Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NPR’s reporting on her today was insane. They introduced the piece with something like “She aimed to revolutionize health care.” She did no such thing. The product was a fraud from the first day to the last. She aimed to bilk investors and purchasers. The end.

And she caused "regular people" real harm. It was not just her VC rich guy investors that she defrauded. She defrauded the public. She deployed the device in pharmacies! She had a deal with Walgreens. And it was ALL PRETEND!! The device never worked. Real people went to a pharmacy to get blood work, they were given faulty results. How many people do you think spent loads of money to get the correct results? People could have died with mis-diagnosis. And she KNEW it fake. That's the entire point.

People seem to think she just did some money crimes. It was way beyond that and absolutely horrific. She buried anyone who tried to blow the whistle. A reasearcher on her staff killed himself from the pressure. She ruined lives. She deserves prison.

She was drawing blood and using existing machine by other companies to do the analysis. It was just a con.

But weren't they diluting the samples in order to run it through the machines, and basically rendering the samples invalid, thus the faulty results.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really don't understand prison for non violent crimes like fraud, etc. These people don't need to be out of society for the sake of public safety. They need to make restitution. There are so many mandatory public service type sentences that would benefit society and benefit the person, too. This does nothing but ruin her family's life, too. These children have no mother, now. Her parents are devastated. Yes, I believe she had kids because she wouldn't have ɓeen able to later, not to sway the sentence.
I don't need my tax dollars going to this. Let her and so many others non violent offenders do real time in society. Limit their travel, how much they can spend, where they can live, how they live, etc., like so many people on Section 8, SNAP benefits, Medicaid. Let them help in homeless shelters, etc., Make them pay restitution with timeoutside, not serve it in a cell which accomplishes nothing.

I wish I had a say in sentencing all those college pay off parents. I think there were better ideas for them, too. Some people need to see how others live.

I really do feel for this woman. She effed up big time, deserves a sentence, deserves to pay off investors, but what will this accomplish?

So you're saying that the more successful frauds who make hundreds of millions or billions of dolllars don't need to have any punishment other than to pay back a portion of the proceeds of their fraud. And then they can go merrily about their lives. That's ridiculous. Crimes require punishment and penalties should be deterrents to at least attempt to discourage others in the future from copycatting the crimes. If there were crimes where the criminals did not actually receive punishment, just a financial slap on the wrist that reduced them from billionaires to millionaires, you'd have many many copycats who would love to gamble on going from nothing to a millionaire by just cheating big and losing a portion of their earnings.

Ok grandma

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really don't understand prison for non violent crimes like fraud, etc. These people don't need to be out of society for the sake of public safety. They need to make restitution. There are so many mandatory public service type sentences that would benefit society and benefit the person, too. This does nothing but ruin her family's life, too. These children have no mother, now. Her parents are devastated. Yes, I believe she had kids because she wouldn't have ɓeen able to later, not to sway the sentence.
I don't need my tax dollars going to this. Let her and so many others non violent offenders do real time in society. Limit their travel, how much they can spend, where they can live, how they live, etc., like so many people on Section 8, SNAP benefits, Medicaid. Let them help in homeless shelters, etc., Make them pay restitution with timeoutside, not serve it in a cell which accomplishes nothing.

I wish I had a say in sentencing all those college pay off parents. I think there were better ideas for them, too. Some people need to see how others live.

I really do feel for this woman. She effed up big time, deserves a sentence, deserves to pay off investors, but what will this accomplish?

So you're saying that the more successful frauds who make hundreds of millions or billions of dolllars don't need to have any punishment other than to pay back a portion of the proceeds of their fraud. And then they can go merrily about their lives. That's ridiculous. Crimes require punishment and penalties should be deterrents to at least attempt to discourage others in the future from copycatting the crimes. If there were crimes where the criminals did not actually receive punishment, just a financial slap on the wrist that reduced them from billionaires to millionaires, you'd have many many copycats who would love to gamble on going from nothing to a millionaire by just cheating big and losing a portion of their earnings.

Ok grandma

Anonymous wrote:I really don't understand prison for non violent crimes like fraud, etc. These people don't need to be out of society for the sake of public safety. They need to make restitution. There are so many mandatory public service type sentences that would benefit society and benefit the person, too. This does nothing but ruin her family's life, too. These children have no mother, now. Her parents are devastated. Yes, I believe she had kids because she wouldn't have ɓeen able to later, not to sway the sentence.
I don't need my tax dollars going to this. Let her and so many others non violent offenders do real time in society. Limit their travel, how much they can spend, where they can live, how they live, etc., like so many people on Section 8, SNAP benefits, Medicaid. Let them help in homeless shelters, etc., Make them pay restitution with timeoutside, not serve it in a cell which accomplishes nothing.

