The rich and powerful fall into unethical traps as surely as the poor and ignorant. And, knowing the political climate and its silo thinking, when I bring up the name Betsy DeVos in regard to Theranos, half of the voting public in this great nation, will be inclined to cheer and applaud.
DeVos was Donald Trump’s education secretary. She was a lightning rod figure, adored and loathed. She also comes from great family wealth; billionaire wealth. I am not stating these facts to talk about politics or privilege. For, what happened to DeVos could have happened to any of us; greater or lesser, political activist or extreme independent.
The Holmes Net
Elizabeth Holmes knew what she was doing, she went after high-income, somewhat technologically naïve individuals to invest in her company. She approached the DeVos family and pitched the investment arm of the DeVos family foundation. This was in 2014. She initially got the foundation to agree to a funding of $50 million. Holmes, seeing the Golden Goose, personally pitched the family and got them to double their commitment.
According to Betsy DeVos, under oath, Holmes told the foundation that not only could the technology analyze a couple drops of blood for more than 300 factors, that it was, in fact, being used by the U.S. military and Big Pharma. They were both lies.
She also stated another lie: the company did all of those tests with its own breakthrough equipment, not third party (rented and/or purchased) equipment.
In all, Holmes was able to hoodwink wealthy investors out of more that $700 million, convincing families like the Waltons (of Walmart) that the Theranos technology was a game changer. Lawyers for Holmes accused DeVos of not doing the proper due-diligence. In other words, not researching the unethical misrepresentations as truth.
The Bricks in the Wall
The bricks in the wall being built around Theranos, Holmes and Balwani are growing higher. For example, per Holmes’ claim that Big Pharma was using the equipment, it turns out that Theranos faked reports from Pfizer and Schering-Plough, which backed the viability of her technology. The reports were lies.
As we have intently covered the trial from an ethical point of view, we note how the language of the defence has shifted. At first, Ms. Holmes was depicted as victim; that her COO and intimate partner Ramesh Balwani had emotionally and psychologically abused her and that she was innocent of wrong-doing.
Now, her lawyers have also interjected another defense. She never intended to commit fraud, but “naively underestimated” the technology and the challenges of conducting 300 blood tests from a single drop of blood. It can’t be done; not in 2014 or in 2021. Someday, perhaps, but not with the Theranos technology.
In week after week, the image that Elizabeth Holmes allegedly portrays of herself was that she was the next Steve Jobs, down to adopting the signature black T-shirt and bold optimism. The problem with even that line of thinking is that Jobs had at least a basic understanding of the technology. Former Theranos employees have already testified that Holmes rarely entered the lab where the technology was being developed. She had no idea of what was behind the “black box,” but she (almost sociopathic in her zeal) blatantly lied to people. It is a sad look.
The case is being shifted to a portrayal of Holmes as the abused, naïve victim who, robotically, asked people such as DeVos for money. In the end, it is a defeat even if she manages to escape from this unethical mess with nothing more than a slap on the wrist.
As a father and grandfather of girls, who has a strong and ethical belief in STEM programs, I find it a shame that Elizabeth Holmes stood as a bold, role model for young girls to follow. She is hardly that. She is emerging as the opposite of that. Young girls have a host of female role models to follow, from Orthopedic Surgeons to CEOs of major software and automobile companies.
Elizabeth Holmes, old black T-shirts and all, is not who any of them should aspire to be.
LEAVE YOUR COMMENTS!
