Elizabeth Holmes Breaks Her Silence In First Interview From Prison (people.com) 138
Convicted Theranos founder, Elizabeth Holmes, had her first interview since being reported to prison in 2023, telling People magazine that she is still working on "research and inventions" in the healthcare space. Here's an excerpt from the article: Scheduled for release on April 3, 2032, Holmes says she hopes to travel with her family and to fight for reform of criminal justice system. She recently drafted an American Freedom Act bill -- a seven-page handwritten document -- to bolster the presumption of innocence and change criminal procedure. "This will be my life's work," says Holmes, adding that she is speaking out now as part of her mission to advocate on behalf of incarcerated persons and those ripped away from their children.
And, despite her global reputation as a biotech con artist who put lives at risk, she says she's continuing to write patents for new inventions and plans to resume her career in healthcare technology after her release. "There is not a day I have not continued to work on my research and inventions," she says. "I remain completely committed to my dream of making affordable healthcare solutions available to everyone."
For now, however, she is sustained by weekend visits from her family, when she can cuddle Invicta, watch William gather acorns in the prison yard and hold Evans's hand and briefly hug and kiss. (Conjugal visits are not allowed.) "It kills me to put my family through pain the way I do," she says. "But when I look back on my life, and these angels that have come into it, I can get through anything. It makes me want to fight for all of it."
And, despite her global reputation as a biotech con artist who put lives at risk, she says she's continuing to write patents for new inventions and plans to resume her career in healthcare technology after her release. "There is not a day I have not continued to work on my research and inventions," she says. "I remain completely committed to my dream of making affordable healthcare solutions available to everyone."
For now, however, she is sustained by weekend visits from her family, when she can cuddle Invicta, watch William gather acorns in the prison yard and hold Evans's hand and briefly hug and kiss. (Conjugal visits are not allowed.) "It kills me to put my family through pain the way I do," she says. "But when I look back on my life, and these angels that have come into it, I can get through anything. It makes me want to fight for all of it."
"continued to work on my research and inventions" (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: "continued to work on my research and inventio (Score:5, Insightful)
All the 'I'm the victim here' attitude from her is too much. Even the phrase "since being reported to prison" fits that narrative. You were thrown in jail for defrauding people, risking lives, and quite possibly leading to death or poorer health outcomes by anyone unfortunate enough to rely on your 'tests' for their decisions.
Clearly she has not learned her lesson, and there should be no opportunity for early release until she does.
Re: "continued to work on my research and inventio (Score:5, Insightful)
But she IS a victim. The poor lass is being ripped away from her children. Children she decided to conceive during her fraud trial. Now what kind of a person would choose to have children under those circumstances? A victim!
She's just another victim of an Elizabeth Holmes fraud attempt.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I mean at least the name can be spelled without resorting to ALT codes, unlike *googles this shit because it's impossible to remember* "X Æ A-12".
Re: "continued to work on my research and inventi (Score:2)
Did she write that or is it just editor fail? When somebody is ordered by a judge to report to prison, then they "report to prison" when they go there on their own. If she didn't do that, they'd issue an arrest warrant and she'd be "sent to prison" instead.
Unless they're saying she was "reported on" for fraud, and then sent to prison, which is just plain silly for either her or the editors to say.
softening words (Score:2)
This is now journalism 101, if discussing a public figure, attractive person, suspected criminal and that person is a woman, there will be layers of softening words to appeal to the emotions and more emotional prone readers.
All of these softening words are downplaying any negative deeds, crimes, and avoiding any responsibility because responsibility, duty, obligation and sacrifice are for the other half of the population.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
And the main benefit
Her subordinate got 13 years (Score:2)
Even though she led the company and defrauded investors she received 11 years in prison (minimum security one) while her subordinate, a man, received 13 years in prison even though he was not in charge.
Sentencing disparity - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Men receive 50% longer sentences for the same crimes with similar circumstances than women.
