How Theranos Misled Me

#1

Post by apsec112 » Mon, Dec 21, 2015, 2:26 AM UTC

How Theranos Misled Me
fortune.com

Re: How Theranos Misled Me

#2

Post by Animats » Mon, Dec 21, 2015, 4:16 AM UTC

When you read an article like that in Fortune, you know a company is in big trouble.

Re: How Theranos Misled Me

#3

Post by sbisker » Mon, Dec 21, 2015, 4:21 AM UTC

Theranos' reply: http://fortune.com/2015/12/20/letter-to-the-editor-theranos-...

It reads like it was written by a small team of lawyers who have had little sleep - not a good sign. :/

Re: How Theranos Misled Me

#4

Post by bpicolo » Mon, Dec 21, 2015, 4:23 AM UTC

Hard to not have a lot of doubt in much of what Theranos has claimed to accomplish. Far too much shroud of secrecy to seem legitimate. Every article that comes up about it reeks of something not being quite right.

Re: How Theranos Misled Me

#5

Post by Afforess » Mon, Dec 21, 2015, 4:32 AM UTC

bpicolo wrote: post #4

Hard to not have a lot of doubt in much of what Theranos has claimed to accomplish. Far too much shroud of secrecy to seem legitimate. Every article that comes up about it reeks of something not being quite right.

That which flourishes in the night withers in the light of day

I definitely feel that vibe from all the news from Theranos. If their methods were revolutionary, they could show off (and license) their innovations with patents, instead of hiding behind trade secrets.

Re: How Theranos Misled Me

#6

Post by msravi » Mon, Dec 21, 2015, 4:32 AM UTC

Theranos has always been very careful with their words - they make sure that it's not an outright lie, but if not read attentively, can very effictively mask the true meaning.

See this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10397886

But then, I really wouldn't expect a journalist to be taken in by the PR speak. I'd sort of expect that after years of listening to doublespeak like this, a journalist would see right through... But I guess not.

Re: How Theranos Misled Me

#7

Post by tacos » Mon, Dec 21, 2015, 4:33 AM UTC

Reporter Roger Parloff certainly isn't winning any investigative reporting awards here. He seems genuinely confused why Theranos, despite having the ability to use its own technology, might also be using existing technology. One explanation might be that Theranos is collecting blood by industry-standard means so that they could also verify accuracy of their newfangled tests using a subset of that sample.

All parties here, from press to company to investors, seem to be maximally full of shit and in massive cover-your-ass mode.

Re: How Theranos Misled Me

#8

Post by rabidonrails » Mon, Dec 21, 2015, 4:33 AM UTC

sbisker wrote: post #3

Theranos' reply: http://fortune.com/2015/12/20/letter-to-the-editor-theranos-... It reads like it was written by a small team of lawyers who have had little sleep - not a good sign. :/

Actually, I think it reads more like "we weren't deliberately misleading Roger Parloff, we were trying to mislead everybody!"

Re: How Theranos Misled Me

#9

Post by padiyar83 » Mon, Dec 21, 2015, 4:39 AM UTC

Theranos was very clear on this. They have about 200 tests that are successful in a lab setting with only one in the works to be cleared by FDA. Truth is that simple ! The rest is just sleazy journalism that sells tabloids

Re: How Theranos Misled Me

#10

Post by seibelj » Mon, Dec 21, 2015, 4:40 AM UTC

sbisker wrote: post #3

Theranos' reply: http://fortune.com/2015/12/20/letter-to-the-editor-theranos-... It reads like it was written by a small team of lawyers who have had little sleep - not a good sign. :/

The whole thing sounds so pendantic, like "See? We are TECHNICALLY CORRECT!"