|
|
|
|
|
|
by tokensimian
3684 days ago
|
|
|
While you make no explicit claim, I suppose the responder was reacting to your opener of "I maintain". That implies you have been saying this all along, in a forum that we would expect to have heard it, but yet you have not been heeded. In my perspective, there is an element to your statement that is claiming authority, thus making you appear as a self-proclaimed expert. |
|
|
Also, I agree that it seems likely Ms. Holmes will face criminal charges. It would have been one thing if Theranos simply substituted venous blood draws for nanodraws, pivoting to not use Edison. However, they not only did that, they denied this publicly, promised to release data showing the validity of their platform (neither of this are lawsuit-worthy) and then proceeded to provide false test results at a very high rate. The problem here is that Ms. Holmes would have to have known of this- she's the CEO of the company, in very tight contact with the labs, etc, holds nearly all the power, and is the ultimate decider. Because of that, she is the direct target of lawsuits.
I expect both government action (which is already ongoing; it's likely she will be sanctioned) and class action lawsuit.
Obviously, the above is speculation, based on my intuition of watching biotechs for 20+ years.