Jump to content
Forums forums
PRIMETIMER
biakbiak

The Inventor: Out for Blood in Silicon Valley

Recommended Posts

I cannot wait! If you haven’t read the book Bad Blood, I highly recommend it, it reads like a thriller. It’s being made into a movie with Jennifer Lawrence but I think this doc will be better. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

Very much looking forward to this (the Jennifer Lawrence version? Not so much). 

I seem to recall reading an article (or articles) in the WSJ years ago that  exposed this woman as a complete fraud and was shocked that the company was still in business for as long as it was afterwards.

And I mean, come on now with the Steve Jobs-inspired turtleneck lady. I don't know how she's not in prison.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
35 minutes ago, Giant Misfit said:

seem to recall reading an article (or articles) in the WSJ years ago that  exposed this woman as a complete fraud and was shocked that the company was still in business for as long as it was afterwards.

Yeah the writer of the book Bad Blood is the person who wrote the articles in the WSJ and goes into the writing process including them being threatened with a ton of lawsuits and having to meet with her lawyers a bunch of times to get a response. The book is seriously great!

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post

Really looking forward to this! I just finished the podcast, The Drop Out, which covers the same turf. What a fascinating story!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
On 2/17/2019 at 8:18 PM, biakbiak said:

Yeah the writer of the book Bad Blood is the person who wrote the articles in the WSJ and goes into the writing process including them being threatened with a ton of lawsuits and having to meet with her lawyers a bunch of times to get a response. The book is seriously great!

Cannot agree enough.  I never thought it possible to binge listen to a book, especially a non fiction one, but I totally did with bad blood.

On 3/5/2019 at 3:51 PM, Pj3422 said:

Really looking forward to this! I just finished the podcast, The Drop Out, which covers the same turf. What a fascinating story!

I know, so bummed I have to wait until March 18!!! And then apparently ABC is doing a long documentary too!

The trailer for the HBO documentary looks amazing, I love me some Alex gibney!

 

On 2/17/2019 at 7:39 PM, Giant Misfit said:

Very much looking forward to this (the Jennifer Lawrence version? Not so much). 

I seem to recall reading an article (or articles) in the WSJ years ago that  exposed this woman as a complete fraud and was shocked that the company was still in business for as long as it was afterwards.

And I mean, come on now with the Steve Jobs-inspired turtleneck lady. I don't know how she's not in prison.

Soooo much style over substance.  It was like she thought if she just wore black turtlenecks, lowered to voice and drank green juice she would be successful.  The substance of actually creating something that worked seemed to never enter her mind.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post

I cannot wait for this! I just finished Bad Blood (in a day, I could NOT put it down) and it was just fascinating. If I didn't know it was a real story, I would have totally thought it was fiction. How she and Sunny got away with what they did for so long, fooling Walgreens and Safeway, and losing so many millions of dollars is unreal. 

I think the Jennifer Lawrence movie could be good, too, I just don't know if she can pull off Elizabeth Holmes' voice (even though Holmes was changing hers on purpose, too).

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
28 minutes ago, emma675 said:

I cannot wait for this! I just finished Bad Blood (in a day, I could NOT put it down) and it was just fascinating. If I didn't know it was a real story, I would have totally thought it was fiction. How she and Sunny got away with what they did for so long, fooling Walgreens and Safeway, and losing so many millions of dollars is unreal. 

I think the Jennifer Lawrence movie could be good, too, I just don't know if she can pull off Elizabeth Holmes' voice (even though Holmes was changing hers on purpose, too).

Can you imagine how hard it would be to permanently do a fake voice?  Like did she go baritone around family and people who had known her for years?  

I try to do a Jamaican accent and about a minute later I sound like a Jamaican pirate, and then somehow it bleeds into Irish pirate.  I cannot fathom being able to commit to a fake voice for like a decade!

I once lost my voice for over a month (well it was super raspy) and I kinda forgot what I sounded like.  I cannot imagine what would have happened if I had a different voice for like a decade.