Black men receive even longer jail sentences that men as a whole.and much longer sentences than women do for the same crime with similar circumstances.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Humans are clearly insane. No need to be a fucking piece of shit misogynist asshat.
You proved your point. But in other news, my post was about grammar, not people.
Re: (Score:3)
Now he is out and has a gene editing pharma company [npr.org].
It creates an interesting conundrum; these people are serving their time, but when they get out they go back to waht they're doing because they're passionate and cut corners, but should we be banning them from doing this?
Re: (Score:2)
She didn't have to pay anything to the victims who got wrong medic
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I would agree with her that financial fraud shouldn't have a higher consequence than unethical biomedical research. Not necessarily that her sentence was too high, though. The current justice system is harsher on crimes that affect the wealthy.
Re: (Score:2)
How else will we get to invent the xenomorph bioweapons that we deserve as a species?
Re: (Score:2)
Came here to emphasize this. She isn't researching or inventing squat.
Re: (Score:2)
Ah, the old 'double down' (Score:5, Insightful)
It's best, though, to STFU until after you've met with a parole board and been released. Maybe until your sentence is up and they can't get you for parole violation and have to start up a whole new legal process from scratch.
Even better, would be to actually reform.
Re:Ah, the old 'double down' (Score:5, Informative)
There is no parole in the Federal prison system for anyone sentenced after November 1987 so there is no way for her to violate parole.
Re:Ah, the old 'double down' (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
She has some name recognition - she'll probably be pardoned
By whom? Her biggest crime was defrauding rich investors. It's not like she killed people, sold drugs, or attempted to overthrow the capital. She's done things to *important people*.
Re: (Score:3)
She has some name recognition - she'll probably be pardoned
By whom? Her biggest crime was defrauding rich investors. It's not like she killed people, sold drugs, or attempted to overthrow the capital. She's done things to *important people*.
All she has to do is get Elon Musk to feel sorry for her, or maybe just get the hots for her, he'll talk to his Buddy In Chief and it will be a done deal with The Donald telling us about how unfair the Biden administration was to go after her for political reasons and how she's the real victim here.
Re: (Score:2)
More realistically, she has to find a way to grease Trump's palm and it'll happen. A Mar-a-Lago membership or book a whole floor of a Trump hotel for a while. Whatever the threshold is for buying a pardon.
Re: (Score:2)
Word on the street is if you cough up a 10% tribute you automatically upgrade to a preemptive pardon.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah she's got that going against her. If she'd only stolen from the poor like Scott Tucker she'd probably only have a few months left, going by the Tucker:Madoff ratio.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Fact check: Trump's lackeys have pressured prosecutors to drop charges against Adams, there has been no pardon...yet.
There are a lot of narratives she could construct that would get her a presidential pardon, and sweetening the deal with some COVID conspiracy theories would get her anywhere...she could say that, BTW, she has proof that COVID leaked from a Chinese lab that she'll release if pardoned, and then when she gets out she can write something slightly novel but fact-free to satisfy the requirements.
Re: (Score:2)
Every so often, I learn a new fact that gives a little bit more colour to the fact that the US justice system is wildly unjust compared to any other western country. Especially as this fact led me to the First Step Act.
Re: (Score:1)
Well lets add some relevant facts.
You can still get out early / have your sentence reduced for good behavior - which amounts to an unconditional parole.
So it isn't widly unjust at all. It is in reality far more just than most systems that include parole. Unless you consider justice to be about retribution and not reform.
Good behavior means reforms have succeeded and there is no value to society in further imprisoning the convict. So we actual restore their freedom rather than letting them out with a bunch
Re: (Score:3)
Ah facts. Tricky, aren’t they? Let’s have a little look.
