Actually, the “mechanics” are a significant part of the problem. We often think of blood as a homogenous fluid but in fact it is a bunch of different constituents suspended in plasma (a proteinaceous colloid designed to maintain pressure and prevent the formation of bubbles of air from forming). Platelets are, of course, sticky when exposed to air, but a lot of the other proteins and saccharides tend to stick to any solid surface. Trying to distribute small samples of blood from the vial that only contains a few drops is a major issue even independent of the veracity of the actual tests. Of course, any test that requires centrifuging blood requires a certain volume of material, as do many other tests looking for low concentrations and accurate measurement of material. And cleaning the machine between samples is virtually impossible; as people who deal with autoclaves know, when you have instruments will small niches even high pressure steam is sometimes inadequate to fully clean equipment.
There are, of course, many other issues with the concept and that Holmes could get away for years without demonstrating how their system could work around them is a testament to her manipulation and the gullibility of venture capitalist investors. But just the microfluidics issues alone should have been enough for anyone doing due diligence to question the viability of the system, and apparently nobody who was in a position to make decisions actually did.
Well, all it takes is a charming and charismatic person in front of you telling you all the problems are little and will be overcome with time, and money. Seems to work for other barons of Silicon Valley all the time.
I can’t dispute any of that and you make your points well. Still, before I donate blood they measure my hemoglobin. They prick my finger, put the blood on a little plastic micro fluid slab, put in a black box, the slab goes back out, they throw it in the trash and a number reads out. There is no cleaning between tests. So in my ignorant mind a machine that does a test with a drop of blood exists already and this is just a more complicated test.
I’d ask to see the blood test work on the bench before I even got to the machine.
A hemoglobin level test is pretty simple; I’m not sure of the details of the test you describe but they’re probably just measuring some level of conductivity or paramagnetic field strength of the sample, so no processing of the sample is required to separate out components.
Theranos did actually run some samples for investors in a “demonstration”; unbeknownst to the investors, however, they were actually running them on Siemens testing machines, which is a point that Elizabeth Holmes explicitly and repeatedly lied about.
“Well, let me tell you, my friends, we got trouble! Right here in Silicon Valley! That’s trouble with “T” that rhymes with “P” and that stands for “Prison”…!”
There’s a YouTube video by a guy who runs a consulting service for white collar criminals headed for jail for the first time.
He made a couple of interesting points. First, even though it’s a Club Fed, things can get testy if you make enemies with other inmates.
He also said that the loss of control is one of the things he believes Elizabeth will have the most difficulty with.
Finally, he believes that the letters of support from her family and friends may have actually hurt her more than helped her cause for sentencing. Most of them were still enabling her, blaming Balwani and everyone else rather than let her take responsibility and apologize for the fraud. He said there were too many and were just too repetitious.
They did, and Theranos faked the results. That has been well documented, and was included in the movie i linked above.
I’m with @Stranger_On_A_Train . The red flag is that blood is sticky and they couldn’t physically move it around the way they claimed to. As I’ve said above, a sheaf of tests, each of which requires a drop of blood, is totally feasible. It’s the box that does them all that isn’t.
(The hemoglobin test you describe is one of those totally feasible tests that could be in the sheaf. I know of at least half a dozen such tests, and I’d be surprised if there aren’t already several dozen. And I’m sure that many more could be developed. Other tests really do require a larger sample of intact and sterile cells.)
From all I’ve read about Theranos, I’m not convinced Balwani deserves two years more in prison than Holmes. I’d impose the same sentence, or perhaps a bit less, than hers.
Well, that’s the whole point of the Svengali trope, right? It’s not the king who was really making the decisions. It was the snake whispering in his ear. It worked this time.
While I would tend to hold her to the higher culpability, broadly speaking, she was convicted on 4 counts and he was convicted on 12, their sentences are close enough, IMHO.
Actually, when I heard the charges, I thought the prosecution would have a harder time making some of them stick against her than against him.
Corporate crimes are hard to attach the higher up you are, because it’s easier to say , with at least a reasonable doubt, that you didn’t know all the details. The closer someone is to the operations, the easier it is to prove the case.
There’s a reasons Weisselberg was on trial with the Trump Org, and not the Orange wonder.
