4 ms·

I have no sympathy for her. It's incredibly irresponsible to do what she did- play marketing games with medical technology. Theranos' unethical behaviour has ma

by fnbr 10y ago

I have no sympathy for her. It's incredibly irresponsible to do what she did- play marketing games with medical technology. Theranos' unethical behaviour has made it much more difficult for future innovation in the medical field, and has potentially cost lives. This sanction is appropriate. My fiancee works as a laboratory scientist in a hospital conducting patient sample testing, and her and her co-workers take their work incredibly seriously- checking, and re-checking their work, with complex protocols to guarantee the accuracy of their testing. It's disappointing to see that same attitude lacking in Theranos.

rtpg 10y ago
I agree with the sentiment, this stuff's important. But when does "playing marketing games" become OK? Maybe for mobile games, but even then you have kids taking their parent's credit cards out of wallets and spending 100s... everything's important to somebody. Clearly medical tech is extra important, and the consequences even more grave, but I hope this is a lesson to everyone that trying to dupe all of society sometimes has consequences. And hopefully convince more people to do ... nicer things? Better things? Well, at least taking things seriously.
- BinaryIdiot 10y ago
  > But when does "playing marketing games" become OK? When it comes to anything that can affect your health in medical related capacities it's tough to say it's ever okay. But duping a 9 year old into buying $200 worth of bullshit in-app purchases? Also very unethical, in my opinion, but at least it doesn't directly result in inaccurate medical care which could easily lead to serious injury or death. So ultimately I'm not sure it's ever ethically okay but that's probably going to depend on each person's definition of "playing marketing games".
  - MawNicker 10y ago
    It's only ever OK. That's just a societal agreement. It's never good. It seems like an extremely conservative application of innocent until proven guilty. Advertising has been deemed necessary despite the ways it can be abused. We should likely be more critical in "serious" markets. It's insane that we let Coke/Pepsi regularly subject us all to babes in bikinis sensually consuming fizzy sugar water. That or whatever other psychologically invasive scene they've contrived. But even then, we still require that you not tell outright lies about your product. This ruling was definitely fair. If not lenient. It would be nice to see fewer marketing games it's just hard to find a good place to draw the line. Not lying is a very low bar.
    - rtpg 10y ago
      I mean, advertising can also just be about brand awareness, or talking about a product. How many psychological tricks are ads in the sidebar of Stack Overflow? The concept of advertising isn't inherently evil. To be clear, I agree 10000% with the action taken here. I would like for us to start applying this strict standard more often.
      - MawNicker 10y ago
        I'm talking about "playing marketing games" and not advertising in general. Then I'm talking about how hard it is to tell the two apart and the lousy compromises we've made in doing so. That being said I think brand awareness is mostly manipulative. Consumers need product awareness. It's definitely on the safer side of games though. I suspect it's fairly intrinsic/necessary. I don't want to advertise for my competitors. The sidebar on StackOverflow is great.
- solidsnack9000 10y ago
  Maybe it's never "OK" but sometimes it threatens life and limb.
whbk 10y ago
Agreed - she should be imprisoned. You don't get to play with lives.
- ben_jones 10y ago
  I think that's the problem. It hasn't been linked to deaths yet. I fear it might be impossible to link a ~year of invalidated blood testing as the cause of death. Did Theranos test for fatal diseases? Did they just test for mundane stuff?
  - MawNicker 10y ago
    > I fear it might be impossible to link a ~year of invalidated blood testing as the cause of death. I can only see one way this happened. Someone got a false negative. They would have gone to another lab but chose Theranos based on marketing claims. They get tested now and see their positive result for a terminal condition they can no longer treat.
Fricken 10y ago
Trying to imagine myself willfully misleading her investors and the public for as long as she did, and at that scale extends beyond my capacity for empathy. I suspect she's genuinely delusional. I don't know how else someone could do something like that.
- ben_jones 10y ago
  I honestly think most entrepreneurs are capable of it. The hype level of Theranos is present at MOST start-ups. I.E. A Large software company that allowed user data to be stolen because of known security issues. Software company does not inform the public of the breach until forced to. A large medical company that allowed a very large failure rate of testing devices from known issues. Medical company does not inform the public of the breach until forced to.
  - schwarrrtz 10y ago
    Agreed. This should be a case study for the importance of following best practices and adhering to appropriate safety protocols. Such protocols should exist in any organization that designs products for other people to use.
  - wiz21c 10y ago
    What scares me most is that the failure are always seen as morally acceptable loss to the founders : "it's that or we have to fire half the company", "it's that or we can't pay salaries", "it's that or closing the company", "it's that or we're in even bigger legal troubles". It basically boils down to "I know I'm doing something wrong but I have no choice". I've personally met one these people. Very smart guy, but unable to say "I'm doing something wrong, so it's better to stop now". Ethics should be hammered in some people's head...
    - solidsnack9000 10y ago
      "I know it's wrong but those are my orders..."
- 10y ago
iaw 10y ago
It's a cold fusion moment for all medical innovation perceived as coming from a 'start-up.' Funding for real fusion research is still difficult to come by because of the shadow of the cold fusion debacle...
- drjesusphd 10y ago
  You're absolutely right. And it continues to this day (cough... Lockheed... cough). There is a huge credibility gap in fusion research, due to no fault in the mainstream research community.