You said that the First Steps Act early release scheme “amounts to an unconditional parole” and that “We actually restore their freedom rather than letting them out with a bunch of conditions and a nanny”. Except that the early release involves exactly what you say it doesn’t: you’re only let out with “a bunch of conditions and a nanny”. Early release inmates serve the remaining portion of the
Re: (Score:2)
I have an alternative solution to crowded prisons, unfair justice system, early parole release plans, and so,on.
Anyone who doesn't want to deal with the justice system should stop committing crimes. It isn't fool,proof but works in most cases.
I know it's a weird idea but let's give it a shot and see how it goes.
Re: (Score:2)
If you think the injustice of the US justice system doesn't encompass detaining, arresting, charging and convicting very large numbers of people who are innocent, then you're more naive than I gave you credit for.
Additionally, of course, there's a really quite famous saying about two wrongs not making a right.
Re: (Score:3)
That's no way to get a pardon from the felon-in-chief.
Leon spawn (Score:2, Informative)
Before any fanbois get woodies, remember he offered a horse to a flight attendant for a rub 'n tug.
Re: (Score:2)
An idea is not a patentable invention (Score:5, Informative)
A lot of people seem to conflate the two. Ideas are a dime a dozen as they say. Coming up with something workable is a lot more than just an idea.
Re:An idea is not a patentable invention (Score:4)
Yes, but the patent office has done all it can to muddle the line. Patents used to require a working model or prototype. These days, you can just sit down, write up some shit, and get a patent for it.
Aside from software patents, there's a number of technical patents that violate the laws of physics and/or describe purely theoretical machines.
So sadly, an idea written up in the correct application form with the right words the inspectors want to see is very likely to result in a patent.
Re: An idea is not a patentable invention (Score:2)
Well 1 it wastes court time and resources and 2 the courts tend to defer to the patent office so it is a poor check on bad patents.
Re: (Score:3)
There is literally no serious reason to worry about people getting a patent on an infinite energy machine or other stupid impossible nonsense.
There's plenty of serious reason to worry about people getting a patent on an impossible design for a net positive energy fusion reactor, then suing when someone actually invents a working one.
Re: (Score:2)
What's wrong with patents on physically impossible devices? There would not be a problem if patents only applied to concrete designs and not concepts. Now, I'm sure you're thinking that patents don't apply to concepts. By the strict letter of the law they do not, but the actual reality is that patent holders can sue in court over what amounts to concepts and, even if they would not eventually win, it doesn't matter because settling is often much cheaper than fighting. Also, it seems like the courts in East
Re: (Score:2)
Actually an idea very much is patentable. There is a long history of patents filed and issued for things that flat out don't work. Remember something is considered patentable when the patent office grants the patent. The fact that the patent office is too staffed full of clueless people to identify obviously unworkable inventions is the reason these things are patentable. An idea alone is not patentable only in a legal context. But that context requires smart people to review something, and often challenge
Re: (Score:2)
Haven't you heard of the AI revolution that's happening? The virtual AI agents (associates? friends?) can do all the actual development and manufacturing. Humans can just sit around comfortably ideating, taking recreational drugs, and farting out prompts while our AI assistants do all the dirty work. We may forget how to tie our own shoes (solution: velcro) and our brains will shrink to bird-size, but things will be so fantastic when we're all working for ourselves as entrepreneurs.
Try something different (Score:4, Informative)
telling People magazine that she is still working on "research and inventions" in the healthcare space.
If you're in the financial industry or healthcare, you need to be extra careful as a startup because you actually have to follow the law.
She should switch to a normal internet startup, where it's ok to lie and you won't get arrested even if your code has bad bugs.
Re: (Score:1)
Isn't it crazy now that CVS has the ability to diagnose certain conditions with a simple blood test? Also found was that a simple blood test can predetect certain specific cancers. Crazy how crazy Elizabeth Holmes was making these same crazy statements. Ofc what she did was what everyone in tech does, fake it until you make it.. that doesn't really play well in Biotech, but it's hard to ignore the impact she actually did to make preventative care just a bit simpler.
