2 ms·
I have been following the Theranos articles in the Wall Street Journal closely. (I’m not a scientist and have no experience working in a clinical lab, so my opi
by chmaynard 11y ago
I have been following the Theranos articles in the Wall Street Journal closely. (I’m not a scientist and have no experience working in a clinical lab, so my opinions are those of an interested observer.)
My opinion is that Theranos should still be a small biotech company operating in R&D mode. They had no business going to market with a methodology and a product that were unproven and entirely hidden from scientific peer review. After the dust settles and they reorganize, that’s probably what will happen. Theranos should also allow their investors to pull out without any consequences.
- mathattack 11y agoIs peer review needed for them to go to market? Or is the real issue the shoddiness of their results? I'm amazed that they (or the people who contracted them) are not getting sued. If they mess up a blood test, someone could get mistreated and die.
- chmaynard 11y agoJust to clarify, the testing device they claim to have invented is proprietary and they have every right to protect their IP. By calling out the lack of peer review, I'm referring to the science behind the use of fingerstick sampling. When you extract blood from a vein with a sterile needle, the blood is uncontaminated. When you stab someone’s finger with a blade or sharp pin, presumably you have lacerated hundreds or thousands of capillaries. The blood that emerges is contaminated by tissues inside the finger and by oils and bacteria on the surface of the finger. It’s possible to do simple tests like iron level with this blood and get accurate results. More complicated tests are another matter, and require scientific investigation.