When I was heading the original IndieBio in Ireland, I heard of Theranos - but I was skeptical to begin with. Anything that's kept secret like that ("Stealth Mode") is usually BS, in my experience, and the cracks started to show pretty quickly in Theranos' case.
On 22 June 2018 19:15:51 GMT+01:00, Dig fan <ryanvituggavieres@gmail.com> wrote:
Start with this during the time Holmes was coming into play. As a person who did take biotech and biology major classes and graduated all the biotech experts in my area never heard of Elizabeth Holmes until the scandal was released to the public. Somehow Holmes is a complete unknown in cities where biotech is a big deal like South San Francisco, Vacaville and Davis areas. Nobody in Indiebio the Biotech accelerator or even the DIY Biology groups like Biocurious or any maker space group heard of her crew. The problem here was that the heat and backlash was focused on something else though.
On Friday, June 22, 2018 at 10:05:56 AM UTC-6, Jonathan Cline wrote:Start a list of every journalist who wrote a nonobjective,
positive-leaning article about Theranos between the years 2005-2015.
That's ten years in which any of the journalists could have called any
typical university microfluidics or nanotechnology research lab in the
world to discount Theranos's vaporware statements. Science reporters
are supposed to report science objectively, not inflate dangerous
hype.
On 6/22/18, Ryan Vitug-Gavieres <ryanvitu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> https://www.reuters.com/article/health-theranos/ theranos-founder-holmes-seeks- stay-of-lawsuit-after- indictment-idUSL1N1TN28J
>
> More updates.
>
--
## Jonathan Cline
## jcl...@ieee.org
## Mobile: +1-805-617-0223
########################
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
0 comments:
Post a Comment