5 ms·
I was a Theranos whistleblower. Here's what I think Elizabeth Holmes is up to
- sherdil2022 1y agoThere is always enough for the needy, there is never enough for the greedy. -Mahatma Gandhi
- abrichr 1y agohttps://archive.is/vWelf https://archive.is/vWelf
- OJFord 1y agoThe submitted isn't paywalled or down, are you expecting something to happen to it?
- southernplaces7 1y agoLucky you, was paywalled for me. Good thing they posted the link.
- OJFord 1y agoOk, yeah, great, I didn't hit that so I was just curious why they did, thinking must be some other reason.
- burnt-resistor 1y agoPaywalled.
- OJFord 1y agoWasn't for me, as I said.
- burnt-resistor 1y agoNo worries. Must be some regional weirdness. US here. VPN or EU over there?
- OJFord 1y agoUK. Also ublock origin - wouldn't be the first time I'd encountered a pay'wall' that flimsy! (Firefox reading mode used to defeat quite a lot of them.)
- santa_boy 1y agopaywalled for me too
- OJFord 1y agoWasn't for me, as I said.
- avree 1y agoPerhaps you are logged in with a "STAT Account"? When I load the link, it prompts me to create one in order to view the article.
- Sabinus 1y agoInteresting, I didn't get that prompt. Read the whole thing fine, no login.
- OJFord 1y agoYup, same, hence my (oh so offensive, apparently) comment asking the reason, assuming it must be something else.
- OJFord 1y agoNope, never heard of Stat before. I could read it fine, no paywall, not sure maybe geographic or just hitting different users :shrug:
- OJFord 1y agoBloody hell, I was only curious! It wasn't paywalled for me, I read it no problem.
- 1vuio0pswjnm7 1y agoTry disabling Javascript.
- joshdavham 1y agoIf anyone is interested in hearing more about this whistleblower's backstory, I'd highly recommend checking out this podcast series: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/tyler-shultz-theranos-whistleblower-part-1/id1677066062?i=1000678413175 https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/tyler-shultz-theranos-... Interestingly enough, one of the podcast interviewers is also a co-founder of Y Combinator.
- tptacek 1y agoCarolynn Levy is also an managing director (legal) at YC.
- RandallBrown 1y agoSurely Theranos developed some technology that was useful? It lasted for 15 years and (as far as I know) employed actual scientists and researchers that were trying to revolutionize blood testing. They must have gotten somewhere right? Even if it wasn't as far as they wanted/claimed? I don't know much about what Haemanthus is claiming, but could a business be built using whatever technology Theranos developed? Or were they headed down a dead end street with nothing of use along the way?
- weaksauce 1y agohow long did enron last before they had to close because of fraud? it was over 20 years i'm pretty sure. that's not a good estimate.
- tbrownaw 1y agoEnron started out as a real company doing real things, and only pivoted to fraud later.
- refulgentis 1y agoWell, I wouldn't put it that way as long as we're correcting the record. It was always the boring moving dirt company, never pivoted, but it grew a cancer that became Too Big To Fail because it was more profitable than moving dirt. - it did boring non-tech big industry stuff - it was good at this - it started an in-house hedging department (normal) - they were good at their jobs and accidentally created a massive speculative trading business that fell apart
- elictronic 1y agoThey caused statewide blackouts in California and bankrupted utilities by causing energy prices to be 20x normal rates. You know, boring stuff like that.
- awesome_dude 1y ago
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- kunzhi 1y agoOf course Holmes will have a second act. Just look at Adam Neumann. Goof up, wait it out bit, come back. To me it seems very obvious that Holmes is slowly but surely building her charm offensive. Nice articles in the New York Times showing her with her husband. Theranos defrauding people is just an unfortunate footnote in her career. I would not be surprised if within the next few years we see Holmes in a government position.
- gyomu 1y agoI always wonder what are the forces at play in those situations. Is that the fraudsters are so charismatic/well connected/etc that their past crimes just don’t hold them back? Or is it a “all notoriety is good notoriety” kind of thing, where even if your fame is due to having been a criminal, that built up name recognition will keep propelling you forward? Or is it more subtle than this - ie some people have the skills required to appear convincing to smart people, raise lots of money, inspire others to follow them in their ventures, etc - but it just so happens that they also suck at not getting caught up in their own narrative and they end up breaking a bunch of laws in that pursuit? It’s fascinating.
- VectorLock 1y agoLike the article says spinning a narrative that "I didn't do anything wrong, it was just so-and-so conspiring to take me down because they were scared of me changing the world!"
- tmpz22 1y agoAn outlaw romanticism that suggests, if they got away with it, they deserved to get away with it. Mix in "Persecuted by big government" and "Wealth makes Right" that conservatives love and you've got plenty of ammunition to mount a come back. She will most certainly come back as an outspoken conservative. I don't think she plays the "I was the persecuted women manipulated by an older man" argument that she used in court. Regardless of the public relations angle it will be the fact that she can bring value to the capitalist class, family connections, name brand (lol). If you can make them money they let you do it.
