Theranos Wellness Centers Aren’t Using “Nanotainers” at This Time • Hacker News Board

Re: Theranos Wellness Centers Aren’t Using “Nanotainers” at This Time

#21

Post by Nutmog » Sun, Dec 27, 2015, 2:55 AM UTC

codezero wrote: post #10

danso wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The origin story of Theranos is carved from pure Silicon Valley mythril: 19-year-old drops out of Stanford to build a massively disruptive startup and in short-order, receives hundreds of millions in funding and near-decaunicorn valuation. On top of that, the founder is a photogenic woman who dresses and speaks and acts as if she were Steve Jobs incarnate. And unlike Facebook and most other tech startups, Theranos wa…

What does this have to do with the photogenicness of the founder? What exactly did Theranos do wrong here as a company? How does she dress? It didn't even seem like a favor. Does she wear black turtlenecks and jeans? I'm really confused about your comment. Does it address what I asked at all? Can you elaborate?

Those were reasons why the media and public are interested in it. Yes she does wear black turtlenecks. I'm sure the way she dresses is part of why people are so interested in the stories. It's probably largely schadenfreude, the kind the celebrities are usually subject to when they put on weight or get arrested.

Re: Theranos Wellness Centers Aren’t Using “Nanotainers” at This Time

#22

Post by icegreentea » Sun, Dec 27, 2015, 2:56 AM UTC

SilasX wrote: post #7

No knowledge of the biotech, but this is really shady. Above-board companies simply do not look like this. 1) Refusal to use the ground-breaking technology: >Then I asked about what Theranos calls “nanotainers” or tiny vials that can give you test results with a single drop of blood. >“Oh you have to order that separately,” she informed me. “We take those intravenously if you bundle a bunch of tests together.” >[...]…

I think you're being a bit too harsh.. or at least your getting distracted by all the wrong stuff.

None of this interaction really screams shady to me, just defensive actions by a company facing shitty PR. Some crap went down, and they're pulling back all their feelers and trying to maintain some degree of control.

The REAL shady parts of Theranos is all their other shit with their dealings with the FDA, the questionable effectiveness of their testing, their insane board of directors, and the what not.

All this piece shows is the Theranos is panicking (and panicking has nothing to do with how above board you are).

Re: Theranos Wellness Centers Aren’t Using “Nanotainers” at This Time

#23

Post by bigchewy » Sun, Dec 27, 2015, 3:05 AM UTC

codezero wrote: post #17

discodave wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. Multi billion dollar valuation. 2. In the health space, being trustworthy is kinda important.

Are the incumbents really trustworthy? I don't think so, but I guess it's becaus the entire industry is so nebulous.

yes, by and large the incumbents comply with regulations, use industry standard equipment that has been tested and approved as being accurate for its intended use, etc.

Re: Theranos Wellness Centers Aren’t Using “Nanotainers” at This Time

#24

Post by adevine » Sun, Dec 27, 2015, 3:06 AM UTC

To me, one of the sad things about the Theranos debacle is that even if they DON'T have super whiz-bang nanotainer technology, the general model of having affordable, transparently priced tests where you can just walk into a Walgreen's and order them is pretty awesome in my opinion.

There are other companies that offer something somewhat similar (e.g. AnyLabTestNow), but the experience still sucks - locations/times are nowhere near as convenient as your local drug store, and the tests are expensive. I don't know how much Theranos' price reduction is dependent on its nanotainer tech, but if someone came in and offered an affordable service like CVS's minute clinics, but for tests, I'd use it, even if they had to do normal draws.

Re: Theranos Wellness Centers Aren’t Using “Nanotainers” at This Time

#25

Post by codezero » Sun, Dec 27, 2015, 3:07 AM UTC

bigchewy wrote: post #23

codezero wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are the incumbents really trustworthy? I don't think so, but I guess it's becaus the entire industry is so nebulous.

yes, by and large the incumbents comply with regulations, use industry standard equipment that has been tested and approved as being accurate for its intended use, etc.

Ok so if Theranos is using the same equipment and tests, what are they doing wrong?

Re: Theranos Wellness Centers Aren’t Using “Nanotainers” at This Time

#26

Post by adevine » Sun, Dec 27, 2015, 3:13 AM UTC

codezero wrote: post #20

Dr_tldr wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I just re-read your original post and realized you're probably not a native speaker of english (or were writing in a hurry on a phone), my apologies! Theranos is catching a lot of flak right now because they claim to be a company founded on this awesome new technology, but they seem to be use existing technologies for all the services they currently offer, they won't show people their wonder-device, and the sto…

The use of existing technologies seems like an unimportant factor. Uber uses cars, more to the point they started using private limo contractors and still do. They nonetheless provided a service above and beyond what you could get before. Is Theranos using existing technologies and still not providing value above the incumbents? This is what I really want to know. I just don't know.

