Investigative journalism still alive and well in this country. The fact that WSJ took so much heat here for exposing the emperor's clothes is troubling. This is a reminder that we must always cast a cynical eye on the corporate world. If it sounds too good to be true it probably is.
except when zionist are killing innocent people while bombing them and bulldozing their homes. except when the biden has rape allegations and media is hiding and suppressing it. except when the enemy is right and american politicians are dead wrong.
anybody with clinical chemistry degree can easily understand that this woman was a fraud from the begining. Here are the some points: 1. interpretation of blood tests will never be in-house and cheap. The current test are already very cheap, but the expensive part is paying people that need a serious degree to interpret results and calibrate equipment. Could you imagine a chaos that would happen if doctors offices would be flooded with uneducated people doing selfmade medical diagnostics. 2, most of diagnostic methods relay on analytes that are not present in finger blood, such as proteins, and therefore you will always have to take blood from a vein. 3. the current apparatus is already using very small amounts of blood, you can do tests with as little as 50 microliters on some of our machines. The reasons why they take more than 50 microlitars is to make sure that they have enough materials if they want to do multiple tests.
Good points but you probably shouldn't make the claim that something can never be done. All we need to know is that it's not possible with current tech and under the current paradigm.
zelimirvulic I worked in scientific equipment sales for 4 years. I remember hearing and reading about Theranos years ago, and about 10,000 red flags went up. It just seemed incredibly fantastical, that this 19 year old teenager had solved “all the problems” relating to a traditional venous blood draw. I doubt she had ever stepped one foot into a lab!
Obviously none of these Theranos board of directors in 2016 had the brain either: Riley Bechtel, former Bechtel Group CEO David Boies, a founder and the chairman of Boies Schiller & Flexner William Foege, former director CDC Richard Kovacevich, former Wells Fargo CEO and chairman James Mattis, later US Secretary of Defense Fabrizio Bonanni, former executive vice president of Amgen
People were followers impressed by the valuation, not the science. Interviews of her were like soft, Silicon Valley PR questions with no follow-up. The whole thing is horrible that Holmes played with people's lives, knowing the tests did not work. It's worse than conning her investors.
Slight quibble: if it's not investigative, it's not journalism. The phrase "investigative journalist" is a silly tautology. That said, the Wall Street Journal's news pages are constently excellent, imho. Just good solid consistent work. A trustworthy source. Their editorial page is not quite the same thing. In its own way it is a throw-back to an earlier age of excellent journalism: opinionated, dedicated, and straighforward in its dedicatiion to spreading the proprietors' opinions. These opinions are, again imho, flaky, selfish, extremely right-wing, and often based on utter fantasy. But they keep their opinions to the editorial page, which as it should be, so no objection from me.
my hats pf off to JC for excellent investigative journalism very bold on Theranos opening a can of worms due to the companies secretive stealthy nature and reluctance to show data or its famed edison device to public scrutiny.
Fabulous interview. The interviewer was prescient about so many elements of this story. He really called it on the demise of the company, the romantic relationship between Holmes and Balkanized, and also on how critical the issue of fraud to patients became in the criminal case. Hope others who are fascinated by the 2021 trial find this. Loved that he called out how critical the suicide of the senior scientist is, and how aberrant and deranged Elizabeth Holmes response was to the crisis created by the original WSJ article.
This is amazing, seeing this interview, years earlier before John had published his book and how they all just got the breaking news that Walgreens was suspecting they had been conned by Theranos and Elizabeth. It's telling that Elizabeth won't address concerns that are coming up at that time and how she continued to do her talking tour (and accolades), and their suspicions which turned out to be true and how guarded John is (before his book) but how excellent and right on the money this interviewer is as far as what may be happening and Elizabeth's mental state...for what eventually happened. Like the interviewer said, if Elizabeth would have just come clean when Walgreens started pulling out and everyone was suspecting that the Theramos machine just couldn't do (yet) what they were saying it could, and admitted they were still in the testing stage but after a few years, they would solve any problems, make it work and set the world on fire and thus they still should be funded...she would have saved face and it wouldn't have been the big scandal and cautionary tale that it was in the end. Really excellent interview, and interviewer.
re: "how did this woman get any money." Older, influential men whom she smiled at and engaged in conversation with and remained attentive to, after all, they had the money. At its root, she's a narcissist and quite probably sociopathic/psychopathic ...
@Bobby Digital re: " A malignant psychopath because giving the wrong test scores can lead into unnecessary medicine or treatment." What? That makes little sense ... b/c, Houston, we still HAVE a problem. Psychopaths are untreatable to boot. Don't you know that?
you can choose to different hypotesis: first all people in the board are stupid and guillable, or something smelly fishy and there something deep in this story. That's why today is still free not in jail
LOVED this interview, especially looking back and seeing how the interviewer was already foreseeing a lot of what ended up happening. And of course John Carreyrou is a legend.
When I first heard of Theranos, before this, I had assumed that EH had some deep technical or scientific insight into blood testing that could be translated into a product, even though she was a sophomore at Stanford. But, now it seems that she just had the thought that a compact, powerful instrument for testing blood would have a large market, and if huge money was raised, then the technical details could be worked out. this was common in the internet age.
The problem was, she was peddling real-world medical devices, not software. As Carreyrou has pointed out at various times, it's telling that one of her board members was close to Larry Ellison of Oracle, a company famous for delivering underdeveloped software they had overhyped, then patching it later into a decent product. The same approach works less well in healthcare.
@@griffithchung9377 I don't have an issue with Oracle of the earlier days. There was no such thing as bullet proof software in the those days. Oracle pioneered many experimental concepts in performance and scaling. If 1 out of 4 had long term viability, then its not bad. It is as important to know what does work as much as what does. In those days, there were very many ideas, most of which did not pan out. In the hands of true expert, it would have been reasonably possible to figure out good design methods to use Oracle. The problem was there were many people who believed Oracle was sophisticated in being idiot proof. Any one knows the true idiot can defeat any idiot-proof system. On the matter of Theranos, the VC's were sophisticated people. even so, handing out the initial 10-20M for a good idea to get set up and started was no big deal, even if E did not want to disclose core technology to be vetted by hired experts (who are not always/often right). It was in the subsequent rounds of funding at the $100M level that disclosure and vetting of IP should have been required
1:13:33 Serious foreshadowing from John Carreyrou with his analogy about Boeing what with the recent Lion Air and Ethiopia Airways crashes involving the B737 Max......the implication being that Boeing may not have done the full testing on the airplane causing the MCAS system to put it into a fatal dive in certain situations.
I realize it's a late to comment now, but I can't help but think about how many people would have been harmed or even died had John Carreyrou not done the reporting on it.
Walgreens are lucky not to be sued by their customers who took the 'test'. Their level of due care and attention for the machine they allowed in their stores was negligible. They were warned by their own investigator to not get involved with theranos but chose to ignore him because of a fear that theranos would go to their competitors. Fomo.
