2 ms·
The trajectory of this company is just terrible. They surmounted the most difficult obstacle in healthcare - breaking into existing strongholds (e.g. Walgreens)
by aabajian 10y ago
The trajectory of this company is just terrible. They surmounted the most difficult obstacle in healthcare - breaking into existing strongholds (e.g. Walgreens). At that point if there was any doubt that their technology worked they should've used existing tools to run their lab tests. Yes they would've lost money, but they could have used the time to build out their rapid technology or pivoted to a different business model. Getting a contract with Walgreens or any major vendor in the healthcare space is an incredible accomplishment, but such unethical behaviour will make it even harder for future startups to secure such partnerships.
- dekhn 10y agoThey did switch to using existing tools to run their lab tests. That's exactly what they did. That's why they started doing venous draws instead of just nanoliter draws from pinpricks. This was documented repeatedly in the media. They also invalidated all their Edison (their specific nano device) results for two years, and it turns out they weren't even running other people's devices correctly and had to invalidate results for that too!