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

Walgreen Terminates Partnership with Theranos

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 153 posts

Re: Walgreen Terminates Partnership with Theranos

#81

Post by _audakel »

dingo_bat wrote: post #51
_audakel wrote: post #25

1 - Theranos should have been more transparent, but what startup doesn't stretch the truth or even leave out data on occasion? It is a fine line between lying and hustling. Startups can often talk about something that doesn't exist yet like it does because they can move fast enough to build it. 2 - I worked at a medical startup in Palo Alto and I can attest that it is incredibly hard complying with all the FDA rules.…

There is a fundamental difference between snapchat and medical tests. You cannot approach one as you approach the other. I have worked for a medical software company and the atmosphere is completely different from the usual move-fast-break-things culture at other places. You digitally sign for every line of code you write or review, every test you write, every test you say is working. If a single bug is found in your…

Beign at either extreme, moving too fast or moving too slow, is problematic. A related field to medical is the Space + Rocket industry. Heavily regulated and if you make a mistake people die.

For much of the lifetime of the industry, NASA was the best there was. They embraced a "zero bug" mentality (http://www.jamesshore.com/Agile-Book/no_bugs.html). It resulted in very slow and costly development and we accepted that as the way things where, ie very expensive and little progress.

SpaceX came in with a move fast and break things mentality. They did not approach this in the way that had always been done (move slow and make no mistakes). They have greatly reduced cost and increased capability to a level that arguably would never have been reached by NASA, all without loss of life.

We don't need to test or develop medical in a haphazard way, but do have to accept that the way things work currently will not result many advancements (at least not rapid advancements). FDA regulations are fine until you realize that you have a currently incurable medial condition, and wonder if medical innovation was easier if you would have a cure.

Is the regulation to ease fear of a potential death/injury worth the many real deaths of people who we do not have treatments for?

Re: Walgreen Terminates Partnership with Theranos

#82

Post by eli »

pekk wrote: post #61
Yhippa wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you mean by pad the reviews? Coerce employees into giving mostly favorable ones?

I won't name names, but one thing I've personally seen is HR initiatives encouraging employees to write reviews, not necessarily coercively. If well-known companies are doing that, it's not unlikely that some companies are directly instructing HR personnel to write favorable reviews.

What's wrong with encouraging employees to post reviews? When you sign up as an employer, glasdoor gives you a sample email to send that asks for honest reviews.

Re: Walgreen Terminates Partnership with Theranos

#83

Post by miander »

eli wrote: post #82
pekk wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I won't name names, but one thing I've personally seen is HR initiatives encouraging employees to write reviews, not necessarily coercively. If well-known companies are doing that, it's not unlikely that some companies are directly instructing HR personnel to write favorable reviews.

What's wrong with encouraging employees to post reviews? When you sign up as an employer, glasdoor gives you a sample email to send that asks for honest reviews.

Because it creates an implicit expectation that your review should be positive.

Re: Walgreen Terminates Partnership with Theranos

#84

Post by iamdave »

miander wrote: post #83
eli wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's wrong with encouraging employees to post reviews? When you sign up as an employer, glasdoor gives you a sample email to send that asks for honest reviews.

Because it creates an implicit expectation that your review should be positive .

Yeah, I'm kind of torn on this. I was asked at a previous company to write a review on GlassDoor (I never did).

Let me rephrase that last sentence: GlassDoor was brought up literally at every monthly update meeting.

But back on target, I'm torn: On the one hand I understand the need to actively recruit and attract talent to join your workforce and I definitely understand GlassDoor is something used by many people to benchmark their expectations on working environment, management and peers. I get that completely.

Where I break off though is when you have to ask your employees to write a review (even if you're adding the qualifier "Be honest, we wont penalize you") instead of creating an internal feedback environment that can go into recruitment, retention and employee/manager review platforms.

I would say there's already a power imbalance inherent to the workplace, especially if you're in one of those "at-will" states. So putting in front of your employees "Hey, can you go write a review of working here on this site?" understandably makes some people shift in their seats.

Re: Walgreen Terminates Partnership with Theranos

#85

Post by eli »

miander wrote: post #83
eli wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's wrong with encouraging employees to post reviews? When you sign up as an employer, glasdoor gives you a sample email to send that asks for honest reviews.

Because it creates an implicit expectation that your review should be positive .

I don't really see how. If I'm unhappy, I'm not going to lie just because I want to anonymously live up to an unspoken expectation.

Unless you think people fear being ID'd... but that's a problem with the whole model.

Anyway, I'd imagine many glassdoor reviews were generated this way. If employers didn't ask, it would be mostly bad reviews from ex employees. Few others would bother.

Re: Walgreen Terminates Partnership with Theranos

#86

Post by pcrh »

dbcooper wrote: post #72
PhasmaFelis wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> #5: Merck: veterinary medicine, PhD I'm really curious what sort of path takes someone from training to be a vet to heading up a global pharmaceuticals company.

Animal models of disease are very important for drug development.

If anything, veterinary medicine is more often more scientific that human clinical medicine due to the greater ease with which experimental approaches can be performed on animals compared to humans.

Re: Walgreen Terminates Partnership with Theranos

#88

Post by kqr2 »

Official statement from Theranos:

https://theranos.com/news/posts/statement-from-theranos-7

  Quality and safety are our top priorities and we are 
  working closely with government officials to ensure that 
  we not only comply with all federal regulations but 
  exceed them. We are disappointed that Walgreens has 
  chosen to terminate our relationship and remain fully 
  committed to our mission to provide patients access to 
  affordable health information and look forward to 
  continuing to serve customers in Arizona and California 
  through our independent retail locations.

Re: Walgreen Terminates Partnership with Theranos

#89

Post by dang »

dingo_bat wrote: post #48
dang wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're not going to find many defenders of Theranos at this point, but that doesn't mean this isn't a bad comment to post to HN. We ask users here to post reflective comments, not ones that try to maximize fury—no matter how right you are or how angry you feel. The fact that you end your comment with a cheap slur about "more civilized countries" is indicative.

I think mucking up blood tests that almost certainly lead to misdiagnoses should stir up some fury.

Stirring up some is not the same as optimizing for.

Re: Walgreen Terminates Partnership with Theranos

#90

Post by chris11 »

PhasmaFelis wrote: post #50
tlb wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the other hand, out of the top 5 pharma companies, only 3/5 CEOs have science degrees: (Edit: was 1, wasn't counting medical degrees before) #1: Novartis: Economics, MBA #2: Pfizer: BS chemical engineering, chartered accountancy #3: Roche: economics, law #4: Sanofi: MD #5: Merck: veterinary medicine, PhD So a person who didn't know any better might not assume a science degree was necessary.

> #5: Merck: veterinary medicine, PhD I'm really curious what sort of path takes someone from training to be a vet to heading up a global pharmaceuticals company.

I'd say a PhD from vet school is just as relevant as a PhD in med school. You are dealing with the same problems, just with a much wider patient type.
Post reply on HN