by fnbr 10y ago

rtpg 10y ago

I agree with the sentiment, this stuff's important. But when does "playing marketing games" become OK? Maybe for mobile games, but even then you have kids taking their parent's credit cards out of wallets and spending 100s... everything's important to somebody. Clearly medical tech is extra important, and the consequences even more grave, but I hope this is a lesson to everyone that trying to dupe all of society sometimes has consequences. And hopefully convince more people to do ... nicer things? Better things? Well, at least taking things seriously.

BinaryIdiot 10y ago
> But when does "playing marketing games" become OK? When it comes to anything that can affect your health in medical related capacities it's tough to say it's ever okay. But duping a 9 year old into buying $200 worth of bullshit in-app purchases? Also very unethical, in my opinion, but at least it doesn't directly result in inaccurate medical care which could easily lead to serious injury or death. So ultimately I'm not sure it's ever ethically okay but that's probably going to depend on each person's definition of "playing marketing games".
- MawNicker 10y ago
  It's only ever OK. That's just a societal agreement. It's never good. It seems like an extremely conservative application of innocent until proven guilty. Advertising has been deemed necessary despite the ways it can be abused. We should likely be more critical in "serious" markets. It's insane that we let Coke/Pepsi regularly subject us all to babes in bikinis sensually consuming fizzy sugar water. That or whatever other psychologically invasive scene they've contrived. But even then, we still require that you not tell outright lies about your product. This ruling was definitely fair. If not lenient. It would be nice to see fewer marketing games it's just hard to find a good place to draw the line. Not lying is a very low bar.
  - rtpg 10y ago
    I mean, advertising can also just be about brand awareness, or talking about a product. How many psychological tricks are ads in the sidebar of Stack Overflow? The concept of advertising isn't inherently evil. To be clear, I agree 10000% with the action taken here. I would like for us to start applying this strict standard more often.
    - MawNicker 10y ago
      I'm talking about "playing marketing games" and not advertising in general. Then I'm talking about how hard it is to tell the two apart and the lousy compromises we've made in doing so. That being said I think brand awareness is mostly manipulative. Consumers need product awareness. It's definitely on the safer side of games though. I suspect it's fairly intrinsic/necessary. I don't want to advertise for my competitors. The sidebar on StackOverflow is great.
solidsnack9000 10y ago
Maybe it's never "OK" but sometimes it threatens life and limb.

whbk 10y ago

Agreed - she should be imprisoned. You don't get to play with lives.

ben_jones 10y ago
I think that's the problem. It hasn't been linked to deaths yet. I fear it might be impossible to link a ~year of invalidated blood testing as the cause of death. Did Theranos test for fatal diseases? Did they just test for mundane stuff?
- MawNicker 10y ago
  > I fear it might be impossible to link a ~year of invalidated blood testing as the cause of death. I can only see one way this happened. Someone got a false negative. They would have gone to another lab but chose Theranos based on marketing claims. They get tested now and see their positive result for a terminal condition they can no longer treat.

Fricken 10y ago

Trying to imagine myself willfully misleading her investors and the public for as long as she did, and at that scale extends beyond my capacity for empathy. I suspect she's genuinely delusional. I don't know how else someone could do something like that.

ben_jones 10y ago
I honestly think most entrepreneurs are capable of it. The hype level of Theranos is present at MOST start-ups. I.E. A Large software company that allowed user data to be stolen because of known security issues. Software company does not inform the public of the breach until forced to. A large medical company that allowed a very large failure rate of testing devices from known issues. Medical company does not inform the public of the breach until forced to.
- schwarrrtz 10y ago
  Agreed. This should be a case study for the importance of following best practices and adhering to appropriate safety protocols. Such protocols should exist in any organization that designs products for other people to use.
- wiz21c 10y ago
  What scares me most is that the failure are always seen as morally acceptable loss to the founders : "it's that or we have to fire half the company", "it's that or we can't pay salaries", "it's that or closing the company", "it's that or we're in even bigger legal troubles". It basically boils down to "I know I'm doing something wrong but I have no choice". I've personally met one these people. Very smart guy, but unable to say "I'm doing something wrong, so it's better to stop now". Ethics should be hammered in some people's head...
  - solidsnack9000 10y ago
    "I know it's wrong but those are my orders..."
10y ago

iaw 10y ago

It's a cold fusion moment for all medical innovation perceived as coming from a 'start-up.' Funding for real fusion research is still difficult to come by because of the shadow of the cold fusion debacle...

drjesusphd 10y ago
You're absolutely right. And it continues to this day (cough... Lockheed... cough). There is a huge credibility gap in fusion research, due to no fault in the mainstream research community.