research.

I told my husband one day, who has a lot more experience with clinical research than I do - he took one look at the original New Yorker article that explained her start-up in detail, snorted his coffee out of his nose, and told me there was no way in hell it would ever work.

I got so mad. We had an argument about it.

And now look who's right. Grr. I hate it when he's right

My ED pediatrician husband, who is fairly experienced in research but in the public health field, read some puff piece and was like “this isn’t my field, but this literally doesn’t make sense; either this article is describing the mechanism totally incorrectly (and he couldn’t think of anything adjacent that was plausible) or this is all a crock of sh*t”… I (a lawyer with not experience in medicine at all) told him he was being ridiculous; like, I could believe the article didn’t describe it well, but it obviously could’nt be medical fiction given where they were in the process. Ha!

[Anonymous]

How did my phone auto correct couldnt to could’nt?? Another truly wtf moment.

[Anonymous]

Good. Tired of female privilege.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a research biologist who so wanted her technology to work, it could have revolutionized medical care and jump-started so much research.

I told my husband one day, who has a lot more experience with clinical research than I do - he took one look at the original New Yorker article that explained her start-up in detail, snorted his coffee out of his nose, and told me there was no way in hell it would ever work.

I got so mad. We had an argument about it.

And now look who's right. Grr. I hate it when he's right

Ask him why so many people were fooled - including the actual scientists she had working for her company. Or did they just not care?

She had people working for her who said it wouldn't work. But you couldn't tell her anything because she knew more than the experts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Good. Tired of female privilege.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a research biologist who so wanted her technology to work, it could have revolutionized medical care and jump-started so much research.

I told my husband one day, who has a lot more experience with clinical research than I do - he took one look at the original New Yorker article that explained her start-up in detail, snorted his coffee out of his nose, and told me there was no way in hell it would ever work.

I got so mad. We had an argument about it.

And now look who's right. Grr. I hate it when he's right

My ED pediatrician husband, who is fairly experienced in research but in the public health field, read some puff piece and was like “this isn’t my field, but this literally doesn’t make sense; either this article is describing the mechanism totally incorrectly (and he couldn’t think of anything adjacent that was plausible) or this is all a crock of sh*t”… I (a lawyer with not experience in medicine at all) told him he was being ridiculous; like, I could believe the article didn’t describe it well, but it obviously could’nt be medical fiction given where they were in the process. Ha!

Standard error in the extremely tiny samples would need to be overcome to get meaningful results.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Love the npr podcast series on her: “The Dropout”

I loved this too; a really great listen. (It was ABC rather than NPR though.)

Highly recommend The Dropout to anyone interested in the story. I thought it much better than the HBO doc .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a research biologist who so wanted her technology to work, it could have revolutionized medical care and jump-started so much research.

I told my husband one day, who has a lot more experience with clinical research than I do - he took one look at the original New Yorker article that explained her start-up in detail, snorted his coffee out of his nose, and told me there was no way in hell it would ever work.

I got so mad. We had an argument about it.

And now look who's right. Grr. I hate it when he's right

Ask him why so many people were fooled - including the actual scientists she had working for her company. Or did they just not care?

They wanted to get rich.