The moderator is like a circus barker. His questions appear to solicit tabloid-type responses. Good for JC for not responding and not MAKING the news. The criminal case just started in Fall 2021. Walgreens bailed in 2016.
this interviewer really likes to show everyone how much he thinks he knows…then Carryrou has to correct him and then finally gets to answer the questions
@@dillsdollface That part was the worst; I got the feeling Carryrou was trying to protect the wife and the interviewer just kept going on and on, making stuff up like how many stock options she had, what they were worth, etc. And the number of times the interviewer said he was a founder, only to be corrected by Carryrou. Overall, I got the feeling Carryrou was sitting there wishing he had a button for 'my turn to talk!'. I bet the interviewer talked more than Carryrou overall! The interviewer is meant to ask questions, not ramble on with speculations of his own.
Another parallel for comparison that can be made is drug discovery and the pharmaceutical industry. You can't take a drug to market until you've performed and passed multiple levels of testing. The fact that it seems they're doing testing-as-they-go, even though they're marketing their unique system as up-and-running and reliable, just really hibbles my jibbles.
Christene Ledoux not sure where these HPV claims come from. We do know that the vaccine has halved the prevalence of HPV in the young adult population.
This guy is a genious investigative journalist l. He asks the pointed and most important questions and really digs. Her father was involved in the Enron scandal!!
My bet is to raise the $900 million, Theranos found enough investors without science degrees, because any degree in a wide range of scientific disciplines would give you enough tools to question this and doubt its underpinnings and plausibility.
@@ReturnOfTheJ.D. Perhaps established biotech researchers? The journalists even says so himself. They are too ashamed those old rich men and don't understand science. But people ALL OVER the world and read about this magical entrepreneur so what I am asking is why NOBODY with a biotech degree has done anything until now! Then again, the journalists also claims these "affairs" have cycles so maybe soon the industry will come out and have this whole charade analysed? Just the fact that one wasn't to see the product! Crazy!
@@Persefone94 Beyond that, one of the most interesting thing for me was that Holmes marketed her company in the computer tech sphere, which I've been in since 1995, when none of her products had anything to do with software or computer hardware. And the media just lapped it up!
I mean Lance Armstrong was a legitimate world champion though. The sport was so dirty that when they stripped his titles, they couldn't even crown a new champion for those years after retesting because everyone who did remotely well was also on steroids. If an entire sport is cheating, they're all on a level playing field.
@@jeffhampton7405 If everybody is 'doping' then they've already changed the game. I guess in some ways that's now part of the difference between an amateur and a professional athlete imho.
Lance Armstrong should've insisted that all his blood tests for doping be carried out by Theranos....using a diluted pin-prick of blood as a sample, the tests would've all come back clean.
I immensely respect Carreyrou’s integrity in his work, how he doesn’t lean in in twisted questions and carefully uses his words in each one of his interviews. On the other hand I’m quite disappointed by the interviewer, especially when he couldn’t set Ian Gibbons’ facts straight and it seemed to me as an enormous lack of respect: he continued with the phrasing “he killed himself” on and on even if Carreyrou corrected him various times. To kill oneself or to suicide for sure refer to the same event, but the hold a different weight and nuances. The same goes when he repeatedly referred to Gibbons as the co-founder and after dismissing the correction multiple times goes on to say “and so… the chief scientist kills himself”. Or more so when he just blatantly rephrases Carreyrou’s words “Rochelle Gibbons, the widow of Ian Gibbons, who tragically killed himself after telling YOU that nothing is working” when Ian told Rochelle and she, after his death, told Carreyrou. All this sensationalised journalism and lack of respect for the facts and sources make my blood boil
I agree; I hated this interview. I've been watching / listening to dozens recently and this is by far the worst. It was really a big rant by the interviewer (how many times can you say 'deranged'!) with Carryrou there to try to keep things on the rails. Awful job.
Also: Is anyone else's hibbles jibbled by the story that young Holmes went out to Singapore for an internship, worked in a lab there, and then came back with ideas? And the fact that Theranos's product goal shifted from drug delivery to microscale diagnostics?
@@woahhhmaithri Real late response, but I think what they're implying is that Holmes might have presented ideas she "borrowed" from her Singapore employers to attract the initial funding to Theranos. Then, when she realized she could get in hot water over misappropriated IP, she switched to promising something she was even less well positioned to deliver. The point being that she never once came up with an original idea that worked and was only ever interested in getting rich investors to subsidize her for producing nothing.
Ruppert Murdock was one the largest investors in Theranos and also the owner of Wall Street Journal and despite repeated pressure from Elizabeth Holmes and her lawyers never interferred in Carreau's reporting, saying he had faith in the reporter to get the story correct and encouraged Holmes to talk to the reporter.
It's amazing, that after all those years they were able to reliably run only one test from that finger prick, because I am pretty sure, that normal labs are able to run more finger prick tests. I remember having them few times (not at Theranos, at hospital normal lab in my country). The doctors are using it for some basic blood work, blood cells counts, I think, maybe blood group, I don't know exactly. The doctors are not using them that often, I think, because usually they are testing for more things that these can do, but I am pretty sure that they can test more than one thing with this. I never liked them, especially after one occasion where it took three attempts before the nurse was able to succesfully draw the sample (it is this thin tube that must be filled with blood without any air bubbles which proved be quite challenging for this particular nurse as the first two samples she drew had bubbles in them). I was begining to dread that I won't leave with a non-pricked finger.
Blood stick tests can run qualitative tests -basically, 'yes or no' tests, but quantitative tests are the tests mostly used for calibrating a patient's chemistry. Theranos couldn't successfully do the second and made some mistakes with simple qualitative tests.
Also: Is anyone else's hibbles jibbled by the story that young Holmes went out to Singapore for an internship, worked in a lab there, and then came back with ideas? And (unrelated to my original point, but is a hibble jibbler nonetheless) the fact that, much later Theranos's product goal shifted from drug delivery to microscale diagnostics?
If only the host would allow the guest to speak. Very unprofessional, horrible interviewer. Trying to show his knowledge of the subject, why have guests?
It was as if the host was more interested in having Carreyrou listen to him than he was interested in listening to Carreyrou. It would have been more appropriate if he made a separate segment of his own opinions rather than constantly injecting them into the interview.
I scrolled through the comments until I found one that mentioned the same thing I thought. This interviewer needs to shut up and let Carreyrou talk, for crying out loud. I can't even listen to it and I'm not even half way through.