In the beginning, the secret sauce of Uber was still its technology - being able to order a car on your phone, seeing where the nearby drivers are, not having to pull out cash or a credit card at the end. This made the experience much better than ordering a cab.

Re: Theranos Wellness Centers Aren’t Using “Nanotainers” at This Time

#27

Post by Pyxl101 » Sun, Dec 27, 2015, 3:15 AM UTC

codezero wrote: post #20

Dr_tldr wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I just re-read your original post and realized you're probably not a native speaker of english (or were writing in a hurry on a phone), my apologies! Theranos is catching a lot of flak right now because they claim to be a company founded on this awesome new technology, but they seem to be use existing technologies for all the services they currently offer, they won't show people their wonder-device, and the sto…

The use of existing technologies seems like an unimportant factor. Uber uses cars, more to the point they started using private limo contractors and still do. They nonetheless provided a service above and beyond what you could get before. Is Theranos using existing technologies and still not providing value above the incumbents? This is what I really want to know. I just don't know.

No, I think that their use of existing technology is exactly the heart of the issue. They claim to have made a breakthrough in how blood tests are conducted that allows them to run a large set of blood tests on a tiny fingerprick blood sample. An investigative journalist then reported that they're not using this technology at all, and all the tests they sell commercially are regular venous blood draws run through testing machines purchased from other companies.

If Theranos is not using their fingerprick blood testing technology, then they are not using their technology commercially at all. So if this is true, then they're a company that's been in business 11 years, has a massive valuation, and has not developed a commercially viable technology yet. It's as if a web search company like Google had been around 11 years, was worth >$1 billion, and then was found to be exclusively using and rebranding Microsoft's search technology instead. It's a scandal.

Theranos' valuation cannot be sustained anywhere near its current value simply by selling blood tests conducted on equipment manufactured by other firms. Theranos' claim to fame is a breakthrough in fingertip-prick blood testing technology, and they have no way to differentiate themselves in the market without this breakthrough technology - their investment value cannot be sustained simply by reselling technology made by other firms.

Re: Theranos Wellness Centers Aren’t Using “Nanotainers” at This Time

#28

Post by danso » Sun, Dec 27, 2015, 3:18 AM UTC

codezero wrote: post #25

bigchewy wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yes, by and large the incumbents comply with regulations, use industry standard equipment that has been tested and approved as being accurate for its intended use, etc.

Ok so if Theranos is using the same equipment and tests, what are they doing wrong?

Not being forthright about the scope of their technological progress and innovation, which is ostensibly the basis of its $9 billion valuation.

Re: Theranos Wellness Centers Aren’t Using “Nanotainers” at This Time

#29

Post by mattmanser » Sun, Dec 27, 2015, 3:21 AM UTC

codezero wrote: post #20

Dr_tldr wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I just re-read your original post and realized you're probably not a native speaker of english (or were writing in a hurry on a phone), my apologies! Theranos is catching a lot of flak right now because they claim to be a company founded on this awesome new technology, but they seem to be use existing technologies for all the services they currently offer, they won't show people their wonder-device, and the sto…

The use of existing technologies seems like an unimportant factor. Uber uses cars, more to the point they started using private limo contractors and still do. They nonetheless provided a service above and beyond what you could get before. Is Theranos using existing technologies and still not providing value above the incumbents? This is what I really want to know. I just don't know.

Unimportant factor?

A better comparison would be if Uber had claimed they had self-driving car before they'd even entered the market, had started doing rides, and then it turned out Lyft drivers were surreptitiously hidden inside the front of the car and were actually driving instead of the mystical self-driving computer.

That's how it looks at the moment with the way Theranos is behaving.

Re: Theranos Wellness Centers Aren’t Using “Nanotainers” at This Time

#30

Post by sandGorgon » Sun, Dec 27, 2015, 3:23 AM UTC

adevine wrote: post #24

To me, one of the sad things about the Theranos debacle is that even if they DON'T have super whiz-bang nanotainer technology, the general model of having affordable, transparently priced tests where you can just walk into a Walgreen's and order them is pretty awesome in my opinion. There are other companies that offer something somewhat similar (e.g. AnyLabTestNow), but the experience still sucks - locations/times a…

Is this something innovative? In india, i just paid 90$ and got 14 different tests including tumor markers tested for. The blood was collected at home (and then sent to a central testing facility).

Unless, it is radically new technology... I'm curious on the value proposition here.