Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Why was Theranos so believable? Medicine needs to look in the mirror

#1
C C Offline
https://www.statnews.com/2018/05/24/ther...evability/

EXCERPT: I watched the recent “60 Minutes” report on the rise and fall of Theranos, the test-everything-with-a-fingerstick company that recently flamed out, costing numerous high-profile investors north of $700 million. The report laid out the standard narrative about Theranos, including healthy doses of deception and greed, an absence of various sorts of oversight, and too much Silicon Valley mythology.

To get some perspective on what happened [...] I re-read a December 2014 article in the New Yorker on Theranos and its founder, Elizabeth Holmes. What struck me as I compared [...] is one simple question that seems to have been missed in the ashes: Why was the Theranos pitch so believable in the first place?

[...] As I further contemplated the believability question, I couldn’t help but wonder whether Theranos managed to thrive for as long as it did because it existed in a biomedical innovation ecosystem that is full of hype. In other words, in a world full of stories and claims about the next big transformation in medicine, did the claims made by Theranos stand out as that outrageous, unbelievable, or in need of extra scrutiny? Not when you measure it by a few examples of standout hype I have collected over the years.

[...] So, why was the story of Theranos so believable in the first place? In addition to the specific mix of greed, bad corporate governance, and too much “next” Steve Jobs, Theranos thrived in a biomedical innovation world that has become prisoner to a seemingly endless supply of hype. That so many high-profile individuals and institutions fed and continue to feed the hype makes me think it is just a matter of time until we see the arrival of Theranos 2.0.

MORE: https://www.statnews.com/2018/05/24/ther...evability/
Reply
#2
Magical Realist Offline
I saw that 60 minutes segment. I think the narrative of the charismatic entrepeneur making good that feeds the whole tech industry dominated peoples minds. Holmes was beautiful and intelligent and bold and everybody so wanted it to be true. Her magic box that runs all tests on blood. A new multi-billion dollar industry. People weren't used to charlatans taking them for a ride. If Steve Jobs and Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerburg and Elon Musk why not Elizabeth Holmes? The moral here is don't jump on the much touted bandwagon just because everyone else is. Do your own homework.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  UK's Cass report on gender medicine demolishes activist tropes? + Insect apocalypse C C 0 202 Apr 13, 2024 07:07 PM
Last Post: C C
  Article Why race-based health care is bad medicine: from BiDil to kidney transplants C C 0 81 Mar 30, 2023 05:19 PM
Last Post: C C
  The corruption of medicine by systemic oppression conspiracy theories C C 0 126 Aug 16, 2022 03:33 PM
Last Post: C C
  Even "good racism" can't base special needs on mere appearances & ethnic claims? C C 0 108 Mar 18, 2022 07:26 PM
Last Post: C C
  The FDA needs to take another look at laser-based 'vaginal rejuvenation' C C 0 67 Feb 23, 2022 07:41 PM
Last Post: C C
  Brexit paves the way for gene-edited crops (EU phobias in rear view mirror?) C C 0 78 Sep 29, 2021 03:26 AM
Last Post: C C
  Medicine's major injections of Woke ideology + How statistical significance was born C C 0 85 Aug 12, 2021 05:32 PM
Last Post: C C
  Science needs a radical overhaul + False epidemic of skin cancer stirs new proposals C C 0 108 Feb 3, 2021 11:37 PM
Last Post: C C
  Chris Cuomo taking junk medicine for COVID-19 + Man injects own semen for back pain C C 0 287 Apr 17, 2020 08:03 AM
Last Post: C C
  WHO endorses traditional chinese medicine: Expect deaths to rise C C 2 433 Oct 4, 2018 04:33 AM
Last Post: Syne



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)