@@SaucyWench7 ^^ Exactly what I thought and did. I almost got the feeling that the interviewer lectured Carreyrou on the subject at points, loving hearing his own voice. Anyway, some good points made and I'm truly amazed by Carreyrous relentless uphill battle in this case. Imagine what forces he fought here. I've also got a really strong antipathy against that Boise muppet after looking at this case while at the same time having to make room on my "favorite-people-shelf" for Erica Chung and Tyler Schultz, with Erica placed in center. Her humble, intelligent yet bubbly personality with a clear sense of humor and top notch ethics is truly heartwarming. Kudos to everyone who gave Carreyrou vital inside information thereby helping to finally decapitate this ugly unicorn. 🦄 Now I'm eagerly waiting for the legal aftermath to run until especially Ramesh Balwani ends up in jail on a very long and unpleasant stretch. I can easily visualize certain 'medical procedures' being performed on him in the showers, strongly reminding him about his actions against Theranos many victims who were f*cked over. Elizabeth probably has a few mental conditions making her believe that she's an unstoppable wunderkind while Ramesh was driven by ruthless greed, practically running Theranos as a high-end scam operation and ego masturbation. There are no excuses for his actions against employers, investors and especially those patients who were used as guineapigs while falsifying the test results for their non-functional joke of a 'product' - which was in fact nothing but an attempt to miniaturize existing technology while doing everything wrong - all from an engineering, clinical medical and ethical perspective. Poor engineers who were given an impossible task, being driven to the edge and beyond to fulfill this ridiculous 'vision' of hers and Ramesh thirst for money and fame. I would love to see one of those presentations where the tasteless, chubby little clown were parroting engineering and medical terms and getting it completely wrong. Cringeworthy and hilarious - if it wasn't that serious. I'm hoping for 20 years minimum. 🤡
This technology already exist in an IStat machine. Granted there aren't hundreds of tests available but there's a reason for that. There are commonly tested values and then more uncommon tests needed. The uncommon tests are done with serum and they should be. Also any IStat results which are abnormal are routinely drawn and serum tests are performed to quantify the results. There wasn't anything about this "technology" that excited me nor my peers as registered nurses. It always seemed to be smoke and mirrors. How the hell didn't the people involved in licensing this see this too? Why didn't the California licensing body and others, make them prove the efficacy of the machines? Jesus! PATIENTS were involved. They were the direct focus of this supposed company. Beware America. Your healthcare isn't the true focus of ANYONE other than yourselves. Money is the focus. Do you due diligence regarding your Doctor, Hospital and all aspects of diagnosis and subsequent plan of care. Have a knowledgable advocate if you don't possess the knowledge yourself. DO NOT have a paternalistic view of medicine. You WILL suffer and potentially die as a result.
Best comment here. This is exactly it. Weren't there ONE (there should be thousands) medically qualified researchers who could question all this? It doesn't matter that journalists are able to create hypes and are in the front line of building things up, BUT there are so many researchers out there that could have and should have questioned all this bullshit!
Thank you, Jason. Darn, I went from being annoyed by your voice to all these fawning thank yous. What a great interview and I’m gonna watch all the rest of your videos on RUclips no.w
As a former GLP auditor herewith my contribution for future investigations... There is a finding I just made on the Theranos website that could give you John the next headliner for the WSJ. On Elizabeth Holmes website address: www.theranos.com/manufacturing , you can see six Arburg 470A machines under the title "manufacturing our devices." Since Arburg is manufactured by the German Arburg injection moulding machines for plastics processing, what is "Arburg" doing on Theranos website? Also, see the Arburg home page at: www.arburg.com/en/ - In fact, the website information was stolen from the Arburg mfg company to fill up the gap and mislead investors/people.
steve jobs can teach 70 y.o. grandma how to use computer (i.e. send an email), but Holmes idea that patients will do tests in WalGreens by themselves is insane. For example immagine 70 y.o. grandma coming to doctors office saying: " I went to Walgreens and I have found high transaminases in my blood. I am suspicious that maybe my liver has some problems or maybe I had an intense workout and my muscle fibers are exhausted" For different cholesterol levels tests even doctors do not know how to interpret them.
zelimirvulic bingo! it's a direct to consumer business model that prey's on the patient fear of the scary/unknown which is the very scenario where cognitive biases dominate and cloud out objective decision-making
@@theresechristiansen9769 no worries. I worked with someone reading the NCO indoctrination when she was promoted, and she was pronounced it that way too! A service member said it!!! 🤦♀️
So I know this is not the #1 important issue when it comes to the whole Theranos debacle, but I can't get over the characterization of her beauty and charisma that accompany every article/video on her. It just fails me completely. I think when people see that she was able to con all these rich old men, they make the jump that fried blonde hair + not fat somehow = attractive. But by most objective standards, she's pretty unfortunate looking- dumpy lower body, jowly, big nose, and those scary doll eyes. And the whole charisma thing? I mean, maybe amongst scientists and Silicon Valley types, but just watching (and listening) to clips of her and she's awful!! I mean, she's intense for sure, and that helps, but seriously? Charisma? Elizabeth Holmes literally reminds me of the weird kid in the 3rd grade sitting in the corner eating her boogers.
Yeah. I think the whole cult of personality or at least silicon valley’s version of it accounts for some of her initial ability to get venture capitalists interested. You would think at least some of them would keep a group around them that had no vested interest in the success of a service or product to do some digging. It seems like it would be cheap insurance against losing millions of dollars in a disaster like this. I’m a healthcare professional and watching people like this scam others when they’re at their lowest in terms of their health is reprehensible behavior.
You know, today everyone is beautiful, regardless how ugly and mean they are. Hand-heart + unicorn power forces everyone to fit in the same form - like in the DPRK and former soviet union. ♥ 🦄 🇨🇳 But I agree. She's actually quite ugly and definitely crazy-looking in her CEO persona. Perhaps not to a 90+ year old former statesman though, who lost his eyesight, judgment and potency long before his libido? 👴 RIP George Schultz. You did great things - in the 80's.
Better yet if you look at the photos that were used for the covers of Fortune and Forbes, they were (and in my opinion very much) touched up/altered/photo shopped especially when compared to any casual, every day photos. Her face has been thinned out, nose given more definition, lips better defined.
Well to be fair plenty of companies don't patent to hide their tech. The problem with a biotech is that with regulators, VC, and pier review the cat has to come out of the bag so you need to eventually have to patent.
It be interesting to discuss what she paid her workers? Was it more then industry average? My guess is she probably paid them exceptionally well to help anchor them to her charade of a company. However no matter how much your paid any person with a bit of integrity would quit after learning what was going on which clearly explains the massive employee turnover that plagued the company.
Really terrible interviewer/host. A good interviewer doesn’t try and be a participant and let’s the guest speak. Doesn’t interrupt. And instead thinks of the listeners. He really wrecked this interview and John has a lot of interesting things to say but we couldn’t get to them because this egotistical blockhead kept interrupting every ten seconds.
@@internetpolification god gave him two ears and one mouth. He should at least attempt to use them in their natural ratio. A good interviewer let’s the guest talk. They’re not a participant they’re a host or interviewer. I don’t care what the hosts thoughts may be. I wanna hear what John says. But yeah it’s annoying AF. 👍
Seems like the scientists were complicit, according to Tyler Schultz audible book on what happened. He said it was like an open secret and they even made jokes about her tricking people into investing, etc., etc.