Also how is she getting interviewed in p
Re: (Score:2)
Isn't it crazy now that CVS has the ability to diagnose certain conditions with a simple blood test?
CVS did that before Holmes.
Ofc what she did was what everyone in tech does, fake it until you make it.. that doesn't really play well in Biotech
If you decide to do that, don't do biotech, and don't do banking.
Also how is she getting interviewed in prison?
Most people can be interviewed.
Re: (Score:2)
Your first post makes it look like you are crediting Holmes with advancing Healthcare technology though. It also doesn't emphasize that she hurt people well.
I disagree that she helped make healthcare simpler, she actually slowed development by diverting money to her fraud and making people have to be just a bit more wary of fraud.
The tests for things like cancer were already in the works.
Holmes promise was more being able to do a couple dozen tests using a single drop of blood.
Re: (Score:2)
So? Are you suggesting that Elizabeth Holmes invented blood tests? Or just blood tests for cancer?
Holmes made specific claims involving testing for a large number of things with a very small amount of blood quickly and accurately in a small on-site device. It didn't work, and she's in jail for lying and otherwise covering up that specific fact.
The specific colon cancer test you linked to is based on detection of tumor dna in the cell free blood fraction. The first serious papers on that technique date at le
Re: (Score:3)
Also how is she getting interviewed in prison?
The same way this story made it to slashdot. They figured there was a high chance that people would read it. It's junkfood for the brain. The western societies LOVE the shit.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm really tired of the "fake it til you make it" defense of her and her supporters. There's a difference between failing to deliver on a promise of the future and lying about your current progress. Most people would agree that failing to deliver for investors should not be a crime as it would disincentivize startups since failure to meet your goals could get you a prison sentence. However, most people would also agree that lying
Re: (Score:1)
Her only real mistake (Score:2, Informative)
She really made a fool of the guy that runs Walgreens. He went all in on her nonsense even though it was obvious nonsense.
The Real danger with scam artists like her is that they show us that the people at the top are just as incompetent as we are and just as easily fooled. If we ever figure that out we're going to start questioning why they get all the
Lobbying for a pardon (Score:1, Insightful)
"Hey Donald, I'm a big enough fraud to join your team!" - Elizabeth Holmes
Re: (Score:2)
I'm surprised Holmes and SBF haven't been pardoned yet.
They must have not put a safety pot away to buy their pardons.
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah but Trump stole from common folk. Holmes stole from rich people. There's a difference.
Big Lunatic Energy (Score:3)
Re:Big Lunatic Energy (Score:5, Funny)
Am I the only one turned on by her level of crazy? No way that does not transfer to the bedroom.
The sex is awesome, but getting stabbed at 3 in the morning kinda messes with your day.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, but the sex after the stabbing is unbeatable.
We could always ask John Wayne Bobbit! 8^) I do get it, she is an attractive woman, but I've dealt with a little crazy in my time. They are pretty scary.
Typical /. sexism. (Score:4, Funny)
That's so sexist.
Reducing a privileged blonde psychopath to the mind blowing mentally ill sex we all know she hasn't had in ages.... penned up with all those other women in that poorly heated prison. It must be hell for her, who knows what she might do to find comfort and attention behind those oppressive steel bars.
Re: Typical /. sexism. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm really excited about grab em by the pussy day. It's going to be like the purge but hornier.
Sure... (Score:5, Funny)
"those ripped away from their children."
Don't commit felony fraud and you won't be.
What a dumb b*tch!
Re: (Score:2)
"those ripped away from their children."
Don't commit felony fraud and you won't be.
What a dumb b*tch!
I would have gone with "don't conceive children while being on trial for felony fraud".
But calling her a dumb bitch is a bit much. She's a victim. ... A victim of a Elizabeth Holmes fraud scheme, in this case a scheme to avoid prison.