- GauntletWizard 1y ago> “Do you think Haemanthus intends to revolutionize health care, or do you think it’s another fraud?” Once again — neither. I think it’s just another chapter of her narrative. This is fraud. We need far more accountability, and that means not letting people who have failed and lied about it "narrative" their way out of consequences. Elizabeth Holmes should not be allowed anywhere near healthcare ever again, and that does mean that even people who are merely close to her should be regarded with great scrutiny.
- threeseed 1y agoElizabeth Holmes has an 11 year sentence and banned for life for building anything like Theranos again. Not sure what more accountability is necessary. Unless you want to get involved in who she dates.
- vkou 1y agoSo, what you're saying is that she's one stroke of the president's pen away from being back in the game? I think the going rate for them for white collar conmen is currently ~2 million.
- VectorLock 1y agoIf Trevor Milton, who faked his EV truck by rolling it down a hill can get one, but sbf couldn't, then I guess it's 50/50.
- vkou 1y agoSBF gave more money to the Dems (Which in itself was enough to convince half this forum that obviously he'll not face any consequences for his actions).
- DiggyJohnson 1y ago> should not be allowed This is a weird thing to say about someone serving a decade long prison sentence
- threeseed 1y agoHere is a link to the patent that Haemanthus is working off: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/05/10/business/HaemanthusPatent.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2025/05/10/business/Haem... Note that it doesn’t reference any of Theranos’ patents so any relationship between the two companies is purely based on the personal connection of the founders.
- YakBizzarro 1y agoFool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me
- cosmicgadget 1y ago> Over the past few years a number of people have reached out to me saying they’ve invented “the Theranos that works,” and several of them have concepts similar to this: apply AI to a mountain of noise and get a thousand test results. So probably if it works it'll come from someone who's got an earlier start and more than 50M in seed funding.
- ipv6ipv4 1y agoThere are billboards on 101 directing people to Holmes’ MAGA-like post truth website that declares she is ‘proven innocent’
- dakr 1y agoI saw one of those billboards on Ventura Blvd. the other day and wondered what kind of PR scam it was. Who pays for those things? Billboards are pretty expensive around here.
- ipv6ipv4 1y agoI assume she is paying for the billboards.
- EnPissant 1y ago[flagged]
- almostgotcaught 1y agoRight before I refreshed this comment said > There is no need to denigrate a political faction. It's flamebait and off-topic. And like witnessing a shooting star, I've witnessed manipulation. What this person was upset about was the insinuation that MAGA is conspiratorially minded. That's bad - can't have people agreeing with that! So they first play at striving for fairness (to poor helpless political parties lol). But realizing it's so just beyond the pale at this point to try to treat MAGA as a good faith actor that it wouldn't fly, they pivot to citing tenuously implicated rules. If this weren't so poorly executed (and if I hadn't caught the edit) I wouldn't have even noticed but given that it is so poorly executed I gotta wonder whether this is just someone slacking at their botfarm job. Edit: just so no one can accuse me of making this up, here is the screenshot from my reader app which still has the original comment: https://imgur.com/a/njjy4Fd https://imgur.com/a/njjy4Fd Edit 2: in case this person edits again, the comment currently reads > Please don't instigate political arguments.
- 1y ago
- slivym 1y ago> The real question is: Will Elizabeth serve the purpose of your fund — or by investing in her, will you simply be serving her purpose of writing her rise-from-the-ashes narrative? I think pretty clearly there are VCs who are quite cognizant that their main advantage is their marketing, and making a big splashy controversial investment serves that marketing well. A16Z don't give a damn if they throw 50m at a bad investment, that's not how the game works- they already know most of their 50m investments will fail, so if that investment can keep their name out there so they get access to the funding rounds of the ones that succeed? It's worth it.
- alexpc201 1y agoI think they will try to make this new company have some kind of success (real or fake) and then seek a pardon from Trump. I have no proof, but no doubts either.
- 1vuio0pswjnm7 1y ago"Since she reported to prison about two years ago, by far the most common question people have asked me is: "Did Elizabeth start Theranos with the intention to revolutionize health care, or did she intend to commit fraud from the start?" I think the answer is neither." It seems that some folks just cannot see Holmes as under-educated and incompetent. Those who see the incompetence are not surprised by the outcomes: business failure and, subsequently, fraud. "It will not work" was an educated opinion offered to her by an advisor that she refused to accept, not because she was "determined" in some "heroic" way, but because she was stupid. Another college drop out who could not finish the work to earn a degree and learn anything, e.g., humility, in the process. If raising money and receiving valuation is in and of itself "business success", then why bother with the made-up scientific basis. Obviously in Holmes' world "it does not have to work (yet)" in order to raise capital and receive press coverage. The only "science" required is the Silicon Valley "science" of exploiting gullibility and building hype. The more interesting question IMHO is: Why try to appear authentic?