  • Like 7
  • Laugh 4

Share this post


Link to post

I read Bad Blood, too, and I'm looking forward to this.  I saw the 20/20 episode that was based on their podcast The Dropout, mentioned upthread. 

She had said as a teenager that her goal was to become a billionaire, and she was, for a while, but unfortunately, she did it to the detriment of others:  her investors, her employees, patients who were unfortunate enough to believe her blood tests were accurate, etc.  And anyone who questioned her was fired or threatened with a lawsuit.  She's just evil.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Gemma Violet said:

I read Bad Blood, too, and I'm looking forward to this.  I saw the 20/20 episode that was based on their podcast The Dropout, mentioned upthread. 

She had said as a teenager that her goal was to become a billionaire, and she was, for a while, but unfortunately, she did it to the detriment of others:  her investors, her employees, patients who were unfortunate enough to believe her blood tests were accurate, etc.  And anyone who questioned her was fired or threatened with a lawsuit.  She's just evil.

She is, but I find it fascinating that we seem to be in this golden age of people who put style over substance.  

Like yeah, Steve jobs and bill gates probably all wanted to be billionaires too...but they had SOMETHING to actually sell.  Like Steve jobs wasn't like "hey if I just wear these turtlenecks I'll be a billionaire, he HAD something.". We now live in a time where someone like Elizabeth Holmes literally had NOTHING to sell except a fancy box that didn't do anything.  Billy McFarland had NOTHING to sell, but he figured if he had stylish videos and Instagram models, something would happen.  It's fascinating to me, and I don't know if it's the result of people just being told to dream big or whatever

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
33 minutes ago, RealReality10 said:

She is, but I find it fascinating that we seem to be in this golden age of people who put style over substance.  

Like yeah, Steve jobs and bill gates probably all wanted to be billionaires too...but they had SOMETHING to actually sell.  Like Steve jobs wasn't like "hey if I just wear these turtlenecks I'll be a billionaire, he HAD something.". We now live in a time where someone like Elizabeth Holmes literally had NOTHING to sell except a fancy box that didn't do anything.  Billy McFarland had NOTHING to sell, but he figured if he had stylish videos and Instagram models, something would happen.  It's fascinating to me, and I don't know if it's the result of people just being told to dream big or whatever

Plus, most of her Board of Directors were elderly men (who knew nothing about the health industry) who were charmed by her.  She had some big names on that Board, intelligent renowned men, and they fell for it (and her) hook, line, & sinker.  

Edited by Gemma Violet
  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, Gemma Violet said:

Plus, most of her Board of Directors were elderly men (who knew nothing about the health industry) who were charmed by her.  She had some big names on that Board, intelligent renowned men, and they fell for it (and her) hook, line, & sinker.  

Charles Schultz ought to be so embarrassed and mortified for putting her before his grandson.  His "press statement" was nice, but self serving and way too late.  

I'm also weirded out that she is still holding onto that voice, like girl stop, we all heard tape of your real voice, are you still so invested in that image?

And the cajones on her to seriously be trying to start another tech company?!?!??

  • Like 12

Share this post


Link to post

We're about 24 hours away! I've never been so excited for a Monday night, lol!

  • Like 4
  • Laugh 2

Share this post


Link to post
45 minutes ago, emma675 said:

We're about 24 hours away! I've never been so excited for a Monday night, lol!

If you're jonesing you should watch the night line special

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, RealReality10 said:

Charles George Schultz ought to be so embarrassed and mortified for putting her before his grandson.

I fixed it for you. 😉

  • Like 4
  • Laugh 4

Share this post


Link to post
46 minutes ago, Gemma Violet said:

I fixed it for you. 😉

LOL, darn it!  I ALWAYS do that.  Thank you.  The peanuts creator would never engage is such shenanigans!

  • Like 7
  • Laugh 7

Share this post


Link to post
12 hours ago, RealReality10 said:

She is, but I find it fascinating that we seem to be in this golden age of people who put style over substance.  

