7 ms·

After the company launched professionals in the medical testing said it was impossible. I believe it was even posted to HN. They stated it was impossible to get

After the company launched professionals in the medical testing said it was impossible. I believe it was even posted to HN. They stated it was impossible to get the results they would get from the amount of blood given.

maxxxxx 8y ago
That can be OK if the company was started knowing that they had invented something new.
- FireBeyond 8y ago
  Sure. And while certainly "possible", how likely is it that a 19yo college dropout (who wasn't studying medical sciences) was able to discover a technique that did so, after forty years of multiple multi-billion dollar companies researching the same (after all, the brave new world offered by her dream was hardly new or unpalatable to other players in her field). And her actions demonstrated she had done no such thing. Buying, hiding, deceiving around traditional venipuncture machines, etc. This is someone who "had a dream", had connections, and was determined and stubborn, in a bad way. Even now she, and one or two of investors, still believe she has been robbed and wronged, and that the world is worse off without Theranos.
- vkou 8y ago
  The bar for inventing something new in medicine is not "Eh, if you squint, it sorta looks like it works, ship that shit."
minimaxir 8y ago
For reference, here's the very first HN submission about Theranos in 2013: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6349349 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6349349
- portman 8y ago
  Fascinating to read, thank you. “There are more soldiers in that board there than doctors” is one of the original comments!
- sveme 8y ago
  Interesting. Skinming through the comments, very little criticism, everyone in awe. Only way down there is someone stating how hard it is to get regulatory approval. I guess that‘s HN still in full fanboy mode, before all those startups started to display their dark sides.
  - icebraining 8y ago
    I don't see any fanboyism; I see interest, and surprise at the composition of the board. A bit down, I see strong criticism by medman77, who hasn't been downvoted.
    - KSS42 8y ago
      medman77 created his/her account that day and only ever posted that one comment. I wonder if he/she was from Nanomix (nano.com, another company working on similar technology since 2000)
      - notlob 8y ago
        An interesting observation is that medman77 would seem to be particular about FDA clearance vs approval, which is one sign of someone who does know what they’re talking about.
    - rgbrenner 8y ago
      medman77, who hasn't been downvoted. We don't know that. You can only downvote comments for a day(?).. but you can upvote forever. Considering it's been 5 years, and people keep linking to his comment... it's hard to say if he gained those points that day or years later after theranos was found to be a fraud.
  - cfadvan 8y ago
    It’s probably also a reflection of the fact that the flaw in Theranos’ goal was a medical issue, namely uniformity of sampled blood, and this isn’t a site of mostly MD’s. Part of it may well have been fanboyism, but it may just have been that most here lacked the requisite background to see the flaw. I find the self-driving, or near-future Mars colony fanboyism here a little harder to take, because a much larger segment of the user base should know better.
- paradroid 8y ago
  "It's odd how little information is provided about the actual new technologies behind this." - @aheilbut
maxander 8y ago
Any citations on that? In all the hullabaloo about Theranos I haven't heard that there were serious theoretical difficulties with what they were trying to do. It would make me feel somewhat better about the whole mess to know this was the case. A successful Theranos would have been the best thing to come out of SV since the Apple II. It was sad to see it fail because of executives' delusions.
- 21 8y ago
  I am no expert, but it's my understanding that blood in the capillaries (fingertip) is not exactly the same as blood in the veins. > In addition, the small volumes involved and the variability in sample quality based on puncture site and technique make capillary sampling particularly susceptible to errors during the pre-preanalytical phase, which are beyond the control of clinical laboratory personnel https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4622200/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4622200/
  - oldgradstudent 8y ago
    It's not the same as the veins, and varies a lot between fingers and location. It is well known to any diabetic, or to anyone who played for a few minutes with a blood glucose monitor.
- joezydeco 8y ago
  The major medical diagnostic companies had been working on microfluidic assays for a couple of decades before Holmes came along. It's a very difficult subject especially when it comes to immunoassays. This wasn't a blue sky field by any means. There were numerous research papers on the topic, and some time spent with experts in the field would have also pointed her in the direction of the current research. Almost too late she hired an expert from Abbott Diagnostics (who headed up a number of successful system projects for them), and he walked away after 6 months.
MBCook 8y ago
Well, to be fair, experts in the field called the original iPhone impossible. Turns out in this case they were right.
- epistasis 8y ago
  I'm not sure if there were "experts" of the same caliber calling the iPhone impossible. In fact, I don't recall anybody saying it was impossible, but would like to find out more. I remember a ton of doubt, after launch, that it would be successful, but those people weren't really experts.
  - comex 8y ago
    Here’s one example. Apparently RIM’s employees collectively thought it was impossible (to achieve the stated battery life); I think they count as experts: > RIM had a complete internal panic when Apple unveiled the iPhone in 2007, a former employee revealed this weekend. The BlackBerry maker is now known to have held multiple all-hands meetings on January 10 that year, a day after the iPhone was on stage, and to have made outlandish claims about its features. Apple was effectively accused of lying as it was supposedly impossible that a device could have such a large touchscreen but still get a usable lifespan away from a power outlet. http://www.macnn.com/articles/10/12/27/rim.thought.apple.was.lying.on.iphone.in.2007/ http://www.macnn.com/articles/10/12/27/rim.thought.apple.was...
    - oldgradstudent 8y ago
      I had the first iPhone. Let me just say that the official battery life was somewhat aspirational.
    - teraflop 8y ago
      The comments summarized in that article seem to no longer be available, but I have a hard time believing the summary is accurate. When the iPhone was released, there were already PDAs on the market with screens the same size or bigger.

maxxxxx 8y ago

That can be OK if the company was started knowing that they had invented something new.

