5 ms·

Does the composition of Theranos' board strike anyone else as very weird? It seems much more like the board of a foreign policy think thank than a biotech start

Does the composition of Theranos' board strike anyone else as very weird? It seems much more like the board of a foreign policy think thank than a biotech start up. There are three former cabinet secretaries (state and defense), two former very senior military officers, two former senators (one regarded as a foreign policy expert), a bigshot DC lawyer, and the former CEOs of Bechtel and Wells Fargo. The only physicians are former Senator Frist and a very credentialed epidemiologist, but it's not clear to me that either would have much knowledge about laboratory testing. I'm really curious what the rationale for this board composition is. [Edit: I'm curious if this is connected to Holmes' father's experience in the foreign policy establishment]

michaelhoffman 11y ago
If you were trying to get military contracts that might be pretty helpful. The military has a huge healthcare system. So does the Department of Veterans Affairs.
hackaflocka 11y ago
I suspect that Holmes is the "front" for someone connected to her father (who is a "civil servant" -- dunno why the article isn't more specific). Probably someone connected to military, government, etc.
- GabrielF00 11y ago
  Her father has a high-level job at USAID. https://www.usaid.gov/who-we-are/organization/christian-holmes https://www.usaid.gov/who-we-are/organization/christian-holm...
  - bookbok 11y ago
    > Holmes worked in the field with USAID missions in Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Egypt, Yemen, Ghana, Haiti, Liberia, Kenya, and Ethiopia > Holmes served in the U.S. Army, Second Lieutenant, Civil Affairs, receiving the U.S. Army Soldier’s Medal for Heroism. Want to guess who he really works for?
    - deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
      - roborodent 11y ago
        Civil Affairs actually tend to be in the field quite a bit.
    - geomark 11y ago
      Hah! Maybe Theranos and Palantir have more in common than I thought.
    - GabrielF00 11y ago
      It seems unlikely that a covert operative would take job as CFO of the EPA, but what do I know.
      - hackaflocka 11y ago
        Maybe they'd do it because it's a good cover (e.g., you find it unlikely)?
ekianjo 11y ago
Well Dropbox has weird board members as well.
pkaye 11y ago
Their early strategy was to get military contract but it didn't go too far because they needed to get FDA approval or something.
randycupertino 11y ago
I think they wanted a bunch of Washington power players because their real money grab was pushing regulation changes so that patients could go and do their blood tests themselves, without a doctor's order. Surprisingly, they were actually successful in getting this passed in 1 state already- Arizona. If they were able to push that through it would be a HUGE gamechanging cash cow, because people could either self pay or even try to get Medicare to pay for it if they wanted to run their own bloodwork without seeing a PCP and getting an order. Physicians groups, insurance companies and biomedical ethics groups aren't really hip to this idea because patient self-testing bloodwork may open pandoras box to a lot of unnecessary expenses, especially if the patient is trying to bill this through their insurance. False positives can and do happen, and they lead to unwarranted appointments, specialist visits, exploratory surgeries, etc. Other reasons physician groups are opposed to it is because they view it as profiting off people who are hypochondriacs, and a huge amount of the customers would probably be drug abusers and steroid users. Most likely, people who would go and do their own blood work are the system's "super ultilizers" and they are the ones who are already costing the insurance companies and the states $3-4 million per patient per year in healthcare expenses. It's not uncommon to have a fibro/rheumatoid arthritis/hypochondriac patient who bills $10 million per year. If these people go to the ER and cost 3k per visit every time they can't fall asleep and have anxiety (~12x per month), imagine how often they might want to go and run their own bloodwork. Not being able to order our own labs as patients is the reason there are moral objections to for-profit hospitals selling "full body scans" and dermatologists doing unwarranted full body mole checks. Generally the proper guidelines is to only administer testing when you suspect that something is wrong.
- pdonis 11y ago
  > Physicians groups, insurance companies and biomedical ethics groups aren't really hip to this idea because patient self-testing bloodwork may open pandoras box to a lot of unnecessary expenses, especially if the patient is trying to bill this through their insurance. Yes, and this concern is justified. If I have to pay for your lab tests, I'm not going to let you just decide to run whatever tests you want. That would be foolish. The solution to this is to allow people to order their own tests if they pay for them themselves. A company like Theranos could then profit by making tests cheap enough for ordinary people to afford them, which would bring much-needed competition to the health care testing industry. But first they need to be able to show everyone, by ironclad evidence, that their tests are reliable.