Well there have always been fraudsters ie Charles Ponzi, George C. Parker, Joseph Weil, to name a few who were from the early 20th century. 

Now we have Madoff, Holmes and MacFarland. What I find fascinating about the latter two is the similarities in personalities, both supposedly were/are extremely engaging, can tell a great story, very “passionate”, won’t take no for an answer and will dispose of i.e. fire  anyone who opposes their delusions of grandeur. Perhaps the others mentioned were like this too. These personality types are likely very common in individuals who are able to successfully con on this level. 

I watched the 20/20 documentary on Holmes. I can’t wait to see what this documentary will reveal.

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
17 hours ago, RealReality10 said:

Charles Schultz ought to be so embarrassed and mortified for putting her before his grandson.  His "press statement" was nice, but self serving and way too late.  

I'm also weirded out that she is still holding onto that voice, like girl stop, we all heard tape of your real voice, are you still so invested in that image?

And the cajones on her to seriously be trying to start another tech company?!?!??

Do you have a link to the press statement?  

After watching the 20/20 feature, I am loving Tyler Schultz.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
59 minutes ago, heatherchandler said:

Do you have a link to the press statement?  

After watching the 20/20 feature, I am loving Tyler Schultz.

Doesn't hurt that he is as cute as a button.  

  • Like 9
  • Laugh 1

Share this post


Link to post

I would be hard pressed to come up with a list of people that comprised her board and investors that I would hate more. 

I realize this is partly because I came to the story through the WSJ pieces where she was starting to be questioned and the fraud uncovered but I seriously don’t see this dynamic and engaging figure that got all this attention, money and loyalty. 

The dancing to Can’t Touch This was special! 

  • Like 14

Share this post


Link to post

Crazy — self-deluded — or liar?

Did she just lose her company?  Guess if she evades prosecution she gets away.

Surprising that investors didn’t pursue her more.  Narrator said they exhausted the $900 million they’d raised, of which $300 million was to settle lawsuits.

So the rest was spent but they can’t go after her personal assets?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Melina22 said:

http://www.pajiba.com/film_reviews/review-alex-gibneys-the-inventor-out-for-blood-in-silicon-valley.php

Well written review of the show. It points out that by the end we're still not sure if she was a pathological liar, fooling everyone, or just trying to "fake it till you make it" till everything collapsed. I'm still not certain. 

After watching the documentary, I still believe that she's a pathological liar and fooled everyone. Many of her actions were too deliberate IMO and strategic for it not to be on purpose i.e. ignoring the advice of her college adviser, bringing on board members who were all old men who were past their prime and had no idea about what she was doing and how it should be done. Ignoring employees concerns who actually informed her and Sunny of the major failures they were having making the technology work, lying about field testing the technology with the military, among other industries, running in the other direction when anyone (specifically potential investors or vendors i.e. the Department of Defense and the firm hired to do their Marketing) would ask for proof that the device worked, firing or asking people to leave who were persistent in their views about the flaws in the technology and worst of all, selling the idea of the technology to Walgreens without being even close to a workable prototype. 

She wanted the prestige of being a billionaire innovator. She didn't care if the technology worked or not. She didn't care that selling this product for public use could be detrimental to many if the medical results provided by the technology was even remotely wrong. Thank goodness the company imploded before any real damage was done to patients, but I absolutely believe she is a pathological liar. 

All that said, as someone asked in another thread, what was Walgreens thinking? The moment Theranos informed them that the Edison would not be onsite and that they'd have to send the blood off to the Theranos labs in California for testing, they should've known something was up. 

And whoever said her fake voice was annoying is an understatement.  We heard more from her in this documentary than the 20/20 story and it was nearly intolerable listening to her "deep" voice. Argh. 