Thanks for your generic and wholly inaccurate assessment of a corporations moral obligation. No one gives a shit about her personal morals, this is about the responsibility of a corporation and it’s obligations under law.
Dave B Murdoc invested way before the journal published the article which led to the downfall of Theranos. Holmes did try to stop the publication by lawsuit threats and begging Murdoc to intervene. But Murdoc refused to interfere with the Journal's decision. His reputation was on the line as well if he knowingly helped Theranos scam people.
@@BKai714 Indeed, she employed the nastiest attorney in the States, private investigators following EVERYONE, massive bullying, threats that people would lose reputations and indeed not just their homes, but their parents' homes. It was positively medieval. Sunny Bulwani and Holmes were terror twins.
The journalist didn't use hindsight but many people commenting may have I have become fascinated by the history 9f this. I had never heard of Theranos until 2018. I would like to think that I would have been sceptical but I am not very confident !
I say the following as someone who frequented - for the short period of time they were open in AZ - the Walgreens clinics with a Theranos lab. I knew some conservatives were on their board, but I did not know THAT many were. Just more evidence that the political aparatchiks that insist they know money and the economy best, are not only just as clueless as anyone else, but are just as guilty of not doing their homework and eating up the BS hook line and sinker WHILE being local to the golden calf they're grooming. It was clear right up front that the company had at the very least not gotten very far yet, since the multiple blood tests I had done were essentially no different than the same tests run at a typical lab around town and required just as much blood. I'm fortunate none of those blood tests impacted me personally in the form of a bad diagnosis or a dangerous drug regimen, but clearly others were less fortunate. Money-chasing idiots, all of them.
Too many ads. Cut it out. Just one, beginning or end. That's the limit. And just incidentally, you might want to distinguish between the Marine Corps and this Marine corpse that you talk about at 38 minutes in. 'Bye! {Over and out, and unsubscribed.}
If you have rich investors and a degree of charisma it appears you can sell snake oil. I don't understand why one of these boxes wasn't taken apart to reveal its miraculous technology. It's not like there aren't enough chemists who know the science?
The biggest tell tale sign was this. Theranos had been singing this tune of finger stick desktop analysis for a decade. If it were possible existing pharma and biotech companies for instance Siemens could have thrown infinite resources at it and get to market first. The fact they didn’t was to me the biggest indicator that it wasn’t technically feasible and thus Theranos had no breakthroughs at all. And it was a lie. She allegedly posed herself on Steve Jobs but missed the major facet about Jobs. He never discussed things publicly until they were built and ready to be launched. Holmes had the pop necks and the trappings but missed the main point. Keep it private and secret until it’s built.
There's always a possibility that the 'big guys' just don't want to rock the boat - they have a massive investment in their existing tech, and a vested interest in maintaining the current model of expensive tests in dedicated labs. Consider also that the petroleum industry has worked hard to de-legitimize both public transit (in LA, historically) and more recently electric cars. Another story to consider is that of IBM, and how they famously ignored the promise of the PC. Ultimately, I suspect this concept will be possible, but using entirely different technologies that are non-destructive on the blood itself, so that 'test 1' does not deplete the blood for 'test 2', etc.
Investigative journalism still alive and well in this country.
The fact that WSJ took so much heat here for exposing the emperor's clothes is troubling.
This is a reminder that we must always cast a cynical eye on the corporate world. If it sounds too good to be true it probably is.
In what way is the pharmaceutical world not the corporate world?
except when zionist are killing innocent people while bombing them and bulldozing their homes.
except when the biden has rape allegations and media is hiding and suppressing it.
except when the enemy is right and american politicians are dead wrong.
@@JamesEPowell did you figure out the answer yet?
Like Ralph Nader said if they’re talking they’re probably lying re pr
John uncovered what 6 years later the prosecution upheld. Thank you Carreyrou
I agree you deserve a Pulitzer Prize. Patients and the medical profession thank you. And we thank you so very much.
This guy and his team got balls, many would have been afraid of such legal grp and wat they are capable of...
anybody with clinical chemistry degree can easily understand that this woman was a fraud from the begining. Here are the some points:
1. interpretation of blood tests will never be in-house and cheap. The current test are already very cheap, but the expensive part is paying people that need a serious degree to interpret results and calibrate equipment. Could you imagine a chaos that would happen if doctors offices would be flooded with uneducated people doing selfmade medical diagnostics.
2, most of diagnostic methods relay on analytes that are not present in finger blood, such as proteins, and therefore you will always have to take blood from a vein.
3. the current apparatus is already using very small amounts of blood, you can do tests with as little as 50 microliters on some of our machines. The reasons why they take more than 50 microlitars is to make sure that they have enough materials if they want to do multiple tests.
zelimirvulic incredibly on point.
Good points but you probably shouldn't make the claim that something can never be done. All we need to know is that it's not possible with current tech and under the current paradigm.
First they think youre crazy, then they fight you, the next thing you know you end up changing the world.
zelimirvulic I worked in scientific equipment sales for 4 years. I remember hearing and reading about Theranos years ago, and about 10,000 red flags went up. It just seemed incredibly fantastical, that this 19 year old teenager had solved “all the problems” relating to a traditional venous blood draw. I doubt she had ever stepped one foot into a lab!
Obviously none of these Theranos board of directors
in 2016 had the brain either:
Riley Bechtel, former Bechtel Group CEO
David Boies, a founder and the chairman of Boies Schiller & Flexner
William Foege, former director CDC
Richard Kovacevich, former Wells Fargo CEO and chairman
James Mattis, later US Secretary of Defense
Fabrizio Bonanni, former executive vice president of Amgen
People were followers impressed by the valuation, not the science. Interviews of her were like soft, Silicon Valley PR questions with no follow-up. The whole thing is horrible that Holmes played with people's lives, knowing the tests did not work. It's worse than conning her investors.
This is top notch high risk investigative journalism at it's purest form.
I agree!
@@slauzon01 Yep
We are trying to book John to come on again! Hopefully he will take us up on our offer
Slight quibble: if it's not investigative, it's not journalism. The phrase "investigative journalist" is a silly tautology.
That said, the Wall Street Journal's news pages are constently excellent, imho. Just good solid consistent work. A trustworthy source.
Their editorial page is not quite the same thing. In its own way it is a throw-back to an earlier age of excellent journalism: opinionated, dedicated, and straighforward in its dedicatiion to spreading the proprietors' opinions. These opinions are, again imho, flaky, selfish, extremely right-wing, and often based on utter fantasy. But they keep their opinions to the editorial page, which as it should be, so no objection from me.
my hats pf off to JC for excellent investigative journalism very bold on Theranos opening a can of worms due to the companies secretive stealthy nature and reluctance to show data or its famed edison device to public scrutiny.
