
Troubled health startup Theranos faces Washington reckoning - JumpCrisscross
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/wunderkind-theranoss-future-is-on-the-line-219162
======
dnautics
I would not want to be in a diagnostics startup right now. Between 23andMe and
theranos, its clear the FDA is being rightly, (I don't say this lightly
because I'm often skeptical about a lot of FDA activities) very strict about
their standards on testing & diagnostics. I'm all for disruptive technology
and businesses, but sv is not only schumpeterian creative destruction, it's
also about growth hacking. To me it's not clear that the silicon valley growth
models are appropriate for this industry.

~~~
lawnchair_larry
I'm not sure how you can compare 23andMe to Theranos. The former was never
intended to be for testing and diagnostics. It's more a case of the FDA being
worried that people will misunderstand it as such.

~~~
dnautics
And accordingly, the FDA has taken a lighter touch with them....

------
JumpCrisscross
Could one credibly argue that Theranos is misunderstood and simply
communicating terribly?

Silicon Valley is chastised for its perceived pettiness. Going after "cat-
picture" class instead of deep technology problems. Theranos is trying to
solve a hard technology problem. Most hard-tech founders I know carry the
scars of their early jaunts with prejudice with them.

Do we have any evidence, not allegations, of criminally-illegal conduct? Or
just fineable tsk tsk.

Theranos does itself no favors by raising the wall around its labs. But could
the reason they're doing this be more cultural and less because they just have
nothing of value? It may not be $10bn of value. But something?

~~~
hga
If you know enough biology, the conceit that they could do so many of these
tests with a fingerstick vs. a venous blood draw was highly questionable from
the start.

Sure, they could in theory prove that basic intuition wrong, but they didn't
in any way in the dozen years since their founding, and at last count were
doing only one of their tests with a fingerstick. The 2nd section of the
article covers this with thorough, accurate, and concise prose.

And then we learned about their being _extremely_ sloppy in running one of
their conventional blood labs, which is a very well establishing sort of thing
nowadays (heck, using machines in blood labs goes back to the '50s). The sort
of thing that is justly worth $10,000/day fines.

Ah, one detail here is that this is not what I'd call a "technology" problem,
it's as much a "science" problem, and those can be much less tractable.

If you want to label their troubles as being with communications, it seems
hard justify after trying and failing for 12 years. And not accepting the
norms of the science community, see again that 2nd section, and now the norms
of the lab testing regulatory community. There's reasons these two communities
have their cultures, and if you want to "disrupt" them, you should at least
understand and appreciate them, and why they exist as they do.

As for "criminal-illegal conduct", it's starting to have the whiff of a Ponzi
scheme, as their own technology appears to utterly fail in both the scientific
and regulatory domains, and they spend a lot more than they're charging to run
their tests, not that at this point they're likely to attract any more
investment. If the financial regulators choose to push it, it looks like they
could make a case for raising funds or spending that money on false pretenses,
at which point the membership of the board might come in very handy. (The
former structure and huge size (12), though, speak of a CEO dominated board,
not one that would provide the company with useful guidance).

------
duncanawoods
I was watching Michael Clayton last night and it was a strange experience
seeing Tilda Swinton playing an exec out of her depth hiring hitmen to kill a
whistle-blower... knowing that another exec with a bizarrely military board
was probably freaking out in a similar way... gave me some shivers.

------
ryandrake
HN Challenge: Find an article about Theranos that does _not_ contain a photo
of the founder.

~~~
mikeyouse
Second result while searching NYTimes:

[http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/03/business/dealbook/david-
bo...](http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/03/business/dealbook/david-boiess-dual-
roles-at-theranos-set-up-conflict.html?_r=0)

First result while searching WSJ:

[http://www.wsj.com/articles/walgreens-threatens-to-end-
thera...](http://www.wsj.com/articles/walgreens-threatens-to-end-theranos-
agreement-1455156503)

Fourth result on WaPo:

[https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/10/27/fda-i...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/10/27/fda-
inspection-reports-detail-problems-at-theranos/)

------
phantom_oracle
Wasn't this the same CEO that (about) 2 years ago became a paper-billionaire
and was the next Silicon Valley darling?

The house of cards sure does fall down very quickly for Valley entrepreneurs.

~~~
dnautics
Not just silicon valley. She captured a lot of media attention nationwide and
for a brief moment was a household name.

~~~
devarshr
Even worldwide (in India). I used to suggest to wiki her and learn more about
her to any girl who aspired to become a healthcare professional or engineer. I
facepalmed at myself when WSJ story came out.

~~~
dnautics
Being in the bio industry, when the theranos thing got big, my cohort was
widely panning the whole idea of microfluidics diagnostics (it's been tried
many times by many people smarter - but maybe not as driven?). Since I had
just started my own nonprofit, the first thing I looked at was her board, and
I knew there was going to be trouble.

------
tardo99
Mark my words, this story ends with a perp walk.

~~~
lunula
On what grounds would you guess that walk be taken?