Edited by Enero
  • Like 17

Share this post


Link to post

The Theranos swindle has fascinated me from the start. Read Bad Blood and viewed everything I could find about it on youtube and google. HBO's 2-hour documentary is a welcome, expertly developed and produced expose on Holmes and her fraud from the start, including previously unseen pep talks she gave to Theranos employees and revealing comments from their best teams about the terrible quality of their technology. 

During videotaped questions from federal investigators who are building the criminal case against her and Sonny, Elizabeth has repeatedly claimed not to remember exactly what she promised and what her team  actually ever accomplished. But the video record is already large and compelling enough to establish she focused far more on attracting investor billions than she ever did trying to direct the development of a workable technology or giving a damn about her mistreated employees. It proves, that she repeatedly lied about product capabilities just to keep the money rolling in and perpetuating the fraud.

Something is really off about her. Obviously some type of sociopathy and criminal mentality at work here. In addition to the video evidence against her, the fact that she also comes across as a deep voiced robot with a strange inhuman unblinking stare certainly won't help her if she ever testifies.

  • Like 12

Share this post


Link to post

Imagine if it had worked and we all had little boxes in our homes that easily tested our blood for hundreds of problems! You can't argue with the vision. Unfortunately her company only made half a baby step toward the reality. 

It's like if a company promised everyone their own personal flying device, but in reality had only invented the straps that attach the wings to your body. 

  • Like 12
  • Laugh 3

Share this post


Link to post
13 minutes ago, Enero said:

And whoever said her fake voice was annoying is an understatement.  We heard more from her in this documentary than the 20/20 story and it was nearly intolerable listening to her "deep" voice. Argh. 

Edited 3 minutes ago by Enero

One thing that wasn’t mentioned in either this and the 20/20 episode that sort of informs the Walgreens thing and why they forged ahead is that Theranos put them in sort of a competition with Safeway who was also going to have Theranos clinics and built them in like 800 stores so they were both competing with each other and sinking millions and millions of dollars into the project quickly so they were invested in the fact she could make it work until it was way too late. Safeway spent over $350 million on the project and its failure helped cost the CEO his job.

  • Like 4
  • Useful 4

Share this post


Link to post

I'm still gathering my thoughts. I feel like there wasn't a whole lot of "new" info in this documentary, most of it (and more) is covered in the book Bad Blood. However, I loved getting to see and hear from the people I read about. Some looked very different from what I had envisioned.

I can't decide what I think Elizabeth Holmes is--a liar, a sociopath, someone who really believed she was doing the right thing and helping people, a narcissist, etc. I think she's probably a combination of many things, but she's completely lacking in empathy above all. Real people could have died and she didn't even seem to acknowledge or understand this. 

A few random thoughts:
1. What was with her makeup?? I've seen clowns who looked understated compared to her.

2. Same for her hair. It drove me nuts how she always had it half tucked into her jacket.

3. The voice drove me CRAZY. It was beyond monotone, it sounded like she was speaking underwater.

4. Tyler Schulz is a better person than I am, I would have cut all ties with my grandfather if he had treated me like that. 

5. I really felt for the Fortune writer, he was just gutted and furious and stunned at the end. I honestly hope he's coping with this or is able to talk to someone about this. I could feel his anger and anguish through the screen.

Elizabeth Holmes just devastated so many lives in so many ways, I don't know how she can live with herself. 

  • Like 16

Share this post


Link to post
23 minutes ago, emma675 said:

few random thoughts:
1. What was with her makeup?? I've seen clowns who looked understated compared to her.

And yet, fascinatingly, she wore no makeup at all at her hearing. I feel like she was going for the "I'm weak and harmless" look there. But still with the big, wide eyes and guileless expression. Surely this can't be accidental. 

  • Like 12

Share this post


Link to post

 It wasn't clear to me who designed and built the "Edison" box - certainly not the sophomore drop-out?   There was a mention of another person whose name was on the patent application.  I would like to have understood how she snookered him and what he understood was going on.   Did he realize what the professor of medicine pointed out - that what she was claiming it did is physically impossible?

