Slashdot Mirror


Report: Feds To Ban Theranos Founder Elizabeth Holmes For 2 Years (cbsnews.com)

An anonymous reader writes: According to the Wall Street Journal, health regulators have proposed pulling the federal license for the company's California laboratory and banning its founder and CEO, Elizabeth Holmes, and company president Sunny Balwani from the blood-testing business for two years. The letter which the WSJ cited in its report found that Theranos had not corrected problems at its lab in Newark, California, and faced possible sanctions as a result. In October 2015, the WSJ reported all but one of Theranos' analyzers in use were off the shelf, and that their tiny samples may not always have been accurate. The company was facing allegations of data manipulation in late December 2015. Earlier this year, U.S. regulators found serious deficiencies at Theranos' laboratory in Newark, California, putting the company's relationship with the Medicare program in danger. Theranos has said that The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) has not imposed sanctions on its Newark Lab. "Due to the comprehensive nature of the corrective measures we've taken over the past several months, which has been affirmed by several experts, we are hopeful that CMS won't impose sanctions," the company said in an emailed statement. "But if they do, we will work with CMS to address all of their concerns."

7 of 104 comments (clear)

  1. Wow, how unsurprising by smooth+wombat · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Anyone who has the least bit of common sense could have told you she's a fraud. She has yet to submit her process to anyone else for confirmation it does what it says it does, her own company has been relying more and more on standard tests rather than their supposed "miracle" process, and companies which have been using her service have been dropping her and going back to what is known to work.

    I remember seeing her listed as one of those youngest self-made billionaires and all I could think was how much she's pulled the wool over on everyone. I can't wait for the lawsuits to come flying in.

    --
    We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
    1. Re:Wow, how unsurprising by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I get the results in 24 hours on their phone app, I can order my own tests, test are a FRACTION of the cost

      1. Cheap
      2. Fast
      3. Accurate
      You can pick any 2, as long as you don't pick #3.

  2. Litmus test that you're in a tech bubble by JoeyRox · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When investors are willing to place a $9B valuation on a tech unicorn that is so secretive nobody even knows what their actual product is or whether it even works.

    1. Re:Litmus test that you're in a tech bubble by tomhath · · Score: 4, Informative

      Has it been revealed how much capital they actually raised? A $9b "valuation" probably means they raised a couple hundred million. No doubt a big chunk of that went straight into her own bank account.

      so secretive nobody even knows what their actual product is or whether it even works

      Their product was well known (quick blood tests that used a tiny amount of blood). But everyone knew from the start that it simply didn't work. A college freshman designing a new way of testing blood that the big labs couldn't figure out how to do? Really?

    2. Re:Litmus test that you're in a tech bubble by sunking2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      To be fair it was actually a college freshmen with rich parents who could give her seed money to gather people around her who could make believe they were onto something.

  3. Re:For-profit healthcare in action. by squiggleslash · · Score: 4, Informative

    The ACA didn't actually change the privateness of the healthcare system. It didn't nationalize anything. It simply implemented some minor regulatory reforms, coupled with insurance mandates and major regulatory reforms on insurers, and made more subsidies available.

    So it really isn't relevant here one way or another.

    --
    You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  4. Re:For-profit healthcare in action. by Richard_at_work · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Perhaps you need a proper national medical scheme then - regardless of what you think of the quality of it, I would much rather live with the NHS here in the UK than have to use the US system.