Theranos

[FlyerInHi]

What’s pretty amazing is the loss is $9 billion of wealth.

Total cash loss is under $500 million from what I read.

[moneymaker]

Does anybody want to talk about the science behind Theranos? Reminds me of this kid from a few years back https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Andraka seems today’s scientists are not like Jonas Salk from years ago.

[Anonymous]

The behavioral science behind this fraud is probably far more interesting than the biochemistry.

[moneymaker]

I think it is interesting that the cure for polio was found 64 years ago, a very specific disease, where the cure involved stimulating the immune system. Now today they are talking about stimulating the immune system in a more general way to fight cancer. It has taken science way too long to appreciate the immune system we each have within us. Have no idea what Theranos claims but since they are talking about a drop of blood or less I will guess it involves nano technology, which I hear is very hot in upstate New York.

[Myriad]

I’m done some reading on this – I don’t think she’s a con artist. Overly optimistic, completely disregard criticisms, incorrect understanding of science, and complete disregard for standard health testing practices – Absolutely Yes.
But I also think she really thought she was going to change the world.

But why VCs didn’t do more research and ask more questions? That’s a different problem – or they just didn’t care.

[Anonymous]

The best con artists have no clue that they actually are con artists.

[njtosd]

[quote=moneymaker]I think it is interesting that the cure for polio was found 64 years ago, a very specific disease, where the cure involved stimulating the immune system. Now today they are talking about stimulating the immune system in a more general way to fight cancer. It has taken science way too long to appreciate the immune system we each have within us. Have no idea what Theranos claims but since they are talking about a drop of blood or less I will guess it involves nano technology, which I hear is very hot in upstate New York.[/quote]

Modifying the activity of the immune system is a common strategy that has been extensively studied for a long time. Millstein and Kohler won the Nobel prize in the 1984 for discovering a method of making pure samples of antibodies. They fused antibody producing cells (which produce only one kind of antibody but do not divide) with cancerous cells (which provide the machinery for endless division). These were called hybridomas and they make “monoclonal” or pure samples of antibodies. Interferon, interleukins, all of the drugs that you see on TV that look like “Adilumimab” are all immune modulators. All of it has to do with activating (or deactivating) cellular processes by interacting with cell surface proteins. I hate to say this, but “new to you” isn’t necessarily new.

The problem with Theranos (to analogize) is that they hypothesized that because there are sharks in the ocean, you will find a shark in every gallon of ocean water you sample. Of course, that’s not the case. You need a lot of water to find one shark. And you need a lot of blood to get even a few molecules of certain proteins. More to get a statistically reliable reading.

[moneymaker]

“Nanotechnology is the future”! As anyone that reads comic books knows. The fine line when it comes to the immune system is to keep the body from attacking itself. That is why so many people claimed aids was made in a government lab, because if possible it would be plausable. OT: Anybody see the Scrips National spelling Bee yesterday, that 11 year old kid was f*****g amazing.

[Anonymous]

$4.5 billion to zero in a year.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/4-5-billion-nothing-forbes-100000828.html

[joec]

Saw this also….Yay…

I guess.

[FlyerInHi]

[quote=moneymaker] Anybody see the Scrips National spelling Bee yesterday, that 11 year old kid was f*****g amazing.[/quote]

Jimmy kimmel had them on his show and then I watched them on YouTube. Amazing kids
Cute

[Anonymous]

$500K penalty for “massive fraud”

http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2018/03/14/theranos-founder-elizabeth-holmes-charged-massive-fraud/424670002/

I don’t know all the numbers but I’m guessing she made more than that along the way.

[ucodegen]

[quote=harvey]$500K penalty for “massive fraud”

http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2018/03/14/theranos-founder-elizabeth-holmes-charged-massive-fraud/424670002/

I don’t know all the numbers but I’m guessing she made more than that along the way.[/quote]
She did.. most of it was in stock that she still had which she was also ordered to surrender. There is also another person who should be eyed: Ramesh Sunny Balwani, supposed one time boyfriend, 64 to her current 34 (take that back 10 years or more and think,…. ewwww). He was point person on the testing fraud, saying that all testing samples should be run through their other standard machines as opposed to their flagship while contracted diagnostic jobs could go through their ‘Einstein’ machine. His argument was that anyone who thought otherwise doesn’t have any legal experience. His background is CS. NOTE: I am not saying she is innocent, but there are two players of concern in Theranos, and Balwani seems to be one that SECs seems to target more than her.

Theranos was in the market of diagnostic testing. Their ‘Einstein’ unit was supposed to do the tests faster and with much less blood. NOTE: 1 cc of water contains 6.022 x 10^23 molecules of water, so 1/4 of the quantity is enough to sense ppm quantities of a material (with caveats following) in blood. 1ppm means that there will be (6.022/4) x 10^23 x 10^-6 or . 1.5055×10^17 molecules (one hundred and fifty million-billion) to work with for a 1ppm sense. It is possible to do diagnostics on small amounts. DNA test works with far less. The little device the hospital clamps on your fingertip – measures blood oxygen non-intrusively as well as heart rate for some installations.

Caveat: when drawing blood from a fingertip, it is not as pure as from artery (source), you are getting blood in ‘transition’, as it is being used by the body. It is also subject to being tainted by chemicals and substances that you recently handled and may either coat or partially permeate the skin. This made worse if a person being tested has poor circulation.

I found the tech interesting, but Theranos was not the only one looking at the tech. I could not see any ‘moat’ or lock-in to the tech. I was also bothered by the lack experience that Elizabeth Holmes had, and that this business was completely outside her field of study. The business was rather opaque, and DD was difficult. By the time my DD was done (what little I could do), the price had gone way past anything that I thought was remotely reasonable (even after getting totally drunk).

One thing to note; the Theranos test is more accurate with arterial blood than from a fingerprick.. but their whole selling point was you only needed a fingerprick. NOTE: Taking blood by fingerprick is much more painful than the traditional because of the number of nerve endings on the tip of a finger.

[spdrun]

Small nit to pick 🙂

6.022 x 10^23 molecules = 1 mole.

1 cc = approx 1 gram of water.

Water is approximately 18 grams per mole.

Therefore, 1cc =~ 1/18 mole or 3.34×10^22 molecules.

Rest of your point stands … though even though there are a lot of molecules available in 1cc of blood, the tests for them have to actually be accurate. The accuracy, not the availablilty of molecules to test seems to be at issue here.

[FlyerInHi]

She got off lightly compared to Martin Shkreli. He was a jerk, that’s why.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2018/03/15/what-makes-elizabeth-holmes-and-martin-shkreli-so-different/?utm_term=.d884dff68b17

[Author]

Posts