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

91–100 of 153 posts

Re: Walgreen Terminates Partnership with Theranos

#91

Post by dang »

niels_olson wrote: post #38
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.

Dang, I appreciate where you're coming from, and understand your sentiment. However, as a pathologist, and having sworn to defend the US Constitution for over 20 years, and having visited a number of the countries he mentioned, I'm inclined to not disagree with the poster. And I am inclined to suggest that killing people for profit is the best single basis for righteous fury.

Inflaming indignation like that isn't righteous. It's a mob behavior, not much different whether the target is guilty or innocent. It's just more socially acceptable when the target is (or is seen as) guilty.

Group rage is good for bonding a community—as Phil Ochs once put it, "the family that slays together stays together"—but that's not the kind of community we want HN to be. Indeed, how we react to situations where someone is (or is seen as) obviously guilty is a good measure of how well we're holding to that standard.

I realize the above may sound counterintuitive, but consider that the comments we get are the best predictor of what we'll get more of. Do we want more of those? The dynamic they lead to is people one-upping each other with fiery denunciations and getting ever more reflexive. We can't have both that and reflective discourse, and we want reflective discourse, including about bad things.

Re: Walgreen Terminates Partnership with Theranos

#92

Post by pyrophane »

beilabs wrote: post #68

Has there been any confirmed cases where someone has died as a result of a faulty Theranos test during this period? Surely that would be the final nail in the coffin of such a mismanaged enterprise...

No. If that were to happen then I imagine that the discussion would shift to which Theranos executives will be going to prison.

Re: Walgreen Terminates Partnership with Theranos

#93

Post by ehudla »

bane wrote: post #16

Walgreens managers also grew increasingly frustrated in recent weeks with Theranos as they sought information about the extent of test reports it had corrected or voided. This seems to be a common thread in the stories I've read about Theranos, an almost pathological inability to provide basic information upon request. I can only guess that Holmes' notion of open and transparent communication is defined very differen…

> I wonder who inside the company is responsible for writing all of these? Holmes herself?

Hey - someone can do some NLP work to estimate number of authors, right?

Re: Walgreen Terminates Partnership with Theranos

#94

Post by cwilkes »

tlb wrote: post #30
grizzles wrote: post #6

It's shocking to find out that a science education is actually pretty useful for leading a science company. DFJ and the other investors should be getting way more of the blame for not doing proper due diligence on Theranos. It's kind of amazing in a way that the company is still a going concern. There is going to be no salvaging this company, because it has nothing of value. What a shmozzle.

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.

What does running a company have to do with science? I'm being serious here. It's not like the Ceo of a company is going to personally check on lab results.

Re: Walgreen Terminates Partnership with Theranos

#95

Post by CaptainZapp »

_audakel wrote: post #81
dingo_bat wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 t…

  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.
Well, they haven't attempted manned space flight yet, have they?

Re: Walgreen Terminates Partnership with Theranos

#96

Post by lordnacho »

cwilkes wrote: post #94
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.

What does running a company have to do with science? I'm being serious here. It's not like the Ceo of a company is going to personally check on lab results.

The CEO needs to have an idea of what conditions are for workers. If I change the work-at-home policy, will we still be able to get work done, while attracting the right people? If someone comes up with a suggestion like "let's make such-and-such a molecule, it will cure the common cold", the boss needs to know what questions to ask. It's about have a prior that's better informed than a non-science person would have.

Lately there's been a trend towards thinking that management is somehow separate from doing things. It's a somewhat anglo-saxon thing, you'll find it less in the Germanic world.

Re: Walgreen Terminates Partnership with Theranos

#97

Post by lordnacho »

Are the tests just completely worthless? I thought the FDA or such would mandate a battery of studies to determine whether the tests were accurate before letting someone sell them.

The fact that a major chain was selling them also seemed to indicate to me that there was something real in Theranos. Probably a lot of people think the same way, and are disappointed.

Re: Walgreen Terminates Partnership with Theranos

#98

Post by grizzles »

cwilkes wrote: post #94
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.

What does running a company have to do with science? I'm being serious here. It's not like the Ceo of a company is going to personally check on lab results.

Because it was a science startup company. The underlying proprietary technology that the entire company is supposed to be based on is a fraud.

It doesn't matter if their tech may one day only require a microlitre of blood to do a blood test. It doesn't work today. They were trading in the market as if it did. That can't be handwaved away. That fact isn't under dispute. That's according to several of Theranos's own current and former employees.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Scientists know this. The fact that Theranos's board lost all it's scientific leadership in July 2013 has been widely cited as a major contributing factor to this debacle. The judgement to not make those false claims is what running the company has to do with science.

Re: Walgreen Terminates Partnership with Theranos

#100

Post by oneloop »

adw wrote: post #55
tuna-piano wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many of us could name the current or former Walgreens CEO? I've seen a certain mentality in people, including managers in the more "boring" companies in our economy. Silicon Valey companies are glamorous. There's a certain star mentality about it. Silicon Valley is in the news, the founders are rock stars. I think the management of "boring" companies is as star struck as the rest of us are. They shouldn't be- the…

Stefano Pessina. One of the most impressive European entrepreneurs. And he's CEO because the pre-existing management, who got them into this mess, were terrible .

Out of interest, what is it that you do in your life that you're informed about such unusual knowledge?
Post reply on HN