Am I the only one that does not think Holmes was charismatic? She seemed creepy with her big non-blinking eyes and her fake deep voice. I don't get a sense of charm from her, I get a sense of creepiness.
Thank you! I do not understand how so many people were fooled by her. Firstly, “theranos” sounds like some made up company in a futuristic sci-fi movie. Bad name for a company. Secondly, she’s about as transparent as glass. Her mannerisms are disturbing and she’s clearly trying to be the eccentric, but brilliant revolutionary. I can barely watch her interviews because her behavior is cringeworthy. The fact that so many powerful people fell for her nonsense is concerning. They’re the ones making decisions that impact the world, so how can we trust them when they can’t see what average people on RU-vid see?
For me she stand out the way Steve Job was. Yes, she was visionary. Unfortunately, what she said is exactly what I expected her to say as businesswoman and entrepreneur (not giving up, motivational speech, etc), not as a scientist. I never once hear her talk scientifically. So, I never trust her from the beginning.
Long ago I worked in a blood lab, as a lowly tech, so I'm not some PhD on the subject. I use to draw several tubes of blood from patients. Here's the thing. Most of the time you only have one needle puncture and the equipment is designed so you can easily fill the tubes without any change in the needle. The location of most needle punctures are in the crook of the arm which isn't sensitive, it's also less "dirty" generally speaking and you don't need to use that punctured spot later to do your daily business. A finger puncture is going to hurt more, you can't get it as clean, and a puncture is a puncture, it is now an open wound on your digit that you use to wipe your butt with, get the picture? The blood flow is lousy in a finger prick too. It made little sense to me to go around praising the finger prick as some sort of scientific improvement. You can lose a lot of blood and not be bothered by it, it's silly to make a big deal out of a few ml of blood. I'd much rather go to a competent lab and have a puncture in my elbow crook than poke holes in myself at some random piece of machinery the general public is sneezing all over.
You are so right. The vacutainer system is pretty clever in and of itself. You can take as many tubes of blood as needed with one puncture and maintain sterility. The different tubes have different preservatives, buffers, and reagents that optimize the tube for each specific test. That's the way to go if you want to optimize the lab results for accuracy and diagnostic value. The idea that ole Lizzy based the whole scheme on was that she didn't like getting stuck with a needle, and she was going to turn that into "not saying goodbye too soon" seems ridiculous. People that are facing serious consequences and need accurate lab results have a lot more to worry about than a single needle in their arm, regardless of how much she wanted to be another Steve Jobs...
Silicon Valley leaders loved that woman. They wanted it to be true so bad that they ignored the red flags for years. The success of a young woman in a CEO tech position takes a hell of a lot of pressure off everyone who doesn't have many women in engineering and management positions. They would sell their souls for a female Steve Jobs, which is who she modeled herself after. She played them like a fiddle. But she's a criminal and deserves jail time for putting so many lives at risk.
This is what happens when people are so concern over representation over reality. And the mainstream media still haven’t learn their lesson. They helped hyped this woman because she is a woman in a primarily male dominated field.
The lesson of this story is the same as all lessons from all stories of fraud (Enron included): If it's too good to be true, it probably is. Rupert Murdoch could have killed this article but he didn't, which shows that he really knows the business of journalism, and he knows when and where he should cut his losses as a businessman.
Once, for a year, I worked under a woman that behaved just like Holmes. She too had the fake _"brightface,"_ the faked little to no blinking eyes, and affected deep voice. She was a conniving psychopath. So I knew the first time I saw Holmes' TedMed talk in 2014 that she was a conniving psychopath. It was _"elementary, my dear Watson."_ _"Ignorance is Strength." I'm weak._
I don't have a problem with getting money for a start up to invent a machine for blood testing. It's when she started to acquire funds for a machine that didn't work and telling people it did work.
"..doctors have not been able to achieve that". If she means medical doctors, no, they will never achieve that. It is normally chemists, biologists and engineers who design this type of medical devices.
I think what she has done wrong is she keep on piling up her business problems and solved it with lies and excuses to buy time instead of being transparent. In the end, the mountain of piled problem burst and she has run out of answers and excuses to buy more time. This is a classical sci-fi movies storyline. I think her story is the best lesson for people that want to dive into startup. Solve your problem one by one as fast as possible. Don't create new problem to cover up your previous problem. Be transparent with your investors. Hire the best genius people in the field that you can afford. When things not working out the way you originally plan, take a pivot and adjust your product. Lastly, do not go too big too soon. I think that's the moral of the story.
The interviewer interrupts, and also doesn't seem to really pay attention to his response...why does she keep looking back at the camera while the dude is looking at her trying to answer her question...
The host thinks MDs know about blood testing. Not really. Interpreting results, yes. The science and methods underlying clinical chemistry, not so much. Holmes was both charismatic and evasive. Listening to her interviews, the latter was inescapable.
I don't get how folks think she was so brilliant! She is, no question, smart but she was an untrained person with one year of college and no medical experience. Her interviews, IMO, are just a regurgitation of buzz-words and hopeful language. She isn't even close to the brilliance and technical understanding of a Jobs.