Having watched the 20/20 coverage of the exact same story on Friday, I wondered if others thought it did really a better job on the story?  The documentary certainly padded a lot with the same shots of her walking through the facility in her lab coat -- and vintage images of early Edison movies.  

Oops, also, I was sorry this documentary did not mention (which 20/20 did) the element of the ad agency (Chiat-Day) they hired to do ads, who refused to put her unproven claims into the ads because the FCC requires documentation of the things you claim in an ad !  I think they had to pull back what the ad said about 90% from what she was saying.  The admen, really, were more sophisticated than the famous old rich guys and venture capitalists.

But my main point is - about the box ?  

Edited by Chippings · Reason: Other thought
  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post
38 minutes ago, Chippings said:

Having watched the 20/20 coverage of the exact same story on Friday, I wondered if others thought it did really a better job on the story?  The documentary certainly padded a lot with the same shots of her walking through the facility in her lab coat -- and vintage images of early Edison movies.  

Oops, also, I was sorry this documentary did not mention (which 20/20 did) the element of the ad agency (Chiat-Day) they hired to do ads, who refused to put her unproven claims into the ads because the FCC requires documentation of the things you claim in an ad !  I think they had to pull back what the ad said about 90% from what she was saying.  The admen, really, were more sophisticated than the famous old rich guys and venture capitalists.

This documentary made some interesting points i.e. the psychologist speaking about the psychology of lying and the detail of the errors with using the Edision. How if there was a mishap with the machine, blood would be everywhere inside the machine and in the portals. A lab technician would then have to reach his/her hand into the machine where there were exposed needles to try and correct the issue.  It was really interesting and informative to see how impractical the Edison was just based on this issue alone. However, overall, I thought 20/20 did a better job with their documentary.

Quote

It wasn't clear to me who designed and built the "Edison" box - certainly not the sophomore drop-out?   There was a mention of another person whose name was on the patent application.  I would like to have understood how she snookered him and what he understood was going on.   Did he realize what the professor of medicine pointed out - that what she was claiming it did is physically impossible?

I'm thinking he or they (some of the patents have several people listed), either remained with the company thinking they could continue tweaking the device until it worked the way it needed, while drinking Elizabeth's kool-aid or they left (or was fired) after pointing out the issues with trying to get the device to work. 

Edited by Enero
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Melina22 said:

And yet, fascinatingly, she wore no makeup at all at her hearing. I feel like she was going for the "I'm weak and harmless" look there. But still with the big, wide eyes and guileless expression. Surely this can't be accidental. 

I noticed that! She was going for young, innocent, and harmless in the deposition video. But she still kept doing the weird, low voice.

This is tacky, but what was going on with the behavioral therapist's face? The half beard and scars (?) looked like a burn patient. It looked painful.

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
10 minutes ago, emma675 said:

This is tacky, but what was going on with the behavioral therapist's face? The half beard and scars (?) looked like a burn patient. It looked painful.

Clearly, I need a Life, but I looked him up - serious burns when he was a young person.  I'm not sure why he chose to feature the damage by growing out the beard, but you are right about the burns.  

  • Like 7
  • Laugh 1

Share this post


Link to post

Maybe I did not watch with my fullest attention, but I'm not sure how she suddenly got the idea for this business and started it.  Was she just a college student who was looking around for something she could do?  Her science teacher who went to work for her--what was HE thinking?  I'm missing some steps here, which may be explained by her ability to charm people and they would have a confirmation bias not to check anything she said.

I'm somebody who has to have blood tests frequently, and yes, they draw two or three tubes at once.  But I'd never say--wow, what the world needs now is a fingerstick version of this.  Yes, that's the ticket  (in a Jon Lovitz voice).

  • Like 7
  • Laugh 5

Share this post


Link to post
14 minutes ago, emma675 said:

This is tacky, but what was going on with the behavioral therapist's face? The half beard and scars (?)

