Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

At Theranos, Many Strategies and Snags

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 134 posts

Re: At Theranos, Many Strategies and Snags

#81

Post by chetanahuja »

isolate wrote: post #66
chetanahuja wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like he dropped out of a graduate degree from Stanford. If his undergrad degree from UT Austin he might have a plausible fig leaf to go around calling himself "a computer scientist". Though I certainly wouldn't call somebody who with just an undergraduate degree a "scientist" in any field unless they've proven themselves by practicing such science in a credible manner for a reasonable period of time.

I prefer an operational definition: a scientist is somebody who does research using the scientific method. But then again, this eliminates a bunch of CS people, since they're mostly doing math and engineering.

Me too. Hence the "practicing such science" part in my comment. University degrees such as Master of Science/Doctor of Philosophy etc. are meant to provide validation from universities that the holder of such degrees has had some training in the discipline but it's by no means a requirement to be a scientist (Leonardo da Vinci certainly didn't have a PhD).

Re: At Theranos, Many Strategies and Snags

#82

Post by tomasien »

tristanj wrote: post #2

> In April 2014, she got a long email from another employee. The employee alleged that Theranos had cherry-picked data when comparing Edison machines to traditional lab machines to make the Edison look more accurate, according to a copy of the email. > For one test, the device’s accuracy rate increased sharply after some information was deleted and manipulated, the employee wrote. Edison machines also allegedly faile…

Just FYI for anyone clicking this link, this is a link that sets it to show the worst reviews on Glassdoor, not a random sampling. I wasn't that familiar with GD beforehand it and confused me.

Re: At Theranos, Many Strategies and Snags

#83

Post by [deleted] »

tristanj wrote: post #2

> In April 2014, she got a long email from another employee. The employee alleged that Theranos had cherry-picked data when comparing Edison machines to traditional lab machines to make the Edison look more accurate, according to a copy of the email. > For one test, the device’s accuracy rate increased sharply after some information was deleted and manipulated, the employee wrote. Edison machines also allegedly faile…

[deleted]

Re: At Theranos, Many Strategies and Snags

#84

Post by pdonis »

beagle3 wrote: post #75
ThomPete wrote: post #7

No matter how this story ends (whether they eventually ends up with having a fully functioning product or not) this should be a cautionary tale to anyone wanting to actually change the world in healthcare. Science speaks for itself and does not care how much you raised at what valuation. It requires a rigorous approach to testings and facts and data or it will be merciless if you aren't living up to your own claims.…

It is a common, romantic view of how science works - but it is only compatible with reality on a 30-50 year timescale, and probably only because of survivor bias. The science of Dan Shchetman, J. Robin Warren, Barbara McClintock and many others spoke for itself, and for a long time "science" essentially didn't listen. I put "science" in quotes because "science" doesn't speak or listen - scientists do - and the scient…

I agree that good science often doesn't get recognized because it happens to rub some established scientists the wrong way.

However, the issue with Theranos is the opposite: it is getting recognized, even though we don't know whether it's good science or not, because there isn't any visibility into what they do and how they do it. The scientists you mention all published their work for the world to see; they didn't hide behind "trade secrets".

> The belief that modern healthcare is nothing but the application of science is also romantic and misguided.

I agree with this too; but again I don't see how it applies to Theranos, because they are explicitly claming that what they are doing is science. So they should be judged by scientific standards, even if the rest of the health care industry can't live up to those standards.

Re: At Theranos, Many Strategies and Snags

#85

Post by pdonis »

randycupertino wrote: post #78
GabrielF00 wrote: post #36

Does the composition of Theranos' board strike anyone else as very weird? It seems much more like the board of a foreign policy think thank than a biotech start up. There are three former cabinet secretaries (state and defense), two former very senior military officers, two former senators (one regarded as a foreign policy expert), a bigshot DC lawyer, and the former CEOs of Bechtel and Wells Fargo. The only physicia…

I think they wanted a bunch of Washington power players because their real money grab was pushing regulation changes so that patients could go and do their blood tests themselves, without a doctor's order. Surprisingly, they were actually successful in getting this passed in 1 state already- Arizona. If they were able to push that through it would be a HUGE gamechanging cash cow, because people could either self pay…

> Physicians groups, insurance companies and biomedical ethics groups aren't really hip to this idea because patient self-testing bloodwork may open pandoras box to a lot of unnecessary expenses, especially if the patient is trying to bill this through their insurance.

