4 ms·
There is an accompanying article [1] that gives more background. The part on there internal quality control tests show the tech just isn't there. > The inspect
by tyre 11y ago
There is an accompanying article [1] that gives more background. The part on there internal quality control tests show the tech just isn't there.
> The inspection report showed that 29% of the quality-control checks performed on the company’s proprietary blood-testing devices in October 2014 produced results outside the range considered acceptable by Theranos.
> In February 2015, an Edison-run test to measure a hormone that affects testosterone levels failed 87% of quality-control checks, the report said.
It doesn't look like they are using Edison to run most of their tests, so we can excuse the experimental tests if they aren't being used for actual patients. Chalk that up to work-in-progress.
What is absolutely inexcusable is their treatment of patients, especially when they found out that results were incorrect.
> Inspectors also found that Theranos sometimes released patients’ results even when the Edison devices used to run those tests produced erratic results in quality-control checks.
and
> The inspection report said Theranos didn’t notify doctors treating patients potentially affected by the erroneous results until mid-November, or seven weeks after the inspectors first identified the problems.
Seven weeks to notify customers that you may have fucked up a medical test? We reach out to customers about potential software bugs within an hour.
This is an instance where I am glad to have government slowing down innovation. "Move fast, break things" doesn't work when people's lives are at stake.
[1]:
http://www.wsj.com/articles/theranos-devices-often-failed-accuracy-requirements-1459465578 http://www.wsj.com/articles/theranos-devices-often-failed-ac...
- diskcat 11y ago>"Move fast, break things" doesn't work when people's lives are at stake. No matter what you do, people's lives are at stake. Even an app that suggests which restaurant to go for dinner could cause somebody to die by suggesting a restaurant in an area with higher rate of accidents. The problem is how little consumers have control of when it comes to healthcare. We like to hand wave and pretend that the rules of economics don't apply when it comes to healthcare so instead of having a market where a person can shop for medicine, doctor's service, equipment etc. it all is more or less just close your eyes go in the tunnel and you will be taken care of and any issue of choice with regards to money is occluded by 'universal healthcare is a human right'. If I could go to a hospital who would then give me a brochure of all the equipments they use and I find out one of their supplier is a dodgy companies that have dodgy equipments and terrible bug-handling practice I would go to another seller just as I would a smartphone that uses a dodgy processor that is known to break.
- Dr_tldr 11y agoYou don't think there might be a certain information asymmetry between you and a medical care provider? And if there's not, why are you going to doctor at all?
- officialchicken 11y agoRegulatory reasons. Even if there was pure info symmetry (a unicorn itself), I can't "prescribe" treatments for myself even to address well-known ailments, such as the case with anyone with a chronic disease or infection.
- diskcat 11y agoThere is an information asymmetry when I buy an apple at the farmer market. That doesn't mean that every time I buy an apple I'm getting ripped off by the seller.
- Dr_tldr 11y agoIf you feel the value of your life/health is essentially comparable in gravity and scale to buying an apple at a farmer's market, your opinions on healthcare regulation are unlikely to be relevant to very many people.
- URSpider94 11y agoI'm going to go out on a limb and say that you fall a couple of sigma away from the typical customer for medical tests. I would argue that most people, when they are already ill, do not want to have to perform life-or-death cost/benefit tradeoff analyses on highly technical accuracy data from the service provider who will perform their blood tests. They want to be assured that everyone in the market meets a basic standard of competency. We as a society have made a decision that we will pay more for our blood tests so that we don't have to do that homework for ourselves. I do definitely think there is an opportunity for individuals to be better informed about the cost and quality of their health care, as long as it meets a basic standard. As an analogy, the airline industry is able to be cutthroat-competitive on fares and routing, while still being highly regulated when it comes to safety. You can't choose to take a cheaper flight by agreeing to let the airline skip on oil changes.