I don't think it's tacky to ask.  Every time the fellow was shown I couldn't help but fixate on his facial hair.   Most every one of us have seen and also have scars, but half a beard and mustache just isn't something you see everyday. Had he been clean shaven I wouldn't have given his looks another thought.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, Mocking Bird said:

I don't think it's tacky to ask.  Every time the fellow was shown I couldn't help but fixate on his facial hair.   Most every one of us have seen and also have scars, but half a beard and mustache just isn't something you see everyday. Had he been clean shaven I wouldn't have given his looks another thought.

I didn't get his name, so I watched the end credits.  He wasn't listed there so I went to IMDB.  He wasn't listed there either.  So, I re-ran the doc, paused it, wrote it down (Dan Ariely) and went to Google.  Burns from an accident.  That actually factored in to his work.   So not tacky at all in my opinion.  Not sure why there is a half beard, but definitely a choice.  

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
13 minutes ago, Mocking Bird said:

I don't think it's tacky to ask.  Every time the fellow was shown I couldn't help but fixate on his facial hair

Add me to the list. He seemed super smart and interesting and I really enjoyed his point about the dice, but was so distracted by his half-a-beard and trying to figure out why he would think that was a good idea. They did a good job of shooting him so it wasn't overly distracting, but I'm very easily distracted. 

  • Like 7
  • Laugh 1

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, emma675 said:

4. Tyler Schulz is a better person than I am, I would have cut all ties with my grandfather if he had treated me like that. 

5. I really felt for the Fortune writer, he was just gutted and furious and stunned at the end. I honestly hope he's coping with this or is able to talk to someone about this. I could feel his anger and anguish through the screen.

Elizabeth Holmes just devastated so many lives in so many ways, I don't know how she can live with herself. 

 

I found myself really worrying for Tyler Schultz as the doc progressed. Not that he'd be broke or permanently unemployed (since Mom & Dad were covering his legal bills and he certainly has money and connections), but for how demoralizing it must have been to have his own grandpa side with this lunatic over him. Well done him for patching it up--like you, I don't know how soon--if ever--I'd be able to do that, even after an apology. Then again, when your loved one's as old as George Schultz is, you probably figure you don't want to spend your last years with them on bad terms.

The Fortune guy was so compelling to watch. He seemed to have real integrity which, frankly, surprised me.

I think Elizabeth Holmes finds it quite easy to live with herself because her personality disorder(s) mean she's unencumbered by conscience, introspection, or regret. I am not a professional, so my opinion is just that--an opinion, but she seems SO narcissistic, oy. Quite a few of my PTV posts refer to my narcissistic ex (probably because I watch lots of shows/docs featuring narcissistic characters/people), but being married to a malignant narc for 16 years (and extensive study on the subject during our hideous divorce) taught me to recognize one. My ex never expressed regret, guilt, or shame for any of the heinous, unethical, and borderline-criminal behaviors he exhibited during our marriage. He traumatized two other women besides me and continues to let our children down on the regular--but never one lick of remorse. That's the vibe I get from Elizabeth Holmes. She doesn't feel remorse because she can't. She'll know what it is, on an intellectual level, and what it looks like, by observing normal people around her--but she won't feel it. She may try to fake feeling it in a courtroom or anywhere else she feels she needs to garner sympathy, but it's not real. More likely, she feels very, very, sorry . . . for herself. She feels victimized by the lesser mortals who don't appreciate her "brilliance" and will expend her energy looking for (and probably finding) new cronies and flying monkeys who do. Narcissistic injury may cause her to shed a few self-pity tears, but she'll bounce back.

Edited by spaceghostess
  • Like 17
  • Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, kathe5133 said:

I didn't get his name

Thank you kathe5133 for finding his name (David Ariely).  I didn't catch it during the show either but wanted to because his research sounded so interesting.  Perhaps the half beard was his own private behavioral experiment as it made an impression on a few of us.