Re: (Score:3)
She didn't even have children until after it was obvious she'd be serving time. When she realised she was facing a prison, she got pregnant as quickly as possible in a bid to get a more lenient sentence. If she didn't want to put herself and her children through that, she shouldn't have got pregnant for sympathy points.
Re: (Score:3)
Her Board of directors was more like a Democrat political appointment group that knowledgable people guiding a tech heavy company.
This is totally disingenuous. There was a mix of Democrats and Republicans on the board along with a lot of CEOs who lean heavily conservative (even though they sometimes go along with performative progressive stuff if they think that is the way the wind is blowing).
Henry Kissinger, William Perry, Bill Frist, James Mattis, and Gary Roughhead? That's a Democrat political appointment group to you?
Some of her biggest investors were Rupert Murdoch, Betty De Vos, and Larry Ellison.
This was corruption and fraud.
Re: (Score:2)
Her Board of directors was more like a Democrat political appointment group that knowledgable people guiding a tech heavy company.
This is totally disingenuous. There was a mix of Democrats and Republicans on the board along with a lot of CEOs who lean heavily conservative (even though they sometimes go along with performative progressive stuff if they think that is the way the wind is blowing).
Henry Kissinger, William Perry, Bill Frist, James Mattis, and Gary Roughhead? That's a Democrat political appointment group to you?
Some of her biggest investors were Rupert Murdoch, Betty De Vos, and Larry Ellison.
This was corruption and fraud. Not political.
You appear to be triggered, So how many MAGA politicians were on her board.? The Republican party is not what it was in the early part of this century. So anyhow, let me know how many people were on the board with present day Republican values.
Re: (Score:2)
You appear to be triggered,
Quite obviously they were just correcting you and, if anyone was "triggered", it was you since you felt the need to say that "Her Board of directors was more like a Democrat political appointment group..."
Re: (Score:2)
Her Board of directors was more like a Democrat political appointment group that knowledgable people guiding a tech heavy company.
From what I can find, the board of directors had two former secretaries of state, both Republican. Then a Democrat former secretary of state and a Democrat senator. Additionally, it looks like a Republican billionaire, a Democrat lawyer, an apparently politically neutral CDC director (served under Carter and Reagan), a Republican former CEO, a foreign pharmaceutical executive who I can't peg as Democrat or Republican and a Chemistry professor who I can't identify as Democrat or Republican. So that's 3 Democ
Re: (Score:2)
Her Board of directors was more like a Democrat political appointment group that knowledgable people guiding a tech heavy company.
From what I can find, the board of directors had two former secretaries of state, both Republican. Then a Democrat former secretary of state and a Democrat senator. Additionally, it looks like a Republican billionaire, a Democrat lawyer, an apparently politically neutral CDC director (served under Carter and Reagan), a Republican former CEO, a foreign pharmaceutical executive who I can't peg as Democrat or Republican and a Chemistry professor who I can't identify as Democrat or Republican. So that's 3 Democrats, 3 Republicans and three who are neutral, unknown, or N/A. So your claims about it looking like a Democrat political appointment group seem to show some bias on your part.
As I answered another - Are those members representative of the current Republican AKA MAGA Republican party? I perhaps erred in thinking of Trump and the party that does as he tells him. This have changed a lot since then. Political parties do not operate in stasis - Is the present Republican party identical to the party of Lincoln? Is the Democrat party the Dixiecrat party as it once was?
Anyhow, point taken. We can move on unless you want to browbeat me a bit. 8^) You don't mention the main point I
Re: (Score:2)
As I answered another - Are those members representative of the current Republican AKA MAGA Republican party? I perhaps erred in thinking of Trump and the party that does as he tells him. This have changed a lot since then. Political parties do not operate in stasis - Is the present Republican party identical to the party of Lincoln? Is the Democrat party the Dixiecrat party as it once was?