Fabulous interview. The interviewer was prescient about so many elements of this story. He really called it on the demise of the company, the romantic relationship between Holmes and Balkanized, and also on how critical the issue of fraud to patients became in the criminal case.
Hope others who are fascinated by the 2021 trial find this. Loved that he called out how critical the suicide of the senior scientist is, and how aberrant and deranged Elizabeth Holmes response was to the crisis created by the original WSJ article.
This is amazing, seeing this interview, years earlier before John had published his book and how they all just got the breaking news that Walgreens was suspecting they had been conned by Theranos and Elizabeth. It's telling that Elizabeth won't address concerns that are coming up at that time and how she continued to do her talking tour (and accolades), and their suspicions which turned out to be true and how guarded John is (before his book) but how excellent and right on the money this interviewer is as far as what may be happening and Elizabeth's mental state...for what eventually happened. Like the interviewer said, if Elizabeth would have just come clean when Walgreens started pulling out and everyone was suspecting that the Theramos machine just couldn't do (yet) what they were saying it could, and admitted they were still in the testing stage but after a few years, they would solve any problems, make it work and set the world on fire and thus they still should be funded...she would have saved face and it wouldn't have been the big scandal and cautionary tale that it was in the end. Really excellent interview, and interviewer.
did anyone actually listen to her speak? not once has she made any sense. how did this woman get any money.
re: "how did this woman get any money."
Older, influential men whom she smiled at and engaged in conversation with and remained attentive to, after all, they had the money. At its root, she's a narcissist and quite probably sociopathic/psychopathic ...
Family connection
@Bobby Digital re: " A malignant psychopath because giving the wrong test scores can lead into unnecessary medicine or treatment."
What? That makes little sense ... b/c, Houston, we still HAVE a problem. Psychopaths are untreatable to boot. Don't you know that?
she always kept things very vague, just like her patents.
you can choose to different hypotesis: first all people in the board are stupid and guillable, or something smelly fishy and there something deep in this story. That's why today is still free not in jail
LOVED this interview, especially looking back and seeing how the interviewer was already foreseeing a lot of what ended up happening. And of course John Carreyrou is a legend.
When I first heard of Theranos, before this, I had assumed that EH had some deep technical or scientific insight into blood testing that could be translated into a product, even though she was a sophomore at Stanford.
But, now it seems that she just had the thought that a compact, powerful instrument for testing blood would have a large market,
and if huge money was raised, then the technical details could be worked out.
this was common in the internet age.
The problem was, she was peddling real-world medical devices, not software. As Carreyrou has pointed out at various times, it's telling that one of her board members was close to Larry Ellison of Oracle, a company famous for delivering underdeveloped software they had overhyped, then patching it later into a decent product. The same approach works less well in healthcare.
@@griffithchung9377 I don't have an issue with Oracle of the earlier days. There was no such thing as bullet proof software in the those days. Oracle pioneered many experimental concepts in performance and scaling. If 1 out of 4 had long term viability, then its not bad. It is as important to know what does work as much as what does. In those days, there were very many ideas, most of which did not pan out. In the hands of true expert, it would have been reasonably possible to figure out good design methods to use Oracle. The problem was there were many people who believed Oracle was sophisticated in being idiot proof. Any one knows the true idiot can defeat any idiot-proof system.
On the matter of Theranos, the VC's were sophisticated people. even so, handing out the initial 10-20M for a good idea to get set up and started was no big deal, even if E did not want to disclose core technology to be vetted by hired experts (who are not always/often right). It was in the subsequent rounds of funding at the $100M level that disclosure and vetting of IP should have been required
1:13:33 Serious foreshadowing from John Carreyrou with his analogy about Boeing what with the recent Lion Air and Ethiopia Airways crashes involving the B737 Max......the implication being that Boeing may not have done the full testing on the airplane causing the MCAS system to put it into a fatal dive in certain situations.
American Greed needs to do an episode on this debacle.
Absolutely! Elizabeth Holmes and Theranos would make the perfect subject.
They are probably waiting for conviction
We all know it's rampant...
But have very little power to curb or stop it...
I realize it's a late to comment now, but I can't help but think about how many people would have been harmed or even died had John Carreyrou not done the reporting on it.
Walgreens are lucky not to be sued by their customers who took the 'test'. Their level of due care and attention for the machine they allowed in their stores was negligible. They were warned by their own investigator to not get involved with theranos but chose to ignore him because of a fear that theranos would go to their competitors. Fomo.
Goes to show those in power are usually more concerned with money than anything else!
This youtube channel is a great public service. Thank you, Jason.
Watching in June 2018. Your predictions on the timeline for the demise Theranos at 59:20 are surprisingly accurate!
The moderator is like a circus barker. His questions appear to solicit tabloid-type responses. Good for JC for not responding and not MAKING the news. The criminal case just started in Fall 2021. Walgreens bailed in 2016.
this interviewer really likes to show everyone how much he thinks he knows…then Carryrou has to correct him and then finally gets to answer the questions
Felt the same, when he was talking on the death of the Head Chemist, it made me super uncomfortable
@@dillsdollface That part was the worst; I got the feeling Carryrou was trying to protect the wife and the interviewer just kept going on and on, making stuff up like how many stock options she had, what they were worth, etc. And the number of times the interviewer said he was a founder, only to be corrected by Carryrou. Overall, I got the feeling Carryrou was sitting there wishing he had a button for 'my turn to talk!'. I bet the interviewer talked more than Carryrou overall! The interviewer is meant to ask questions, not ramble on with speculations of his own.
Holmes is a mental case.
It wouldn't have mattered at all if what she was creating was an app. She tried to apply iterative IT principles to Medicare. Insane.
Why does the interviewer keeps twisting what John is saying? He did it multiple times and John had to keep correcting him
...because this interviewer is a blithering idiot :) Certainly more interested in hearing his own voice than the subject he is talking to.
I saw John zone out a few times when interviewer was on a long explanation... lol
It's at 30 mins. He is very irritating. Really labours the point he is trying to make.
This is serious Theranos is not responding being open about its technology and giving wrong results as per center for medicare and medicaid services.
Another parallel for comparison that can be made is drug discovery and the pharmaceutical industry. You can't take a drug to market until you've performed and passed multiple levels of testing. The fact that it seems they're doing testing-as-they-go, even though they're marketing their unique system as up-and-running and reliable, just really hibbles my jibbles.
bingo
Christene Ledoux not sure where these HPV claims come from. We do know that the vaccine has halved the prevalence of HPV in the young adult population.
it's hibble jibbling for sure.
Pay-per-view John Carreyrue vs. Elizabeth Holmes in prison interview.
This guy is a genious investigative journalist l. He asks the pointed and most important questions and really digs. Her father was involved in the Enron scandal!!
My bet is to raise the $900 million, Theranos found enough investors without science degrees, because any degree in a wide range of scientific disciplines would give you enough tools to question this and doubt its underpinnings and plausibility.