FireBeyond 8y ago
Sure. And while certainly "possible", how likely is it that a 19yo college dropout (who wasn't studying medical sciences) was able to discover a technique that did so, after forty years of multiple multi-billion dollar companies researching the same (after all, the brave new world offered by her dream was hardly new or unpalatable to other players in her field). And her actions demonstrated she had done no such thing. Buying, hiding, deceiving around traditional venipuncture machines, etc. This is someone who "had a dream", had connections, and was determined and stubborn, in a bad way. Even now she, and one or two of investors, still believe she has been robbed and wronged, and that the world is worse off without Theranos.
vkou 8y ago
The bar for inventing something new in medicine is not "Eh, if you squint, it sorta looks like it works, ship that shit."

minimaxir 8y ago

For reference, here's the very first HN submission about Theranos in 2013: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6349349 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6349349

portman 8y ago
Fascinating to read, thank you. “There are more soldiers in that board there than doctors” is one of the original comments!
sveme 8y ago
Interesting. Skinming through the comments, very little criticism, everyone in awe. Only way down there is someone stating how hard it is to get regulatory approval. I guess that‘s HN still in full fanboy mode, before all those startups started to display their dark sides.
- icebraining 8y ago
  I don't see any fanboyism; I see interest, and surprise at the composition of the board. A bit down, I see strong criticism by medman77, who hasn't been downvoted.
  - KSS42 8y ago
    medman77 created his/her account that day and only ever posted that one comment. I wonder if he/she was from Nanomix (nano.com, another company working on similar technology since 2000)
    - notlob 8y ago
      An interesting observation is that medman77 would seem to be particular about FDA clearance vs approval, which is one sign of someone who does know what they’re talking about.
  - rgbrenner 8y ago
    medman77, who hasn't been downvoted. We don't know that. You can only downvote comments for a day(?).. but you can upvote forever. Considering it's been 5 years, and people keep linking to his comment... it's hard to say if he gained those points that day or years later after theranos was found to be a fraud.
- cfadvan 8y ago
  It’s probably also a reflection of the fact that the flaw in Theranos’ goal was a medical issue, namely uniformity of sampled blood, and this isn’t a site of mostly MD’s. Part of it may well have been fanboyism, but it may just have been that most here lacked the requisite background to see the flaw. I find the self-driving, or near-future Mars colony fanboyism here a little harder to take, because a much larger segment of the user base should know better.
paradroid 8y ago
"It's odd how little information is provided about the actual new technologies behind this." - @aheilbut

maxander 8y ago

Any citations on that? In all the hullabaloo about Theranos I haven't heard that there were serious theoretical difficulties with what they were trying to do. It would make me feel somewhat better about the whole mess to know this was the case. A successful Theranos would have been the best thing to come out of SV since the Apple II. It was sad to see it fail because of executives' delusions.

21 8y ago
I am no expert, but it's my understanding that blood in the capillaries (fingertip) is not exactly the same as blood in the veins. > In addition, the small volumes involved and the variability in sample quality based on puncture site and technique make capillary sampling particularly susceptible to errors during the pre-preanalytical phase, which are beyond the control of clinical laboratory personnel https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4622200/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4622200/
- oldgradstudent 8y ago
  It's not the same as the veins, and varies a lot between fingers and location. It is well known to any diabetic, or to anyone who played for a few minutes with a blood glucose monitor.
joezydeco 8y ago
The major medical diagnostic companies had been working on microfluidic assays for a couple of decades before Holmes came along. It's a very difficult subject especially when it comes to immunoassays. This wasn't a blue sky field by any means. There were numerous research papers on the topic, and some time spent with experts in the field would have also pointed her in the direction of the current research. Almost too late she hired an expert from Abbott Diagnostics (who headed up a number of successful system projects for them), and he walked away after 6 months.

MBCook 8y ago

Well, to be fair, experts in the field called the original iPhone impossible. Turns out in this case they were right.

epistasis 8y ago
I'm not sure if there were "experts" of the same caliber calling the iPhone impossible. In fact, I don't recall anybody saying it was impossible, but would like to find out more. I remember a ton of doubt, after launch, that it would be successful, but those people weren't really experts.
- comex 8y ago
  Here’s one example. Apparently RIM’s employees collectively thought it was impossible (to achieve the stated battery life); I think they count as experts: > RIM had a complete internal panic when Apple unveiled the iPhone in 2007, a former employee revealed this weekend. The BlackBerry maker is now known to have held multiple all-hands meetings on January 10 that year, a day after the iPhone was on stage, and to have made outlandish claims about its features. Apple was effectively accused of lying as it was supposedly impossible that a device could have such a large touchscreen but still get a usable lifespan away from a power outlet. http://www.macnn.com/articles/10/12/27/rim.thought.apple.was.lying.on.iphone.in.2007/ http://www.macnn.com/articles/10/12/27/rim.thought.apple.was...
  - oldgradstudent 8y ago
    I had the first iPhone. Let me just say that the official battery life was somewhat aspirational.
  - teraflop 8y ago
    The comments summarized in that article seem to no longer be available, but I have a hard time believing the summary is accurate. When the iPhone was released, there were already PDAs on the market with screens the same size or bigger.