4 ms·
Their tech wasn’t fraud as far as I know. There are a dozen other companies using the same technology. 16S rRNA gene sequencing. I used them and never felt dece
by vimy 5y ago
Their tech wasn’t fraud as far as I know. There are a dozen other companies using the same technology. 16S rRNA gene sequencing. I used them and never felt deceived with the data I got.
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0176555 https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal...
Edit:
https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndca/pr/ubiome-co-founders-charged-federal-securities-health-care-fraud-conspiracies https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndca/pr/ubiome-co-founders-char...
Nowhere here does it say the tech was fake. Mostly insurance fraud. I don’t think the label “theranos-lite” is correct.
- jwithington 5y agoWhat kind of information did it give you?
- vimy 5y agoWhat bacteria my gut was missing or had too much of. My Firmicutes/Bacteroidetes ratio was skewed. I then changed my diet and did several more tests to see the evolution of my gut microbiome. The periods where I felt better correspond to the test results that showed an almost normal result. When I got worse again so did the tests. There were several useful tools on github and other sites: https://github.com/ubiome-opensource/microbiome-tools https://github.com/ubiome-opensource/microbiome-tools https://blog.adafruit.com/2018/02/26/biohacking-comparing-multiple-ubiome-samples/ https://blog.adafruit.com/2018/02/26/biohacking-comparing-mu... https://microbiomeprescription.com/ https://microbiomeprescription.com/ I now use https://biomesight.com/ https://biomesight.com/ instead of ubiome.
- joering2 5y agoI'm thinking about pulling trigger on BiomeSight, especially since they are UK-based so far from USA and they have more strict regulation on not selling my DNA. But other than fancy scientist lingo, did they actually give you "recommendations for food, prebiotic supplements and lifestyle adjustments based on up-to-date research findings" ? Did they give you enough real information that you could actually adjust your life for better?? https://shop.biomesight.com/collections/frontpage/products/gut-microbiome-test-snapshot https://shop.biomesight.com/collections/frontpage/products/g...
- jinder 5y agoBiomesight is the best 16S provider right now in my opinion. They use Jason Hawrleak reference ranges and interventions as far as I’m aware. However this sort of testing only gives you an overall picture, is pretty variable and works in percentages. I’ve been shifting my microbiome for the best part of a year, and boy is it difficult, especially if you have non-trivial issues. I think there’s a huge space here for potential startups that can start capturing research into actionable intervention steps (nobody is doing it well at the moment).
- vimy 5y agoYeah, I got useful info. But I use other sites, like the one linked above, to analyze my data. You can download the raw data. Their own recommendations are still pretty barebones. Still useful though, even without other sites.
- chowells 5y agoMost of what made Theranos a scam wasn't that their tech was impossible. It was that they were committing mass fraud by making a lot of claims about what they were doing that were false. It seems like if your underlying technology actually works but you run the rest of your business with the same scams as Theranos, you qualify as Theranos-lite
- bpodgursky 5y agoTheranos gave patients clinical results based on technology was not accurate or reliable. The test results were practically random noise. That is dangerous and could have seriously hurt, or killed, someone. No amount of billing fraud, however egregious, could possibly match that level of irresponsibility.
- fastball 5y agoTheranos' tech is impossible though, as far as everyone else in the field is concerned. Blood from a finger prick is just not homogenous enough to give accurate levels of pretty much anything Theranos said they could test. The most egregious thing uBiome has been accused of doing basically amounts to insurance fraud, which isn't great but also isn't on the same level as lying to customers about the accuracy of the test results they've received. Insurance fraud isn't what made Theranos "Theranos" at all, so I wouldn't call a corp doing that "Theranos-lite".
- disillusioned 5y agoYeah this is an important distinction here: Theranos's technology never reached the level of accuracy it needed in order to do the thing it set out to do: report accurate blood tests. uBiome's core technology _did_ work: it revealed counts of various flora in your gut. What they did that was problematic was they basically offered the service with a nod and wink guarantee that they wouldn't bill you for the service, but would rather have a doc in their employ rubber stamp a "prescription" for the test, to then bill your insurance. They would bill insurance some fairly astronomical amount, too, like, IIRC, $3k-$4k. They'd warn you the entire time "if the insurance company sends you an EOB telling you there's a balance you may owe from us, don't worry, we won't charge you!" Multiple layers of problematic, both with regards to how they threaded the needle to get a script written for the test to be defensibly "covered" by insurers, and the rates they were charging. But at least the tech seemed validated and fairly accurate.
- hef19898 5y agoFraud comes in multiple flavors, there is product fraud, there is business fraud and there is accounting fraud. uBiome may not be Theranos-style product fraud, if their business practices are fraudulent it is still fraud. Saying otherwise would be saying Enron wasn't fraud because the tech worked...