I wish I had a say in sentencing all those college pay off parents. I think there were better ideas for them, too. Some people need to see how others live.

I really do feel for this woman. She effed up big time, deserves a sentence, deserves to pay off investors, but what will this accomplish?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NPR’s reporting on her today was insane. They introduced the piece with something like “She aimed to revolutionize health care.” She did no such thing. The product was a fraud from the first day to the last. She aimed to bilk investors and purchasers. The end.

And she caused "regular people" real harm. It was not just her VC rich guy investors that she defrauded. She defrauded the public. She deployed the device in pharmacies! She had a deal with Walgreens. And it was ALL PRETEND!! The device never worked. Real people went to a pharmacy to get blood work, they were given faulty results. How many people do you think spent loads of money to get the correct results? People could have died with mis-diagnosis. And she KNEW it fake. That's the entire point.

People seem to think she just did some money crimes. It was way beyond that and absolutely horrific. She buried anyone who tried to blow the whistle. A reasearcher on her staff killed himself from the pressure. She ruined lives. She deserves prison.

She was drawing blood and using existing machine by other companies to do the analysis. It was just a con.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ironic thing is, I’m pretty sure that what she was trying to do with the blood tests will actually come to pass in the next 10-15 years. The technology wasn’t there yet but it will be.

No. This is not true. It’s a physical limit thing. The small amount of blood drawn by Holmes(a finger pick) is not large enough to actually capture what is in the blood. She was just making things up.

There are already arrays that look for multiple different genetic anomalies from single sample for cancer patients. I m guessing that with time the technical limits that currently have technicians running so many basic tests different machines under different conditions will be reducible to arrays on much smaller surfaces, or test results that can be extrapolated from much smaller starting samples.

I guarantee you a man will patent the technology, run with it, and make billions. The idea is valid. The technology just needs to get there. She said herself that she just needed be more patient for the technology to catch up and that that was her error.

"Theranos that works". Can't believe he said that.

https://stanforddaily.com/2023/01/20/stanford-researchers-theranos-that-works/

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ironic thing is, I’m pretty sure that what she was trying to do with the blood tests will actually come to pass in the next 10-15 years. The technology wasn’t there yet but it will be.

No. This is not true. It’s a physical limit thing. The small amount of blood drawn by Holmes(a finger pick) is not large enough to actually capture what is in the blood. She was just making things up.

There are already arrays that look for multiple different genetic anomalies from single sample for cancer patients. I m guessing that with time the technical limits that currently have technicians running so many basic tests different machines under different conditions will be reducible to arrays on much smaller surfaces, or test results that can be extrapolated from much smaller starting samples.

I guarantee you a man will patent the technology, run with it, and make billions. The idea is valid. The technology just needs to get there. She said herself that she just needed be more patient for the technology to catch up and that that was her error.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ironic thing is, I’m pretty sure that what she was trying to do with the blood tests will actually come to pass in the next 10-15 years. The technology wasn’t there yet but it will be.

No. This is not true. It’s a physical limit thing. The small amount of blood drawn by Holmes(a finger pick) is not large enough to actually capture what is in the blood. She was just making things up.

There are already arrays that look for multiple different genetic anomalies from single sample for cancer patients. I m guessing that with time the technical limits that currently have technicians running so many basic tests different machines under different conditions will be reducible to arrays on much smaller surfaces, or test results that can be extrapolated from much smaller starting samples.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The ironic thing is, I’m pretty sure that what she was trying to do with the blood tests will actually come to pass in the next 10-15 years. The technology wasn’t there yet but it will be.

No. This is not true. It’s a physical limit thing. The small amount of blood drawn by Holmes(a finger pick) is not large enough to actually capture what is in the blood. She was just making things up.

Anonymous wrote:I've been thinking about this lately. I believe EH 100% deserves the sentence she received, but I still feel a great deal of compassion for her (or any woman) leaving for a long prison term with 2 small children.

Anonymous wrote:The ironic thing is, I’m pretty sure that what she was trying to do with the blood tests will actually come to pass in the next 10-15 years. The technology wasn’t there yet but it will be.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't think she'll really be in prison for the entire 11 years. I can't imagine her husband waiting for her.

The article I read said that federal law requires her to serve 85% of her term. So unless she wins an appeal or a new trial, she's going to be there quite a while.

She could also be pardoned (which my husband thinks I’m crazy for considering, even though I wouldn’t support it).