|
|
|
|
|
by draker
3627 days ago
|
|
I think the difference is that Musk basically wanted to make a mass produced electric car. While it is difficult I would say much of this is due to the infrastructure and capital requirements to get to this point. No one doubted that an electric supercar could be made, rather that it would be very difficult to achieve scale. Had Theranos opted for a mass produced microfluidics chip and instrument based on existing chemistries people would have said it would be difficult to compete with the large industry players (Bio-Rad, Roche, Thermo Fisher etc). This would be deemed difficult or "ridiculous" for reasons relating to capital, infrastructure and potential market share rather than the actual science and functionality of the system. This is where Theranos differs from Tesla, not only trying to achieve scale but do so with a unproven scientific method. It's a shame that Theranos has played out like this because a system that uses a small amount of blood is a great end goal but should have been a 10-15-20 year goal; just as Musk didn't intend to produce a $30,000 mass market car from the beginning. If Theranos built their own instrument based on existing qPCR research/design and used existing chemistry they could get "in the door" and begin really understanding the market. They would need to differentiate but could do so by attempting build a single benchtop automated unit that removed the need for manual sample preparation. While their solution may be a premium offering and a smaller market this would lead them towards their ultimate goal. Over time they could begin to look into chemistries, chip designs and instruments that would bring them closer to their ultimate goal of low cost and low blood requirement testing. |
|