  • Like 3
  • Laugh 1

Share this post


Link to post

Well, she is a real piece of shit, isn't she?  Truly mentally unstable.  I've seen interviews with Tyler and the girl (Wendy?) who was the whistleblower.  They gave me hope.  If those two young people can risk their livelihood and let's face it, lives, to stop this madwoman from hurting people, the world is in good shape!  It's nice to see that kind of integrity.  Elizabeth is an example of the evil that can exist, but those two show us that evil won't triumph!

  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post
17 minutes ago, spaceghostess said:

Then again, when your loved one's as old as George Schultz is, you probably figure you don't want to spend your last years with them on bad terms.

I think he forgave him because his grandfather always treated him with respect despite disagreeing with him. He told him, "They'll never convince me you're stupid but they convinced me you're wrong. " 

I feel like Tyler understood that Elizabeth had hypnotized his grandfather, especially since she'd  made Tyler himself question his reality on several occasions, and his grandfather's advanced age sure didn't help, but he knew his grandfather did love and respect him. 

As for Elizabeth, I totally agree with you, Spaceghostess, that she never showed a shred of remorse. That's not how normal people act. She only feels sad for herself. 

Edited by Melina22
  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
33 minutes ago, GussieK said:

I'm somebody who has to have blood tests frequently, and yes, they draw two or three tubes at once.  But I'd never say--wow, what the world needs now is a fingerstick version of this.  Yes, that's the ticket  (in a Jon Lovitz voice).

 

Yeah, I kind of rolled my eyes when she was describing how having blood drawn is her worst nightmare and she wanted to spare other people the trauma. I also have to have blood drawn regularly (not super-frequently) and I'm a blood donor, so clearly not freaked out by the process, but I know some people are needle-phobic. It's just that I don't think that's the majority of the population? The idea of all the info in a few drops of blood is very cool, but for most people, I'd imagine that the speed and low cost of the Edison would be the draw (ahem, sorry) and certainly was the selling point, rather than "Oooh, it's so terrible to have that big, creepy needle!", etc.

No doubt I'm in the minority, but in terms of comfort, I'd actually rather have a traditional blood test than the Edison. My least favorite thing about giving blood is the hemoglobin stick, which I find hurts like hell compared to a needle inserted by an experienced phlebotomist. My veins collapse sometimes, and even that's better than a hemoglobin stick for weird ol' me. The fingertips are loaded with nerve endings, after all.

  • Like 16

Share this post


Link to post

And no one mentioned.  There are more nerve endings in the fingertips than just about anywhere else.  It's less painful to have blood drawn from a vein by an experienced phlebotomist than to do a finger prick!

  • Like 7
  • Useful 1

Share this post


Link to post

I have veins that even really good phlebotomists sometimes have issues with so I would love a pinprick system. If only so I didn’t look like Inwas in an accident after every blood draw because I also bruise easily. That said I have no idea why someone other than a hypochondriac would want to spend money on a device so you could run blood tests at home whenever you wanted.

  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, biakbiak said:

I have veins that even really good phlebotomists sometimes have issues with so I would love a pinprick system. If only so I didn’t look like Inwas in an accident after every blood draw because I also bruise easily. That said I have no idea why someone other than a hypochondriac would want to spend money on a device so you could run blood tests at home whenever you wanted.

Heh, my dad's a hypochondriac.  He was going for weekly blood draws to check his blood sugar because "diabetes." He wasn't diabetic, and still isn't . . . just borderline, and it's easily controlled by diet. Part of his hypochondria is the attention he gets at the doctor's office, so he probably wouldn't get as much satisfaction from the Edison--but other hypochondriacs might.

My mom also has invisible veins and has ended up like you, with the horribly bruised arms (and sometimes needing IVs in the hand instead of arm) which absolutely sucks. Mine are hard to find, too. When I was in the hospital w/my first baby, they couldn't insert the IV after multiple stabbings and had to send for someone they called a "multi specialist." She was a magic woman who had things under control in minutes! Luckily, most of the phlebobomists at the (evil? greedy?) Quest lab I use can find my veins, but I have to drink a lot of water beforehand to make it easier.