Sure, but when it became that huge why wasn't there ONE SINGLE person with research degrees out there who questioned this?
@@Persefone94 Who would listen to them? A former Secretary Of State like Schultz or Kissinger? How would those investors know who to trust?
@@ReturnOfTheJ.D. Perhaps established biotech researchers? The journalists even says so himself. They are too ashamed those old rich men and don't understand science. But people ALL OVER the world and read about this magical entrepreneur so what I am asking is why NOBODY with a biotech degree has done anything until now! Then again, the journalists also claims these "affairs" have cycles so maybe soon the industry will come out and have this whole charade analysed? Just the fact that one wasn't to see the product! Crazy!
@@Persefone94 Beyond that, one of the most interesting thing for me was that Holmes marketed her company in the computer tech sphere, which I've been in since 1995, when none of her products had anything to do with software or computer hardware. And the media just lapped it up!
Elizabeth Holmes case = Lance Armstrong caseShe is PT Barnum in Steve Jobs Turtle Neck
I mean Lance Armstrong was a legitimate world champion though. The sport was so dirty that when they stripped his titles, they couldn't even crown a new champion for those years after retesting because everyone who did remotely well was also on steroids. If an entire sport is cheating, they're all on a level playing field.
ROFL! Good One 😅😄😜
@@jeffhampton7405 If everybody is 'doping' then they've already changed the game. I guess in some ways that's now part of the difference between an amateur and a professional athlete imho.
Lance Armstrong should've insisted that all his blood tests for doping be carried out by Theranos....using a diluted pin-prick of blood as a sample, the tests would've all come back clean.
No, the product Lance used worked flawlessly.
I immensely respect Carreyrou’s integrity in his work, how he doesn’t lean in in twisted questions and carefully uses his words in each one of his interviews.
On the other hand I’m quite disappointed by the interviewer, especially when he couldn’t set Ian Gibbons’ facts straight and it seemed to me as an enormous lack of respect: he continued with the phrasing “he killed himself” on and on even if Carreyrou corrected him various times. To kill oneself or to suicide for sure refer to the same event, but the hold a different weight and nuances. The same goes when he repeatedly referred to Gibbons as the co-founder and after dismissing the correction multiple times goes on to say “and so… the chief scientist kills himself”. Or more so when he just blatantly rephrases Carreyrou’s words “Rochelle Gibbons, the widow of Ian Gibbons, who tragically killed himself after telling YOU that nothing is working” when Ian told Rochelle and she, after his death, told Carreyrou. All this sensationalised journalism and lack of respect for the facts and sources make my blood boil
I agree; I hated this interview. I've been watching / listening to dozens recently and this is by far the worst. It was really a big rant by the interviewer (how many times can you say 'deranged'!) with Carryrou there to try to keep things on the rails. Awful job.
1:30:49 As we know today. it was not in Elizabeth's best interests to "come clean".
Saw your recent episode about this. 5 years so much has happened
"Drawing blood from a prick". Technically they're still correct.
LOL heheeheh.
Also: Is anyone else's hibbles jibbled by the story that young Holmes went out to Singapore for an internship, worked in a lab there, and then came back with ideas? And the fact that Theranos's product goal shifted from drug delivery to microscale diagnostics?
I know this was quite a while ago but could you expand on what you mean?
@@woahhhmaithri Real late response, but I think what they're implying is that Holmes might have presented ideas she "borrowed" from her Singapore employers to attract the initial funding to Theranos. Then, when she realized she could get in hot water over misappropriated IP, she switched to promising something she was even less well positioned to deliver. The point being that she never once came up with an original idea that worked and was only ever interested in getting rich investors to subsidize her for producing nothing.
I wonder if Sunny/Elizabeth have given the 40 THUMBS DOWN to this video.
as it turns out, she's all thumbs
Ruppert Murdock was one the largest investors in Theranos and also the owner of Wall Street Journal and despite repeated pressure from Elizabeth Holmes and her lawyers never interferred in Carreau's reporting, saying he had faith in the reporter to get the story correct and encouraged Holmes to talk to the reporter.
It's amazing, that after all those years they were able to reliably run only one test from that finger prick, because I am pretty sure, that normal labs are able to run more finger prick tests. I remember having them few times (not at Theranos, at hospital normal lab in my country). The doctors are using it for some basic blood work, blood cells counts, I think, maybe blood group, I don't know exactly. The doctors are not using them that often, I think, because usually they are testing for more things that these can do, but I am pretty sure that they can test more than one thing with this. I never liked them, especially after one occasion where it took three attempts before the nurse was able to succesfully draw the sample (it is this thin tube that must be filled with blood without any air bubbles which proved be quite challenging for this particular nurse as the first two samples she drew had bubbles in them). I was begining to dread that I won't leave with a non-pricked finger.
Blood stick tests can run qualitative tests -basically, 'yes or no' tests, but quantitative tests are the tests mostly used for calibrating a patient's chemistry. Theranos couldn't successfully do the second and made some mistakes with simple qualitative tests.
"Does Boeing start putting passengers in a jet that hasn't been put through all its checks" - hmmmmm, this didn't age well!
1:06:24 thank you, man, I’m looking at this from may2023 and you are nailing this. Amazing interview, calacanis.
Holmes needs to go to jail, for thinking she's steve jobs. Ditch the turtle neck you are not steve jobs, steve jobs was a man who made a real product.
This is not gossip it is real US Govt Declaring Thernos is faulty and probably inaccurate now
Next assignment for WSJ and Carreyrou - Expose fraud in US stock markets ; How gangsters like GS manipulate stock prices
John Carreyrou and his work are excellent, this presenter/interviewer is dreadful.
I got the same feeling that his style was annoying and he had to be corrected repeatedly. "Marine Corpse", lol.
`I agree, I'm only continuing to watch for Carreyrou's insight.
@@asmileisspecial I ended up fast-forwarding through all his 'monologues' and just listening to Carryrou.
Also: Is anyone else's hibbles jibbled by the story that young Holmes went out to Singapore for an internship, worked in a lab there, and then came back with ideas?
And (unrelated to my original point, but is a hibble jibbler nonetheless) the fact that, much later Theranos's product goal shifted from drug delivery to microscale diagnostics?
If only the host would allow the guest to speak. Very unprofessional, horrible interviewer. Trying to show his knowledge of the subject, why have guests?
I agree- the host was really annoying.. lol
I think he makes some interesting points. Still though, really missing a chance there.
It was as if the host was more interested in having Carreyrou listen to him than he was interested in listening to Carreyrou. It would have been more appropriate if he made a separate segment of his own opinions rather than constantly injecting them into the interview.
I scrolled through the comments until I found one that mentioned the same thing I thought. This interviewer needs to shut up and let Carreyrou talk, for crying out loud. I can't even listen to it and I'm not even half way through.
