41–50 of 105 posts
Just proof that gender bias exists from the bottom to the top, and our media hype machine plays on it just as well as those evil white men with the money do.
The idea of rapid disruption in the healthcare industry makes me uncomfortable for some reason. I admire Holmes's ambition and in interviews I've watched she seems competent and well guided but something just doesn't seem to add up. How was a college dropout able to get a break in the healthcare sector? Becoming a doctor requires years of education and training and along comes this young woman who just decides "I'm g…
This company exists because she is a she. A man of similar privileged upbringing starting a company based on vaporware would not be nearly as interesting as an apparently unemotional woman seems to be to the industry. She's so mysterious, doesn't have a boyfriend! So dedicated, must be right! Just proof that gender bias exists from the bottom to the top, and our media hype machine plays on it just as well as those ev…
Bill Gates had a privileged upbringing...
The purpose of NYT article seems to be to message that while Holmes may get removed from the CEO, the shareholders are still hoping to retain the value.
This company exists because she is a she. A man of similar privileged upbringing starting a company based on vaporware would not be nearly as interesting as an apparently unemotional woman seems to be to the industry. She's so mysterious, doesn't have a boyfriend! So dedicated, must be right! Just proof that gender bias exists from the bottom to the top, and our media hype machine plays on it just as well as those ev…
He may not be able to get the press she gets, but with his parents' and their networks' money he would be able to do a great deal.
Im not sure why she is so highlighted .. she grew up wealthy and getting investment from her parents' network Im sure wasn't a hard thing to do vs. the majority of us who have no such luck, rather we work hard/harder to make it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because she refuses to talk specifics about the technology. And the subtext is that Theranos has been able to attract such a high valuation based on her personality even when the technology isn't apparently there.
Also, have you looked at Theranos website? She is just.. everywhere.
The idea of rapid disruption in the healthcare industry makes me uncomfortable for some reason. I admire Holmes's ambition and in interviews I've watched she seems competent and well guided but something just doesn't seem to add up. How was a college dropout able to get a break in the healthcare sector? Becoming a doctor requires years of education and training and along comes this young woman who just decides "I'm g…
If you look at CEO's and other higher ups of healthcare companies, a significant number have absolutely no science training.
Healthcare founders almost always have either medical and/or science training.
The questions are easy to answer and wouldn't give away any trade secrets, but she pretty systematically refuses to give simple direct answers to very simply questions. If answering these simple questions, like how many tests they can run using their tech, would give away trade secrets then their tech isn't likely very interesting. The copy coming out of the company insists they are able to do the things they claim, but it doesn't appear they have any particularly commercial ready technology to go to market with.
Holmes is caught in a bit of a bind, she used her family's powerful connections to raise absurd amounts of money on nothing at all and now has to deliver or face the wrath of those same powerful connections. She's also managed to fill the board up with big names through her family connections who have absolutely no medical background at all (except for Dr. Foege) in an effort to give some kind of legitimacy.
Here's an example of her answering simple questions to get a feel:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8qgmGtRMsY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBs-oj7U-bo
Here's an example of how she answers things, (exact quote) "So we have developed hundreds of tests over the course of the last 12 years that can run on a tiny sample using proprietary Theranos technology..." The critical missing components to this statement:
a) To what accuracy compared to traditional tests?
b) All of the tests on one sample, or one test per nanotainer sample?
c) Are all of those tests current tests that Theranos would run on a sample? (R&D could be generated 10 tests a week, but 90% of those tests could be poor, or could not be clinically useful)
She then goes on about taking the data they've generated for their FDA submission and putting it into the public domain and being a leader in transparency. She goes on to talk about all the various technologies Theranos has developed, but it's only the nanotainer tube that's being tested and blah blah blah it's all very complicated and none of the answers clarify or complete any other answer - it's like getting a good image from a shattered mirror.
Simple yes/no answers turn into minutes of non-answers. This isn't difficult, but she makes it absolutely excruciating.
Here's an exceprt from her bio from theranos.com
"Theranos' breakthrough advancements have made it possible to quickly process the full range of laboratory tests from a few drops of blood - instead of numerous tubes - and at unprecedented low costs, and are now directly accessible to people and their physicians through Theranos Wellness Centers opening nationwide."
Except not a single part of this has been demonstrated to be true in any way.
This company exists because she is a she. A man of similar privileged upbringing starting a company based on vaporware would not be nearly as interesting as an apparently unemotional woman seems to be to the industry. She's so mysterious, doesn't have a boyfriend! So dedicated, must be right! Just proof that gender bias exists from the bottom to the top, and our media hype machine plays on it just as well as those ev…
>A man of similar privileged upbringing starting a company based on vaporware Bill Gates had a privileged upbringing...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Also, have you looked at Theranos website? She is just.. everywhere.
The sound of that is almost hilarious so I took a look. There are two pictures of her in the rotating highlights things and one on the company page. I clicked around on at least 10 other pages or so and didn't find any more pictures. Didn't seem like "everywhere" to me unless I happened to visit the few pages without her photo.
“The minute you have a backup plan, you've admitted you're not going to succeed.”
Elizabeth Holmes is a category filter on their News page.