One of the most disturbing revelations about the "development" of the Edison was how very dangerous the process was for the lab workers and scientists. It's unconscionable that they had to routinely stick their hands into little boxes filled with stabby sharps riddled with blood containing hepatitis and other nasty things. How will gloves help you in that situation? They won't. It's amazing that no one was infected. (or were they?)

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Quote

I'm somebody who has to have blood tests frequently, and yes, they draw two or three tubes at once.  But I'd never say--wow, what the world needs now is a fingerstick version of this.  Yes, that's the ticket  (in a Jon Lovitz voice).

I have to have labs done frequently, too (my record is 14 vials in one draw, I almost passed out), and even I, as someone who is not a medical professional, could not understand how she thought hundreds of tests could be run on one tiny drop of blood. It is just not possible. The book Bad Blood does a great job of explaining the mechanics of what they were trying to get the Edison to do, I cannot recommend it enough.

Quote

I've seen interviews with Tyler and the girl (Wendy?) who was the whistleblower.  They gave me hope.  If those two young people can risk their livelihood and let's face it, lives, to stop this madwoman from hurting people, the world is in good shape!  It's nice to see that kind of integrity.  Elizabeth is an example of the evil that can exist, but those two show us that evil won't triumph!

Erica was the other whistleblower. Those kids are amazing, they exposed this whole thing and exposed themselves (the law firm representing Theranos had people stalking them and more), but had the bravery and integrity to stand up to it.

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post

I agree that a home blood testing machine would be a hypochondriac's dream and would no doubt cause way more problems than it solves. It could have its uses though. 

I remember times in the past when they'd draw multiple large vials of blood from me, then say, "You're anemic." Duh. Actually a couple of years ago 2 back to back surgeries left me extremely anemic and I was so pleased that during my recovery they did "microtesting". It was a lot like the nano vial. Just a tiny amount so they could check my blood without draining large amounts of it daily. 

And that's all I'm going to post about blood because my legs are starting to feel all wobbly. 😁

 

https://jezebel.com/elizabeth-holmess-fake-voice-is-actually-just-stupid-ma-1833402366

Amusing article about her voice. 

Edited by Melina22
  • Like 2
  • Laugh 5

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, emma675 said:

I noticed that! She was going for young, innocent, and harmless in the deposition video. But she still kept doing the weird, low voice.

This is tacky, but what was going on with the behavioral therapist's face? The half beard and scars (?) looked like a burn patient. It looked painful.

I sincerely wonder what her plan is for the baritone voice.  Like everyone knows it's fake, but she has been pretty committed to it for like a decade.  I mean how do you just come out one day with regular voice after robot talking for so long?

It's almost an admission that the whole thing was BS, and just an act to make her seem like something she wasn't.  Is she ever going to be ready for that admission?  Is she going to drag out the charade on her deathbed?

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
7 hours ago, Chippings said:

Clearly, I need a Life, but I looked him up - serious burns when he was a young person.  I'm not sure why he chose to feature the damage by growing out the beard, but you are right about the burns.  

Very strange indeed.  

I preferred the 20/20 episode to this, although I liked this one, too.  The 20/20 one just seemed to flow better.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
10 minutes ago, RealReality10 said:

I sincerely wonder what her plan is for the baritone voice.  Like everyone knows it's fake, but she has been pretty committed to it for like a decade.  I mean how do you just come out one day with regular voice after robot talking for so long?

It's almost an admission that the whole thing was BS, and just an act to make her seem like something she wasn't.  Is she ever going to be ready for that admission?  Is she going to drag out the charade on her deathbed?

Maybe losing the voice will be part of a rebranding effort. She seems to be over the black turtlenecks (having ruined them for everybody). Does Madonna still speak with a fake British accent?

Part of her sentence--if she serves one--should be having to watch a video loop of herself "dancing" and jumping in the bouncy castle with her ex.

  • Like 2
  • Laugh 5

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×