Elizabeth Holmes (Theranos) found guilty

[Agema]

...on four counts of fraud. She potentially faces decades of prison.

Elizabeth Holmes trial: jury finds Theranos founder guilty on four fraud counts

The jury delivered the verdict after announcing they were deadlocked on three of the 11 charges Holmes faced

www.theguardian.com

So sad.

Although honestly, fraud was quite a team effort, wasn't it? At least they got a person at the top rather than a load of flunkies.

 

[Chimpzy]

With any luck her partner in crime, Ramesh Balwani, will get nailed too, tho his trial is yet to start. Next week if I'm not mistaken.

 

[Fallen Soldier]

She was charged for fraud against her investors, but not for the people who donated their blood to her company. Basically the legal system once again screws over poor and middle class people but protects the rich.

 

[Trunkage]

She was charged for fraud against her investors, but not for the people who donated their blood to her company. Basically the legal system once again screws over poor and middle class people but protects the rich.

Yes. But blood isn't worth anything. Nor are results. Medical results, definitely not economic ones.

Like defamation, you cant sue unless it damages you FINANCIALLY.

 

[Trunkage]

Wished this happened to the Sackler family.

Cannot believe this took this long

Although honestly, fraud was quite a team effort, wasn't it? At least they got a person at the top rather than a load of flunkies.

If I remember correctly, one of the heads of department commited suicide from the pressure of Holmes and Balwani to keep quiet about the test not workinf. I would have hoped that would be included.

 

[CM156]

Interested to see what happens in sentencing and the inevitable appeal.

 

[Fallen Soldier]

Yes. But blood isn't worth anything. Nor are results. Medical results, definitely not economic ones.

Like defamation, you cant sue unless it damages you FINANCIALLY.

So? The rich assholes get coddled up by the courts while the people who donated their blood for medical testing were fucked over.

 

[Gergar12]

LOL.

 

[Agema]

Yes. But blood isn't worth anything. Nor are results. Medical results, definitely not economic ones.

Blood's pretty valuable. We just have a system where people often agree to give it for free.

I'm actually pretty unhappy that treatments that come from people (e.g. where they find someone with a genetic profile that enables a treatment to be designed) tend not to see a penny of the profit, either.

 

[Seanchaidh]

Blood's pretty valuable. We just have a system where people often agree to give it for free.

I'm actually pretty unhappy that treatments that come from people (e.g. where they find someone with a genetic profile that enables a treatment to be designed) tend not to see a penny of the profit, either.

There are rule utilitarian arguments- somewhat persuasive ones- that doing such would be unethical, though I regard them as contingent upon certain features of capitalist society. We don't want people selling their kidneys to pay debts, for example.

 

[Schadrach]

With any luck her partner in crime, Ramesh Balwani, will get nailed too, tho his trial is yet to start. Next week if I'm not mistaken.

Be willing to bet you right now he's a) found guilty on more of the counts than she is and b) he will receive a harsher punishment than she does for whatever charges stick.

 

[Avnger]

Be willing to bet you right now he's a) found guilty on more of the counts than she is and b) he will receive a harsher punishment than she does for whatever charges stick.

Wow, I'm honestly surprised we made it 10 whole posts before we got our first M"R"A post.

 

[Agema]

There are rule utilitarian arguments- somewhat persuasive ones- that doing such would be unethical, though I regard them as contingent upon certain features of capitalist society. We don't want people selling their kidneys to pay debts, for example.

My understanding is that it relates to patent law. Happening to have a special bit of biology is apparently not remarkable, merely a gift of the natural world to be exploited by human activity like any other. That human activity to create value and IP is the ability to identify the fact and claim priority of discovery.

I think it was viewed as grey area plenty of years ago, but (surprise, surprise) the law appears to have come down on the side of corporations.

 

[Trunkage]

Blood's pretty valuable. We just have a system where people often agree to give it for free.

I'm actually pretty unhappy that treatments that come from people (e.g. where they find someone with a genetic profile that enables a treatment to be designed) tend not to see a penny of the profit, either.

Oh yeah. Who was that women who died a long time ago but the still use her body and blood to make certain medicines?

 

[CM156]

Oh yeah. Who was that women who died a long time ago but the still use her body and blood to make certain medicines?

Henrietta Lacks. Assuming we're talking about the same person.

 

[meiam]

Blood's pretty valuable. We just have a system where people often agree to give it for free.

I'm actually pretty unhappy that treatments that come from people (e.g. where they find someone with a genetic profile that enables a treatment to be designed) tend not to see a penny of the profit, either.

You can sell plasma (blood without red blood cell) in most of the US iirc. I'm sure if people stopped donating blood the system would change to pay them for it.

As far as genetic profile, it would be quite complicated to make a system where those could be patented. Moreover, who would own the gene when multiple people have it? If one person is found to have the gene and receive compensation and later someone else is found to also have it, should they receive part of the compensation the first person received? If the first person to agree gets all the reward, companies would just have every family member bid down the price. If you need agreement of everyone involved, that would seriously slow down the development of promising treatment. And do people who have the gene really deserve any reward from it? They didn't work for it nor do they lose anything.

 

[Adam Jensen]

Oh, I remember her. I remember watching her TED talk years ago because she struck me as a complete fuckin' sociopath. She's a creepy looking human being who can't hide the fact that she's out of her freakin' mind. Not long after she was accused of fraud. It made total sense.

 

[Agema]

As far as genetic profile, it would be quite complicated to make a system where those could be patented. Moreover, who would own the gene when multiple people have it?

First come first profits, like any patent. Two people can have the same idea at the same time, but the first one to get their idea to a critical point to justify a patent gets the kudos and the money. So it can be with the first person found to have the right gene.

I'd rather at least one average joe who happens to have the right biology gets something for making the world a better place, rather than none.

 

[gorfias]

Oh, I remember her. I remember watching her TED talk years ago because she struck me as a complete fuckin' sociopath. She's a creepy looking human being who can't hide the fact that she's out of her freakin' mind. Not long after she was accused of fraud. It made total sense.

That low tone voice was something she effected as she thought that is what visionaries are supposed to sound like.

 

[Adam Jensen]

Yeah, that's the one. It perplexes me how some people are incapable of recognizing sociopaths, while others, like me, see them from a mile away. I literally get goosebumps when I encounter one in the wild. It's like they emit some kind of creepy signal. To me they are obvious. And Elizabeth Holmes would, IMO, score very high on the psychopathy scale. Higher than a lot of psychopathic politicians and televangelists.