Slashdot Mirror
Allegations of Data Manipulation At Theranos (wsj.com)
An anonymous reader writes: A lengthy report at the Wall Street Journal brings allegations of data manipulation against blood-testing startup Theranos. The company raised hundreds of millions of dollars from investors, at a valuation of roughly $9 billion, on the hope that they can revolutionize medical diagnosis. They've also made agreements with Safeway and Walgreen's to offer blood tests within stores. But multiple former employees say Theranos was shaky on the science at best, and intentionally misrepresentative at worst.
Engineer Anthony Nugent says the device intended for Walgreen's was still experimental. He also recalls seeing the machines labeled "for investigational use only," because of poor accuracy. A Theranos lab worker "told federal authorities that the results from the quality-control runs diverged from the known amount by more than two standard deviations, a red flag that suggested possible accuracy problems." When that employee notified superiors within the company, somebody came and deleted the quality control data, which made the device's test runs appear better than they were. There are also reports that inspectors and auditors were purposefully kept away from parts of Theranos's lab. A Theranos spokesperson denied everything.
Engineer Anthony Nugent says the device intended for Walgreen's was still experimental. He also recalls seeing the machines labeled "for investigational use only," because of poor accuracy. A Theranos lab worker "told federal authorities that the results from the quality-control runs diverged from the known amount by more than two standard deviations, a red flag that suggested possible accuracy problems." When that employee notified superiors within the company, somebody came and deleted the quality control data, which made the device's test runs appear better than they were. There are also reports that inspectors and auditors were purposefully kept away from parts of Theranos's lab. A Theranos spokesperson denied everything.
It's a shame Theranos is having so many problems, because to me it was never about blood testing using small volumes of blood, but about low cost DIY blood testing available at places like Walgreens. The ability to walk in and get a Cholesterol test for $3, and a comprehensive metabolic plane for $7 instead of going through a doctor (and paying several hundred dollars for the privilege of having that doctor cluck-cluck at me) is a big deal: it means I could (for example) try different diets and get a blood test monthly to see how those diets affect me.
Something like blood testing should have a outside validation for their machines. Why is the company validating these machines on their own?
You aren't getting the bigger picture. We've all been primed for a new age of "illnesses". As minor issues are turned into full blown syndromes. and lucky us! there is a maintenance medicine we can take for the rest of our life to take care of this dreadful disease.
I forsee that Theranos' blood testing machines will provide the breakthrough on finding new illnesses like Bellybutton Stink syndrome, and perhaps even the holy grail of modern medicine - Overactive ear hair! And whoever they are leasing this technology to will have just the maintenance med for that.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Most of these claims come from ex-employees. It's like having my ex-wife write my biography; I'm sure she'd find a way to put a negative spin on that time I saved puppies from a house fire (like: "he went back inside to grab things he cared about but left my cherished family photos to burn").
lucm, indeed.
After reading TFA, it seems like the company runs like a cult of personality of Ms. Holmes. Their answer for every objection is to impugn the integrity or intelligence of the person who raised the issue. Their remembrance of the facts diverges wildly from the first hand accounts of their critics. Whenever they mention Ms Holmes odd behavior, they basically make the No True Scotsman defense, that Ms Holmes would never do that. That is classic cult-like behavior.
I can't get my head around how they raised so much money with nothing but the most basic outline of an idea and not even an original one. Score one for political connections.
I smell something funny, but I don't think they have a test for that at Theranos.
"Theranostics" is a contraction of "therapeutics" and "diagnostics". It's been a fashionable term in research over the last decade.
Commercial clinical analyzers are programmable by the end user. Thus, for example, it is possible for company "X" to purchase commercial clinical analyzers, put it's own programs on them, and say that "samples are being run on company X's proprietary systems". However if company X is also representing that it has proprietary clinical hardware, confusion might result. That is, a statement that "samples were run on company X's proprietary systems" would not enable outside readers determine if either commercial hardware or proprietary hardware was used. I am not sure if the press understands this.
Who the hell invests in a company with non-existing tech and incompetent board???