San Jose, CA – In 2010, Theranos Inc. attracted two major retailers in hopes of introducing their lab technology to busy pharmacies nationwide.
The criminal trial of Theranos founder Elizabeth Holmes promises real-time, cheap lab testing, expanding affordable healthcare for consumers and bringing in even more revenue for the retail giant, according to court testimony.
The testimony describes how executives from both chains were persuaded to believe Theranos’ claims after years of diligence, pilot projects, consultations with lawyers and medical professionals, and negotiations with startups that would eventually collapse. showing.
According to court testimony over the past two days, the lack of due diligence was why both companies spent a lot of time examining the Theranos device and testing its reliability or accuracy.
“Our general understanding was that the technology worked as we were told,” Wade Miquelon, former chief financial officer of Walgreens, said in a court testimony Wednesday.
According to Theranos, a unique technology allows you to test for more than 200 health conditions using a few drops of blood from a finger puncture wound. According to 2015 and 2016 reports from The Wall Street Journal, Theranos blood testing equipment is unreliable and inaccurate, the company can only run part of the test on its own machine, and the rest are commercially available. It was up to the analyst.
Holmes’ lawyer said running a failed company was not a crime and tried to blame his best lieutenant and ex-boyfriend Ramesh “Sunny” Barwani for Theranos’ technology and operations. Down.
Barwani is facing dozens of such cases and another trial is scheduled for early next year. He pleaded not guilty.
Micron, which helped oversee the early stages of the eventual turbulent relationship between Walgreens and Theranos, on Wednesday gave the company its due diligence on Theranos, relying partly on staffing medical professionals. I testified that I was there. Walgreens also hired a lab company to provide ratings, and Walgreens was considering collaborating with approximately 200 diagnostic companies, with Theranos telling Walgreens that it was “far away”, Miquelon testified. Gave.
Walgreens turned to experts at Johns Hopkins University and asked their doctor to meet with Holmes and Balwani. According to documents produced in court, the doctors did so and determined that the technology was correct and would be useful in setting up a retail clinic. But he never got the Theranos device to “play,” Michael said.
Steven Bird, the former CEO of Safeway, testified Tuesday that he had consulted with the director of the Johns Hopkins Institute and the University of California, San Francisco about Theranos’ claims. He invites one of the doctors to dinner with him and Mr. Holmes to discuss Theranos’ business. Bird said contacts at Johns Hopkins had received the Theranos test device, but the company retrieved it before researchers could verify its functionality.
An email from Bird in court revealed that Safeway had completed hundreds of hours of due diligence in Theranos and had been in contact with Holmes almost every day for more than a year.
Mr Bird testified that the Safeway director had a blood test after a finger was stabbed, however the machine malfunctioned and the results did not come. Mr Micron said he had two blood tests for a puncture wound in the finger and a short time later he got a result from a doctor.
Safeway and Walgreens signed a deal with Theranos in 2010. Safeway has run a pilot program to test the blood of employees at a corporate premises. However, despite the grocery store spending more than $350 million on building a store clinic for that purpose, Theranos devices were never placed in Safeway stores.
The Walgreens project has gone through a phase where companies have come up with details ranging from “Project Beta” in 2011 to “Project Normandy” in 2012. Mr Michelon said Walgreens and Theranos each sought the advice of outside experts on regulatory questions, such as whether Walgreens stores or Theranos headquarters are considered regulatory laboratories.
“This technology has new properties in the world, so it took some work to understand it,” Mitchell said in court testimony.
Both Safeway and Walgreens’ contracts with Theranos allowed the retailers to end their relationship.
Mr Michelon said Walgreens had agreed to pay Theranos a $100 million “innovation fee” and a $40 million convertible bond.
Walgreens and Theranos introduced an in-store blood test in 2013, which started with friends and family and opened it to the public. According to court records, relations between Theranos and Walgreens began to deteriorate in 2014 when the startups missed a major deadline.
Theranos then scrapped the results of thousands of patients it tested at Walgreens and, under pressure from federal regulators, stopped taking blood samples with its typical finger prick. Walgreens sued Theranos for $140 million in 2016, and a year later, the Wall Street Journal reported that it had reached a secret settlement that required Theranos to pay Walgreens more than $25 million. Was.
write to [email protected] heathersomerville
Copyright © 2021 DowJones & Company, Inc. All rights reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8
Source link Elizabeth Holmes test: Retailers validate Theranos without testing equipment