U.S. Files Criminal Charges Against Theranos’s Elizabeth Holmes, Ramesh Balwani • Hacker News Board

Re: U.S. Files Criminal Charges Against Theranos’s Elizabeth Holmes, Ramesh Balwani

#221

Post by bookofjoe » Sat, Jun 16, 2018, 12:02 AM UTC

gamblor956 wrote: post #10

maxxxxx wrote: post #6

Does anybody know if Theranos got started with at least an idea how to accomplish what they wanted to do? From what I have heard in interviews they started with the thought "Doing xxx would be super useful" but didn't have an approach for accomplishing this but instead took in money and tried to figure it out. It's like me saying "An antimatter drive would revolutionize space exploration" and starting to collect mone…

They had a good idea of what they wanted to do (blood tests using very thin needles) but never successfully figured out how to accomplish that with the level of accuracy required. Most Medical professionals believe that what they wanted to do was simply impossible from a biological perspective due to the natural variations of blood content. It would have been like trying to determine traffic on a freeway by taking a…

Well stated. I'm a retired neurosurgical anesthesiologist who relied on accurate blood test results to manage major intracranial procedures. No way would I accept a finger-stick hemoglobin/hematocrit as the basis on which to decide on the need for blood transfusion. Why? Because as a medical intern I did them routinely, because I had to get a number to present at morning rounds and even our excellent STAT Lab (LAC-USC Medical Center in Los Angeles) sometimes couldn't turn around a properly drawn venous sample in time. Because it was often difficult to get sufficient blood volume from a finger-stick to fill even the tiny glass capillary tubes we used to "spin a 'crit" in a centrifuge, I would occasionally squeeze a patient's fingertip to enhance blood flow. Those results were sometimes wildly at variance with later venous samples from the same patient. Why? Because they were diluted with interstitial fluid along with capillary blood, the result of my manual pressure on the fingertip.

Re: U.S. Files Criminal Charges Against Theranos’s Elizabeth Holmes, Ramesh Balwani

#222

Post by anoncoward111 » Sat, Jun 16, 2018, 12:06 AM UTC

asdsa5325 wrote: post #220

anoncoward111 wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because many people smoke weed, but only some are jailed for it. THAT'S why whataboutism is important. Enforcement bias.

Because not everyone who smokes is caught, and some plead guilty to get an easy sentence, laws differ based on location, and case circumstance is not always the same? This is how the system works.

"The system" is logical and ethical, in your opinion? I'm trying to call into question here if "a crime" on paper is a crime worth enforcing.

When the black man in New Orleans is thrown in jail for smoking weed, but the black/white/asian male in Iowa goes unprosecuted, how much of a crime is the crime really?

You either need 100% prosecution or 0%. Murder is murder, fraud is fraud, isn't it?

Re: U.S. Files Criminal Charges Against Theranos’s Elizabeth Holmes, Ramesh Balwani

#223

Post by bookofjoe » Sat, Jun 16, 2018, 12:06 AM UTC

pmattos wrote: post #119

maxxxxx wrote: post #6

Does anybody know if Theranos got started with at least an idea how to accomplish what they wanted to do? From what I have heard in interviews they started with the thought "Doing xxx would be super useful" but didn't have an approach for accomplishing this but instead took in money and tried to figure it out. It's like me saying "An antimatter drive would revolutionize space exploration" and starting to collect mone…

For anyone wanting to dig deeper into this the recently released Bad Blood book is pretty awesome. The author, the WSJ jornalist above who early on raised serious doubts about Theranos, reconstructs the startup history in a thriller-ish style, but fully based on actual facts/research. Highly recommended.

The upcoming movie starring Jennifer Lawrence as Holmes should be a blockbuster.

Re: U.S. Files Criminal Charges Against Theranos’s Elizabeth Holmes, Ramesh Balwani

#224

Post by rgbrenner » Sat, Jun 16, 2018, 12:09 AM UTC

icebraining wrote: post #83

sveme wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting. Skinming through the comments, very little criticism, everyone in awe. Only way down there is someone stating how hard it is to get regulatory approval. I guess that‘s HN still in full fanboy mode, before all those startups started to display their dark sides.

I don't see any fanboyism; I see interest, and surprise at the composition of the board. A bit down, I see strong criticism by medman77, who hasn't been downvoted.

medman77, who hasn't been downvoted.

We don't know that. You can only downvote comments for a day(?).. but you can upvote forever. Considering it's been 5 years, and people keep linking to his comment... it's hard to say if he gained those points that day or years later after theranos was found to be a fraud.

Re: U.S. Files Criminal Charges Against Theranos’s Elizabeth Holmes, Ramesh Balwani

#225

Post by grigjd3 » Sat, Jun 16, 2018, 12:14 AM UTC

gwicks56 wrote: post #215

icelancer wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> The short answer is her Jobs-like "reality distortion field" -- she was exceedingly good at convincing non-scientists that their science worked. This confuses a lot of people (not saying you are one of them), but this is really common in intelligent non-experts. People vastly overestimate how intelligent they are when they place value on their intelligence; in other words, they like thinking they are smart. When t…

That's why, when you read the memoirs of conmen, they always say educated, intelligent people are the easiest to rip off.

Funny, the PhD taught me to keep what I say fairly limited. On the other hand, I find generalists will say all kinds of crap that "sounds true" but they have at best a weak theory and a couple of anecdotes.

