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

31–40 of 153 posts

Re: Walgreen Terminates Partnership with Theranos

#31

Post by dragonwriter »

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.

I don't see one with a science degree. I see two with science degrees -- both in the same social science, each of which also has a professional degree in addition -- one with an engineering degree, and two with professional degrees in medicine (one if which is veterinary).

Re: Walgreen Terminates Partnership with Theranos

#32

Post by minimaxir »

_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.…

> 4 - Before we all hop on the hate Theranos band wagon, lets remember that they did what all startups do - move fast and break things.

There are some things like medical information which should not be broken, and worst of all, lying about it.

Re: Walgreen Terminates Partnership with Theranos

#33

Post by tuna-piano »

_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.…

You may be right with all your points.

But did Walgreens know this was Theranos' mentality? The investors, patients, the doctors using the unreliable test results?

If the Theranos stakeholders all hopped on to the "move fast and break things" train- I'd be all for it. Facebook had that as their well known public motto and people still invested and used the service. People don't want to break things when it comes to their health.

Re: Walgreen Terminates Partnership with Theranos

#34

Post by grizzles »

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.

Do you think it's fair to compare a startup with established multinational companies that have profits and a serious track record? These investors are presumably investing in something, not writing a blank cheque. I could go start a space mining company tomorrow, with a view towards building a space shuttle that was powered by a single drop of oil but I would assume that I would have some trouble raising capital without some kind of verification of my claims.

Re: Walgreen Terminates Partnership with Theranos

#35

Post by metalliqaz »

smaili wrote: post #13

Anyone happen to know why this took so long to become official? EDIT: Looks like it's mentioned a few paragraphs into the article: Walgreens leaders decided to end the partnership after regulators disclosed problems at Theranos in late January, but held off on finalizing the separation because the company feared Theranos might sue, said people familiar with the matter.

They must have realized that Theranos is going to sue no matter what happens.

Re: Walgreen Terminates Partnership with Theranos

#36

Post by vincentbarr »

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…

Another startling Glassdoor review that seems planted by the company:

'Cons Not a con, more of a note -

It is a start up environment, which means that it is very fast and dynamic. It calls for a lot of hard work and creativity. Theranos is not for someone who is set in his or her ways, or for someone who is simply looking for a 9-5.'

Re: Walgreen Terminates Partnership with Theranos

#37

Post by JumpCrisscross »

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…

Astroturfing Glassfoor should be considered fraud. It's giving information to potential employees while omitting material information (that the company is the oposter) for purposes which financially benefit the company and its backers.

Re: Walgreen Terminates Partnership with Theranos

#38

Post by niels_olson »

dang wrote: post #11
GuiA wrote: post #2

The Theranos leadership belongs in jail. Misleading patients with bullshit medical science ranks pretty high up on the list of things that should get executives locked up. We are talking about tens of thousands of patients here whose doctors made medical choices based on fundamentally flawed blood work, all while Holmes and her buddies were boasting about how disruptive their technology was, how much better they were…

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.

Re: Walgreen Terminates Partnership with Theranos

#39

Post by godzillabrennus »

foobarian wrote: post #23
ChuckMcM wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well yes and no. Remember that they have a really well connected board of directors and a lot of people put their reputation out there based on information they believed to be true. The managers at Walgreens don't know how to design, validate, and certify laboratory tests and procedures so they are kind of at the mercy of the folks who tell them they do. And while it would have been within their rights to send an out…

It's still surprising that it was possible at all to start doing this without some proof of work. There are better checks and balances for something as mundane as selling lettuce or holding money deposits; why not blood testing?

Bernie Madoff held the SEC at bay for years because of who he knew. What makes this any different?

Re: Walgreen Terminates Partnership with Theranos

#40

Post by SyneRyder »

_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.…

"It is a fine line between lying and hustling."

You just highlighted why I think "hustle" is a terrible word for the startup community to embrace. Google's dictionary (appears to be the Oxford dictionary) includes the definition "a fraud or swindle / to obtain illicitly or by forceful action". The Cambridge dictionary lists "A dishonest way of making money / to try to persuade someone, especially to buy something, often illegally".

By those definitions, there is no fine line - they're the same thing.

Post reply on HN