Yes, and this concern is justified. If I have to pay for your lab tests, I'm not going to let you just decide to run whatever tests you want. That would be foolish.

The solution to this is to allow people to order their own tests if they pay for them themselves. A company like Theranos could then profit by making tests cheap enough for ordinary people to afford them, which would bring much-needed competition to the health care testing industry. But first they need to be able to show everyone, by ironclad evidence, that their tests are reliable.

Re: At Theranos, Many Strategies and Snags

#87

Post by bane »

tristanj wrote: post #2

> In April 2014, she got a long email from another employee. The employee alleged that Theranos had cherry-picked data when comparing Edison machines to traditional lab machines to make the Edison look more accurate, according to a copy of the email. > For one test, the device’s accuracy rate increased sharply after some information was deleted and manipulated, the employee wrote. Edison machines also allegedly faile…

Here's some fascinating things I came across above and beyond lousy management kvetching and nepotism complaints:

- complaints about poor pay, minimal benefits, no options, no 401(k) matching, no wellness benefits, no gym

- not allowed to post Theranos on your linkedin profile...that's crazy goobers

- lots of acknowledgement by reviewers that many of the reviews of Theranos are fake, including a couple that say there's regular pressure to post fake positive reviews on the site. Reading the positive reviews that sound like press releases, I can believe Holmes probably wrote them herself.

- long work hours, minimal work from home, regular weekend work

- incredibly high turn-over rate (no surprise)

- complaints about lack of domain knowledge up through the management chain, from product development to medicine

- very heavy involvement by the COO in everyday employee's work, complaints about the COO's temper and lack of domain knowledge (he, Ramesh "Sunny" Balwani appears to be Stanford CS dropout who went on to get an undergrad and MBA elsewhere)

- descriptions of the assay preparation not being particularly unique...which feeds my previous notion that they're main innovation is subsidizing blood tests with VC money to drive the price down

- employees with experience in the regulatory environment are ignored

- no protocol "if you stick yourself with a needle" (written by a current Phlebotomist)

Re: At Theranos, Many Strategies and Snags

#88

Post by mrbonner »

blakeross wrote: post #37

I wrote a parody of Theranos as a TV pilot that is increasingly becoming true: http://www.pricks.com/ (I'm sharing this here because the Hacker News community seemed to enjoy my Season 3 premiere of Silicon Valley [ https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10179894 ], but apologies if others feel it detracts from the discussion.)

Hey. Are you the original dev for firefox?

Re: At Theranos, Many Strategies and Snags

#89

Post by danso »

mrbonner wrote: post #88
blakeross wrote: post #37

I wrote a parody of Theranos as a TV pilot that is increasingly becoming true: http://www.pricks.com/ (I'm sharing this here because the Hacker News community seemed to enjoy my Season 3 premiere of Silicon Valley [ https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10179894 ], but apologies if others feel it detracts from the discussion.)

Hey. Are you the original dev for firefox?

Via the about page: http://www.pricks.com/about

> Blake "Blade" Ross has been working in tech since he began programming for Netscape at 14. When he was 17, he left Netscape to start the Firefox web browser with some colleagues. After Firefox, Blake attended Stanford for a year and then went on leave to build a new company. In 2007, Facebook purchased that company as its first ever acquisition. Blake spent 6 years as a Director of Product at Facebook. He has been featured a number of times for his work in tech, including on the cover of Wired and Spectrum magazines, and in the 2013 Forbes 30 under 30 list.

Like Holmes, Ross also ditched Stanford after a year to start a company :)

Re: At Theranos, Many Strategies and Snags

#90

Post by eli »

randycupertino wrote: post #58
in_cahoots wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not a lie but it's not necessarily the whole truth. Companies can't alter reviews, but Glassdoor definitely can and does. We just don't know what criteria they use.

Glassdoor seems like it has the same business model as yelp- "Buy our advertising and we will make your good rankings rank higher and your worse reviews be filtered or lower." Maybe not outright extortion but certainly not what they claim of being a truly independent forum.

That allegation against yelp has never been proven. I'd be surprised if either yelp or glass door is outright deleting reviews for money.
Post reply on HN