Re: U.S. Files Criminal Charges Against Theranos’s Elizabeth Holmes, Ramesh Balwani

#226

Post by bdowling » Sat, Jun 16, 2018, 12:15 AM UTC

gwicks56 wrote: post #215

icelancer wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> The short answer is her Jobs-like "reality distortion field" -- she was exceedingly good at convincing non-scientists that their science worked. This confuses a lot of people (not saying you are one of them), but this is really common in intelligent non-experts. People vastly overestimate how intelligent they are when they place value on their intelligence; in other words, they like thinking they are smart. When t…

That's why, when you read the memoirs of conmen, they always say educated, intelligent people are the easiest to rip off.

I don't doubt that that's true, but it's also educated, intelligent people who are more likely to have the kind of money that makes them targets for con men.

Re: U.S. Files Criminal Charges Against Theranos’s Elizabeth Holmes, Ramesh Balwani

#227

Post by icantdrive55 » Sat, Jun 16, 2018, 12:16 AM UTC

weiming wrote: post #145

atombender wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This interview with John Carreyrou [1], the Wall Street Journal journalist who is largely responsible for exposing Theranos, goes into a lot of detail. It's long, so if you want a shorter answer, jump to the question "What technology did Theranos actually develop?": Basically there were three iterations of the technology. The first one used microfluidics, which are basically the repurposing of the micro-fabrication t…

I am assuming they had some of the best people in the field working on these. Makes me wonder how much the employees were aware of the company's situation, and the infeasibility of some of these goals.

I have found that most people go along with the herd when it comes to money, and career.

Those that claim, "Not me!", are usually the last to raise their hand.

I have seen so many people con other people legally, and 1 out of a 100-1000 will even bring up the immoral/unethical behavior.

I walked out of Chiropractic School in the ninties after realizing it's a scam. The Subluxation is exceptionally rare.

I knew, along with my classmates that it was all a big scam, but we were invested.

A New Yorker, and myself were the only ones raising our hands when the instructor would say something rediculious like, "Chiropractic has over 17 different upper cervicsl techniques, and they all work equally well." Yea--Placbo Effect was a bad word.

In all honesty, it took a nervous breakdown to completely see the light.

I knew all along it was a sham, but figured I would be different Chiropractor. I would use the non-force techniques on patients, and refer if anyone didn't respond to my harmless placebo treatments.

In the end, I just walked, but took away something about human nature. Career, and money will cause most of you to look the other way.

Re: U.S. Files Criminal Charges Against Theranos’s Elizabeth Holmes, Ramesh Balwani

#228

Post by tptacek » Sat, Jun 16, 2018, 12:21 AM UTC

mchannon wrote: post #148

wil421 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like you are playing the victim in this situation. Tone is hard to read through text so please forgive me if I misread your factual statements based on your own experience. Both of these people fully deserve what’s coming to them. They lied to investors, they lied again to investors to keep the company afoalt, and above all they seriously jepordized medical results. It’s one thing to challenge status quo or ev…

I am a victim, offering highly pertinent experiences to inform the opinions of the HN crowd. It doesn't matter if my tone offends your sensibilities. I feel like you're playing judge, jury, and executioner. Leave the pitchforks and torches for the judicial system in this country. What if they get found not guilty, or more likely (but still unlikely) the feds quietly drop the case?

You were convicted both of a scheme where you bypassed OfficeMax's limits on the number of printer cartridges any one person could redeem, and for a separate scheme where you claimed the purchases of strangers as your own to cash in on their rebates. A lot of people here might disagree with how much prosecutorial attention was heaped on you, but "victim" is laying it on a bit thick.

The new infographic is a nice touch.

Re: U.S. Files Criminal Charges Against Theranos’s Elizabeth Holmes, Ramesh Balwani

#229

Post by ceejayoz » Sat, Jun 16, 2018, 12:21 AM UTC

teraflop wrote: post #176

comex wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here’s one example. Apparently RIM’s employees collectively thought it was impossible (to achieve the stated battery life); I think they count as experts: > RIM had a complete internal panic when Apple unveiled the iPhone in 2007, a former employee revealed this weekend. The BlackBerry maker is now known to have held multiple all-hands meetings on January 10 that year, a day after the iPhone was on stage, and to have…

The comments summarized in that article seem to no longer be available, but I have a hard time believing the summary is accurate. When the iPhone was released, there were already PDAs on the market with screens the same size or bigger.

PDAs that could run a processor powerful enough for actual desktop-quality Webkit, a cellular radio, etc.?

Re: U.S. Files Criminal Charges Against Theranos’s Elizabeth Holmes, Ramesh Balwani

#230

Post by nsp » Sat, Jun 16, 2018, 12:22 AM UTC

SilasX wrote: post #191

rz2k wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Check out the top comment to April 2015: Scientists skeptical about Theranos blood test (businessinsider.com) : [1] > What stops the skeptics from doing their own tests by walking into a service center and having their blood analyzed for all tests possible and doing the same with their blood for conventional tests? Or an even large scale test? > If their concern is genuine (rather than a way to get a look under the h…

And for everyone one of those I can find about a thousand HN comments telling you to push on even if you're unsure about whether you can deliver. Edit: For that reason, most of this "I told you so" sounds like hindsight bias if it comes from someone who would normally take the attitude of "fake it till you make it", "don't wait until you're sure you have a working product".

Generally that advice is not directed towards people starting medical device companies.