3 ms·
The author should appear on Dancing with the Stars, because the article was some Fred Astaire level dancing, managing to avoid mentioning that the company handl
by KennyBlanken 5y ago
The author should appear on Dancing with the Stars, because the article was some Fred Astaire level dancing, managing to avoid mentioning that the company handled nearly a million test results and a "significant number" of them were bullshit - and that Holmes spent years lying to regulators, investors, and reporters.
Think about how many people's medical care was affected by her. Even if 10% of the results were wrong, that's 100,000 results.
Nature does a decent job of summing up the mess: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-05149-2 https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-05149-2
- jjeaff 5y agoI see no evidence that the author read the WSJ article he tried to refute. Because he provided zero refutation to any of the specific facts reported. It's just sort of, that article said she was bad, but I don't think so.