michaelhoffman 11y ago

If you were trying to get military contracts that might be pretty helpful. The military has a huge healthcare system. So does the Department of Veterans Affairs.

hackaflocka 11y ago

I suspect that Holmes is the "front" for someone connected to her father (who is a "civil servant" -- dunno why the article isn't more specific). Probably someone connected to military, government, etc.

GabrielF00 11y ago
Her father has a high-level job at USAID. https://www.usaid.gov/who-we-are/organization/christian-holmes https://www.usaid.gov/who-we-are/organization/christian-holm...
- bookbok 11y ago
  > Holmes worked in the field with USAID missions in Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Egypt, Yemen, Ghana, Haiti, Liberia, Kenya, and Ethiopia > Holmes served in the U.S. Army, Second Lieutenant, Civil Affairs, receiving the U.S. Army Soldier’s Medal for Heroism. Want to guess who he really works for?
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
    - roborodent 11y ago
      Civil Affairs actually tend to be in the field quite a bit.
  - geomark 11y ago
    Hah! Maybe Theranos and Palantir have more in common than I thought.
  - GabrielF00 11y ago
    It seems unlikely that a covert operative would take job as CFO of the EPA, but what do I know.
    - hackaflocka 11y ago
      Maybe they'd do it because it's a good cover (e.g., you find it unlikely)?

ekianjo 11y ago

Well Dropbox has weird board members as well.

pkaye 11y ago

Their early strategy was to get military contract but it didn't go too far because they needed to get FDA approval or something.

randycupertino 11y ago

I think they wanted a bunch of Washington power players because their real money grab was pushing regulation changes so that patients could go and do their blood tests themselves, without a doctor's order. Surprisingly, they were actually successful in getting this passed in 1 state already- Arizona. If they were able to push that through it would be a HUGE gamechanging cash cow, because people could either self pay or even try to get Medicare to pay for it if they wanted to run their own bloodwork without seeing a PCP and getting an order. Physicians groups, insurance companies and biomedical ethics groups aren't really hip to this idea because patient self-testing bloodwork may open pandoras box to a lot of unnecessary expenses, especially if the patient is trying to bill this through their insurance. False positives can and do happen, and they lead to unwarranted appointments, specialist visits, exploratory surgeries, etc. Other reasons physician groups are opposed to it is because they view it as profiting off people who are hypochondriacs, and a huge amount of the customers would probably be drug abusers and steroid users. Most likely, people who would go and do their own blood work are the system's "super ultilizers" and they are the ones who are already costing the insurance companies and the states $3-4 million per patient per year in healthcare expenses. It's not uncommon to have a fibro/rheumatoid arthritis/hypochondriac patient who bills $10 million per year. If these people go to the ER and cost 3k per visit every time they can't fall asleep and have anxiety (~12x per month), imagine how often they might want to go and run their own bloodwork. Not being able to order our own labs as patients is the reason there are moral objections to for-profit hospitals selling "full body scans" and dermatologists doing unwarranted full body mole checks. Generally the proper guidelines is to only administer testing when you suspect that something is wrong.

pdonis 11y ago
> Physicians groups, insurance companies and biomedical ethics groups aren't really hip to this idea because patient self-testing bloodwork may open pandoras box to a lot of unnecessary expenses, especially if the patient is trying to bill this through their insurance. Yes, and this concern is justified. If I have to pay for your lab tests, I'm not going to let you just decide to run whatever tests you want. That would be foolish. The solution to this is to allow people to order their own tests if they pay for them themselves. A company like Theranos could then profit by making tests cheap enough for ordinary people to afford them, which would bring much-needed competition to the health care testing industry. But first they need to be able to show everyone, by ironclad evidence, that their tests are reliable.