Elizabeth Holmes verdict got more attention because the story of Theranos Icarus ended with the founder’s belief that he was fooling investors, scientists and biotechnology entrepreneurs.

Theranos claims to have developed an innovative medical device that can detect a variety of diseases and conditions from just a few drops of blood. After the story cracks surfaced, she was taken to court, and the jury transferred Holmes, who was CEO in the company’s turbulent 15-year history, on January 3 with two counts of fraud. Convicted of two counts of conspiracy to commit fraud.

She was 37 years old and was acquitted of four other frauds and conspiracies on the basis of allegations that she had deceived a patient who paid for a blood test in Theranos.

In response to Theranos’s surge and remarkable decline, Babson Diagnostics CEO David Stein confirms that the story is a reminder for investors and that engineers’ claims are backed by real science. Said that it is a reminder for.

Stein, who writes for STAT, also said that Theranos violations cast a shadow over biomedical innovation, especially in the areas of diagnosis and blood testing. He said the health technology community now needs to regain public trust. He suggested that in order to do this, one must follow three principles. Lead science. Ensure transparency and understanding.

Stein also said that while he is willing to innovate and commercialize new health products, everything must be backed by science. He writes: Even in this supercharged environment, it is possible to innovate with rigor and integrity by combining deep scientific knowledge with the know-how of the technological ecosystem.

The case is likely to shape the way biotechnology entrepreneurs approach investors, researchers told Nature News, emphasizing the importance of verifying early research through a peer-review process. increase.

In an article in, Nature said that while the Theranos scandal provided a vicious feed for books, movies and podcasts, more importantly, for scientists interested in blood diagnostics companies and businesses. It was a reminder. The journal said 4,444 scientists said they hope that in the future, executives from biotechnology start-ups will share their data early and participate in some sort of peer-review process.

It’s a great educational moment, said Eleftherios Venyandis. He became the first scientist to put Theranos on duty for his exaggerated claims in 2015. This is an example of a $ 9 billion worth of giant company going bankrupt due to a series of mistakes.

Paul Jaeger, a diagnostic developer and researcher at the University of Washington at Seattle, believes that a drop of blood is enough to perform 200 tests, as Theranos argued, only in the arena. He told Nature that it was fundamentally flawed. There are not enough molecules.

Other experts could identify technology issues before deceiving investors if the Elizabeth Holmes verdict was open to peer reviews. I said it should be. This is part of the science’s self-correction process, Yager said.

He added that some problems can also be avoided if the Elizabeth Holmes verdict has something to do with the scientific background. The process required to obtain a science degree tends to teach students the importance of reviewing and publishing experiments, Yager said. You learn that you need to line up your ducks and have reliable data.

Meanwhile, scientists also hope that biotechnology companies will be scrutinized more. James Nichols, a professor of pathology, microbiology and immunology, said the pressure to get the technology right will surely increase. He told Nature that Holmes considers Theranos technology to be copyrighted, does not publish it, and does not want to share it with the community.

Holmes’ belief will make biotechnology entrepreneurs more cautious and honest in their approach to investors, Nature said.

This was probably the biggest story of laboratory medicine, and it was a disaster, Diamandis said. The question is what can we learn about it so that it never happens again. The Associated Press reported that the trial also revealed the pitfalls of a cheeky strategy adopted by many Silicon Valley entrepreneurs who instill endless optimism, whether for good reason or not.

Holmes’ belief said it could at least temporarily reduce the performance of bold promises and bold exaggerations that are a daily part of the technology industry’s commitment to innovation.

The results of the trial will send a message to the CEO that crossing the border has consequences, as predicted by Ellen Kreitzberg, a law professor at Santa Clara University who attended the trial. But she added that greed will continue to keep the hype in Silicon Valley.

Read my more blogs from here