@@SaucyWench7 ^^ Exactly what I thought and did. I almost got the feeling that the interviewer lectured Carreyrou on the subject at points, loving hearing his own voice. Anyway, some good points made and I'm truly amazed by Carreyrous relentless uphill battle in this case. Imagine what forces he fought here. I've also got a really strong antipathy against that Boise muppet after looking at this case while at the same time having to make room on my "favorite-people-shelf" for Erica Chung and Tyler Schultz, with Erica placed in center. Her humble, intelligent yet bubbly personality with a clear sense of humor and top notch ethics is truly heartwarming. Kudos to everyone who gave Carreyrou vital inside information thereby helping to finally decapitate this ugly unicorn. 🦄 Now I'm eagerly waiting for the legal aftermath to run until especially Ramesh Balwani ends up in jail on a very long and unpleasant stretch. I can easily visualize certain 'medical procedures' being performed on him in the showers, strongly reminding him about his actions against Theranos many victims who were f*cked over. Elizabeth probably has a few mental conditions making her believe that she's an unstoppable wunderkind while Ramesh was driven by ruthless greed, practically running Theranos as a high-end scam operation and ego masturbation. There are no excuses for his actions against employers, investors and especially those patients who were used as guineapigs while falsifying the test results for their non-functional joke of a 'product' - which was in fact nothing but an attempt to miniaturize existing technology while doing everything wrong - all from an engineering, clinical medical and ethical perspective. Poor engineers who were given an impossible task, being driven to the edge and beyond to fulfill this ridiculous 'vision' of hers and Ramesh thirst for money and fame. I would love to see one of those presentations where the tasteless, chubby little clown were parroting engineering and medical terms and getting it completely wrong. Cringeworthy and hilarious - if it wasn't that serious. I'm hoping for 20 years minimum. 🤡
The Boeing analogy at 1:14:00 didn’t age well.
Notice there were no doctors or medical professionals on the board. Or women.
Elizabeth Holmes was on the board. So it isn't correct that there were no women. And there was at least one doctor. And they all failed miserably.
This technology already exist in an IStat machine. Granted there aren't hundreds of tests available but there's a reason for that. There are commonly tested values and then more uncommon tests needed. The uncommon tests are done with serum and they should be. Also any IStat results which are abnormal are routinely drawn and serum tests are performed to quantify the results. There wasn't anything about this "technology" that excited me nor my peers as registered nurses. It always seemed to be smoke and mirrors. How the hell didn't the people involved in licensing this see this too? Why didn't the California licensing body and others, make them prove the efficacy of the machines? Jesus! PATIENTS were involved. They were the direct focus of this supposed company. Beware America. Your healthcare isn't the true focus of ANYONE other than yourselves. Money is the focus. Do you due diligence regarding your Doctor, Hospital and all aspects of diagnosis and subsequent plan of care. Have a knowledgable advocate if you don't possess the knowledge yourself. DO NOT have a paternalistic view of medicine. You WILL suffer and potentially die as a result.
Best comment here. This is exactly it. Weren't there ONE (there should be thousands) medically qualified researchers who could question all this? It doesn't matter that journalists are able to create hypes and are in the front line of building things up, BUT there are so many researchers out there that could have and should have questioned all this bullshit!
Thank you, Jason. Darn, I went from being annoyed by your voice to all these fawning thank yous. What a great interview and I’m gonna watch all the rest of your videos on RUclips no.w
As a former GLP auditor herewith my contribution for future investigations... There is a finding I just made on the Theranos website that could give you John the next headliner for the WSJ. On Elizabeth Holmes website address: www.theranos.com/manufacturing , you can see six Arburg 470A machines under the title "manufacturing our devices." Since Arburg is manufactured by the German Arburg injection moulding machines for plastics processing, what is "Arburg" doing on Theranos website? Also, see the Arburg home page at: www.arburg.com/en/ - In fact, the website information was stolen from the Arburg mfg company to fill up the gap and mislead investors/people.
Fun to come back and watch this in 2021
steve jobs can teach 70 y.o. grandma how to use computer (i.e. send an email), but Holmes idea that patients will do tests in WalGreens by themselves is insane.
For example immagine 70 y.o. grandma coming to doctors office saying: " I went to Walgreens and I have found high transaminases in my blood. I am suspicious that maybe my liver has some problems or maybe I had an intense workout and my muscle fibers are exhausted"
For different cholesterol levels tests even doctors do not know how to interpret them.
zelimirvulic bingo! it's a direct to consumer business model that prey's on the patient fear of the scary/unknown which is the very scenario where cognitive biases dominate and cloud out objective decision-making
zelimirvulic
41:00----- a thousand word smile
Investigate journalism is still around. It's just not all at the corporate level like WSJ or ABC.
Theranos sounds like a name of a super villain
Thera(py) + (diag)nos(is)
Thank you John Carreyrou!!! True American hero
Okay, Jason pretty accurate vis a vis Holmes' defense claims. Guy has good intuitions.
How it started!
It’s not pronounced as “corpse.” It’s pronounced “core.”
Sorry - it’s my OCD and also being a veteran.
✌️
i sympathise, i was a corpsman
Look, I didn't even notice that! Thx for bringing it up. People are stupid sometimes.....And I'm a civilian.
@@bbbrucebb 😝😝😝😝 no problem!
@@theresechristiansen9769 no worries. I worked with someone reading the NCO indoctrination when she was promoted, and she was pronounced it that way too! A service member said it!!! 🤦♀️
Gotta let ur guests talk, m8
David Boies Represented Al Gore In The Florida Recount,Also Harvey Weinstein And Theranos.He Has Disgraced Himself.
Lawyer luvs
wealthy criminals...
Her father was on the board of Enron
So I know this is not the #1 important issue when it comes to the whole Theranos debacle, but I can't get over the characterization of her beauty and charisma that accompany every article/video on her.
It just fails me completely.
I think when people see that she was able to con all these rich old men, they make the jump that fried blonde hair + not fat somehow = attractive. But by most objective standards, she's pretty unfortunate looking- dumpy lower body, jowly, big nose, and those scary doll eyes.
And the whole charisma thing? I mean, maybe amongst scientists and Silicon Valley types, but just watching (and listening) to clips of her and she's awful!! I mean, she's intense for sure, and that helps, but seriously? Charisma?
Elizabeth Holmes literally reminds me of the weird kid in the 3rd grade sitting in the corner eating her boogers.
Yeah. I think the whole cult of personality or at least silicon valley’s version of it accounts for some of her initial ability to get venture capitalists interested. You would think at least some of them would keep a group around them that had no vested interest in the success of a service or product to do some digging. It seems like it would be cheap insurance against losing millions of dollars in a disaster like this. I’m a healthcare professional and watching people like this scam others when they’re at their lowest in terms of their health is reprehensible behavior.
You know, today everyone is beautiful, regardless how ugly and mean they are. Hand-heart + unicorn power forces everyone to fit in the same form - like in the DPRK and former soviet union. ♥ 🦄 🇨🇳
But I agree. She's actually quite ugly and definitely crazy-looking in her CEO persona.