It was a perfect storm of factors that allowed this scam to be so huge. It’s shocking that it went on for so long and fooled so many people, but when you learn the story, there were so many different factors and elements that came together to allow it to happen. Elizabeth should have never made it past her first investor pitch. I think it would be extremely difficult for something like this to ever happen again
moviedude22 Her BOD was advisory. She controlled 99+% of the voting shares. In a deposition, G Schultz (possibly) stated that he didn’t think to question the tech. Presumably, nor did others. She lied to investors and to her BOD. Apparently, she got away without an audit committee. His grandson, Tyler, was the whistleblower who, with Carreyrou, started the company’s epic tumble.
They were "intellects" but if you read Carreyrou's book (and other articles by him/ others), none of them were medical researchers or even people involved in the healthcare industry. Sure, you had Bill Frist but to me, he is more Congressman than actual physician and things Frist has said make me doubt he knows much about medicine. None of the Silicon Valley venture capitalists or firms expert in healthcare invested in Theranos, probably because they were suspicious of what the company could actually do. Yet other investors were so dazzled by the board names, they didn't think deeply about this. It is striking that her entire board did not have a single woman on it despite being a woman-led company and that most were older, Caucasian males. It is well-known that people who are arrogant and expert in one field often think this makes them experts in another field. Some studies even suggest intellectuals may be more gullible than the average person. Another example would be the Bernie Madoff scandal, where lots of well-known, seemingly smart people got ripped off, investing because they saw other well-know people investing.
Lily Chu She expertly leveraged famous names to attract others and to defraud investors. They were all buddies from the Hoover Institute. One is secretary of DOD.
@@FrankGutowski-ls8jt Tyler Schultz tried to warn grandpa George that Holmes was a fraud, but grandpa was so thoroughly taken in that he believed Holmes over his grandson. The mark of a really successful con is that those who are duped believe the con-artist over anybody else, including people who love and want to protect them.
I don't think she was charismatic at all. I think she had mental issues which prevented her to map on to reality but the fact she came from a very important family, her first network, the field she chose and the need for investors to find successful project in the e-health sector (e-health predictions by Gartner were super optimistic at that time and still are), her determination (ability) to appear someone fully dedicated to her project and her strange appearance probably helped her a lot. I mean there are a lot of startuppers with ideas like her but they didn't get funded. In addition to this you need to consider that she filed more than 200 patents for inoperable inventions but but at that time for investors was not common to see a startup with such a rich patent portfolio.
If you think her idea of a finger prick technology was far fetch you have to remember that her original start-up idea was a wearable patch that does all the diagnosis and cures you in real-time and not the Edison. That idea came after the fact that the patch was so far-fetch she gave up on it after spending years of doing researching and she even patent it. The patch was supposed to have built-in wifi and Bluetooth so it can communicate with doctors so will know what medicine to insert into your skin. Think about that. A wearable patch that has all the medicine put into it and has Bluetooth and wifi and also a large enough battery to sustain and provide power all day long. This was in 2003 now. That was the original product that she wants to put out in the market, not the Edison.
I think Elizabeth got some of her ideas fron watching science fiction. The blood testing from Dr McCoy on Star Trek and the low voice intoning ‘technology’ from Stargate.
Everyone in comments after a huge thing like this break are always saying they wouldn't have been fooled, or they found the person creepy. Had you been there at the time you would have been fooled. This woman was a narcissist, she was exceptionally manipulative and the only people who really saw past this had inside information. She is creepy now, and she seems incredibly fake now, but at that time, before knowing anything about her, everyone was sucked in. That doesn't make you gullible, or less intelligent. She found a way to make her company seem legit, and the more people bought into this, the more believable and concrete it became. It's so easy to say ' I knew it' after the fact
She needs to be jailed! If this was a young man doing this scam guaranteed he be going to jail for 20 years!!! Her crazy ass needs to pay the piper for being a phony and stealing from people!
John covers himself by touching up on the people who brought Elizabeth down - but he fails in addressing the significance of these people. Read the book - it involves people who felt shunned b/c Elizabeth never sought their advise - alleged family friends who were actually snakes - patent trolls - (the practice of obtaining a patent before others as a method to basically steal from those who not only invent but put their ideas to business - this book is full of this). Read the book and see the connection - people who were jealous of her rapid success - snakes who pretended to be "family friends." If anything, this story should always help reinforce the wisdom to NEVER allow strangers into your home - and always be cautious about people claiming to be "friends." Her family failed her and those very same "friends" brought her down. Read the book - it is fascinating - Patent Trolls, CIA, Gov't, etc.
Wow. That's not what I got out of it. I see a con woman, a bully man, ignorant knowledge of what you were actually trying to do, cheating the FDA and hiding info, intimidation and threatening employees.....and on and on.
@@garnwalkerstables Yes, all that. It is weird - that despite her being a total charlatan - it bothered me more what that patent troll did. Why? Because such treachery and back-stabbing is just the antithesis in my realm. Straight parasitical status to do that. I see them like maggots.
@Ghosty You ignore the fact that were it not for her family connections and the money provided by friends of the family, she'd have never gotten off the ground. You can't have this both ways.
That female reporter's annoying lock bracelet won't stop moving around - talk about distracting. It's interfering with the freaking interview and it's clanking around - WHY would they let her wear this thing on the air ??? WTH?!!! More to the point - the Theranos leader and her old man creepy boyfriend CEO were both sociopaths. This author should have simply said she is a sociopath. Rather than her "convincing appeal".🤔
IT WAS NOT A UNIQUE EVENT. There’s A SYSTEMIC ISSUE IN AMERICA OF lying to ourselves. FOR EXAMPLE, how we hurt so many innocent people In WAR ABROAD!!!!