Perhaps not to a 90+ year old former statesman though, who lost his eyesight, judgment and potency long before his libido? 👴
RIP George Schultz. You did great things - in the 80's.
🎯
If one sees her as ‘beauty and charisma’ that person must identify with snakes.
Better yet if you look at the photos that were used for the covers of Fortune and Forbes, they were (and in my opinion very much) touched up/altered/photo shopped especially when compared to any casual, every day photos. Her face has been thinned out, nose given more definition, lips better defined.
Excellent public service. Keep it up!
This interviewer is atrocious in every interview that he conducts. Interrupts, shows off, tells the story, doesn’t listen. Truly awful
Henry, George, David, et.al., there’s no fool like an old fool, right? We need to listen to our grandchildren, who have their finger on the pulse.
An old horney fool & his money are soon parted ! EH.
Well to be fair plenty of companies don't patent to hide their tech. The problem with a biotech is that with regulators, VC, and pier review the cat has to come out of the bag so you need to eventually have to patent.
It's called a finger stick. The fascination with prick is hilarious.
Amazing that good journalism like this came out of the WSJ in light of the nonsense they published about Pewdiepie
It be interesting to discuss what she paid her workers? Was it more then industry average? My guess is she probably paid them exceptionally well to help anchor them to her charade of a company. However no matter how much your paid any person with a bit of integrity would quit after learning what was going on which clearly explains the massive employee turnover that plagued the company.
I can't stand the term Start up, it's just business...a company,,,it means nothing
Stop advertising yourself, what is the main topic here ?
YOUR SHOW IS NOT WORTH ALL THE PROMOS YOU DO,,,SORRY
Really terrible interviewer/host. A good interviewer doesn’t try and be a participant and let’s the guest speak. Doesn’t interrupt. And instead thinks of the listeners. He really wrecked this interview and John has a lot of interesting things to say but we couldn’t get to them because this egotistical blockhead kept interrupting every ten seconds.
He does it every interview he does.
@@internetpolification god gave him two ears and one mouth. He should at least attempt to use them in their natural ratio. A good interviewer let’s the guest talk. They’re not a participant they’re a host or interviewer. I don’t care what the hosts thoughts may be. I wanna hear what John says. But yeah it’s annoying AF. 👍
Seems like the scientists were complicit, according to Tyler Schultz audible book on what happened. He said it was like an open secret and they even made jokes about her tricking people into investing, etc., etc.
What's the name of the song track at the intro?
Well Done JC. 🎉🎉🎉🎉❤
Elizabeth Holmes' moral obligation is about one person, and it is not you.
Thanks for your generic and wholly inaccurate assessment of a corporations moral obligation.
No one gives a shit about her personal morals, this is about the responsibility of a corporation and it’s obligations under law.
Murdoc who owns the WSJ and also had 100mil in theranos shares. How did he lose money knowing this? He could have profited off that situation.
Dave B Murdoc invested way before the journal published the article which led to the downfall of Theranos. Holmes did try to stop the publication by lawsuit threats and begging Murdoc to intervene. But Murdoc refused to interfere with the Journal's decision. His reputation was on the line as well if he knowingly helped Theranos scam people.
@@BKai714 Good point.
@@BKai714 Indeed, she employed the nastiest attorney in the States, private investigators following EVERYONE, massive bullying, threats that people would lose reputations and indeed not just their homes, but their parents' homes. It was positively medieval. Sunny Bulwani and Holmes were terror twins.
Well it's 2019 and trial is 6 months away...wow!
She even tricked 2020....
Make that 2 yrs
Isn’t hindsight great?
The journalist didn't use hindsight but many people commenting may have
I have become fascinated by the history 9f this. I had never heard of Theranos until 2018. I would like to think that I would have been sceptical but I am not very confident !
I say the following as someone who frequented - for the short period of time they were open in AZ - the Walgreens clinics with a Theranos lab. I knew some conservatives were on their board, but I did not know THAT many were. Just more evidence that the political aparatchiks that insist they know money and the economy best, are not only just as clueless as anyone else, but are just as guilty of not doing their homework and eating up the BS hook line and sinker WHILE being local to the golden calf they're grooming.
It was clear right up front that the company had at the very least not gotten very far yet, since the multiple blood tests I had done were essentially no different than the same tests run at a typical lab around town and required just as much blood. I'm fortunate none of those blood tests impacted me personally in the form of a bad diagnosis or a dangerous drug regimen, but clearly others were less fortunate.
Money-chasing idiots, all of them.
The Boeing comment with hindsight 😢
Boeing was an analogy that aged poorly.
Too many ads. Cut it out. Just one, beginning or end. That's the limit.
And just incidentally, you might want to distinguish between the Marine Corps and this Marine corpse that you talk about at 38 minutes in.
'Bye!
{Over and out, and unsubscribed.}
1:08:26 I could agree with that assessment.
I miss that intro
If you have rich investors and a degree of charisma it appears you can sell snake oil. I don't understand why one of these boxes wasn't taken apart to reveal its miraculous technology.
It's not like there aren't enough chemists who know the science?
Because she “hid” the boxes under the guise of proprietary knowledge.
Your intuistion was 100% correct
SHOE LEATHER JOURNALISM HONEST NEWS REPORTING OF OLD MAYBE WE NEED MORE OF THIS AS A GOOD MEDIA TODAY....
The biggest tell tale sign was this. Theranos had been singing this tune of finger stick desktop analysis for a decade. If it were possible existing pharma and biotech companies for instance Siemens could have thrown infinite resources at it and get to market first. The fact they didn’t was to me the biggest indicator that it wasn’t technically feasible and thus Theranos had no breakthroughs at all. And it was a lie. She allegedly posed herself on Steve Jobs but missed the major facet about Jobs. He never discussed things publicly until they were built and ready to be launched. Holmes had the pop necks and the trappings but missed the main point. Keep it private and secret until it’s built.
There's always a possibility that the 'big guys' just don't want to rock the boat - they have a massive investment in their existing tech, and a vested interest in maintaining the current model of expensive tests in dedicated labs. Consider also that the petroleum industry has worked hard to de-legitimize both public transit (in LA, historically) and more recently electric cars. Another story to consider is that of IBM, and how they famously ignored the promise of the PC. Ultimately, I suspect this concept will be possible, but using entirely different technologies that are non-destructive on the blood itself, so that 'test 1' does not deplete the blood for 'test 2', etc.
Anybody reading this a lab tech? Any chance this could become a reality?
This interviewer was making some really silly extraoplations.
1:13:39 that aged well 😂
1:13:40 Oops.
01:54 - Hanry Kissinger lost a few million ... Could not have happened to a nicer 'scam of the earth'
Read The Art of Short Selling before you invest anywhere public private angel whatever.
I enjoyed this interview, but what a weird note to end it on. "East coast people are the only ones who care about truth." What?
Interviewer is narrcistic.