I don't really get the point of that paragraph. The fraud at Theranos came to light in 2015, the board was formed well before that. This was well before Trump's first election to President and before his campaign leading to that (I won't call it his first campaign, because it wasn't really, he had made efforts to run for President before that had not gone anywhere). Why would any of them in any way be representative of the current MAGA party? They would have to be time travelers.
Anyhow, point taken. We can move on unless you want to browbeat me a bit. 8^)
Done.
That the makeup pf the BOD was odd for a biotech company.
Well I did mention that
Re: (Score:2)
As I answered another - Are those members representative of the current Republican AKA MAGA Republican party? I perhaps erred in thinking of Trump and the party that does as he tells him. This have changed a lot since then. Political parties do not operate in stasis - Is the present Republican party identical to the party of Lincoln? Is the Democrat party the Dixiecrat party as it once was?
I don't really get the point of that paragraph. The fraud at Theranos came to light in 2015, the board was formed well before that. This was well before Trump's first election to President and before his campaign leading to that (I won't call it his first campaign, because it wasn't really, he had made efforts to run for President before that had not gone anywhere). Why would any of them in any way be representative of the current MAGA party? They would have to be time travelers.
Anyhow, point taken. We can move on unless you want to browbeat me a bit. 8^)
Done.
That the makeup pf the BOD was odd for a biotech company.
Well I did mention that one of the former CDC director, the pharmaceutical exec, the chemistry professor,. Basically that's 33.33% representation of the kind of professionals who you would rationally want on such a board.
I always leave the possibility that I am wrong, but I do have others who believe as I do: https://www.forbes.com/sites/g... [forbes.com] So you know where I'm coming from - At present, I'm the CEO of a 501(c)(3) We have a board of 9 people, including me. Here's a article from the Utah Bar that tracks how I believe a Board of directors should be structured:
Board level systems for oversight - we have members specifically tasked with being certain we are working within our legal structure.
Regular Reporting to the board
Re: (Score:2)
What that does is show one thing. That the core mindset is more focussed on financial matters. Now as a company that is supposed to profit, I understand that there will likely be more financial types - keeping with board level expertise - than my 501(c)(3), but an overload of people who are focused on money, well there's some danger there.
Regarding this, and your other comments about the makeup of boards, I certainly don't actually disagree that, ideally, the board will have a lot of expertise on the subject matter that the company is primarily involved in. I recognize however, that this is a utopian idea. Realistically these companies are usually primarily interested in money. So maybe that actually perfectly explains the makeup of their boards. In Pfizer's case because they are a nearly 200 year old company that has had plenty of time to d
How can we miss you... (Score:4, Insightful)
so much breaking (Score:2)
A good rule of thumb is to ignore anything posted with emotion baiting, drama-manufacturing headlines.
I'm sure she had a principled stance she was mum as a monk, and something big and important changed for her to finally break that silence.
Maybe soon she'll "clap back" about something.
I can hate the game also. (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, self-preservation, her life's work. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Because the Board represents the investors. These are money guys. They know as much about the science as the typical dog walker.
They're actually victims here as they put in zillions of dollars and it went to zero.
She will be pardoned (Score:3)
I am sure she is gathering the money needed to get a pardon from Trump.
My spies tell me it is a sliding scale, but for someone of her stature the bidding starts at 10million usd.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh btw, Tara Reade would like a chat with you.
She and Mia Kirshner were kind of hot until they exceeded their expiration dates.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
You mean those unarmed grandmas who went on selfie tours?
The grandmas who smeared poop on the walls? Or the ones who made sure to bring along lots of zip ties to cuff prisoners with? Or the ones armed with sharpened spears in viking helmets, or the ones.with Camp Auschwitz shirts, or... well, you get the point, I could be doing this for hours.
As for Biden pardoning Hunter, I can't really agree with that. There should be strict rules against self-dealing in pardons, so Presidents should not be able to pardon themselves, their family, or people whose crimes were di
"Working on research and inventions" (Score:3)
If she really wants to work on "research and inventions", there's an established pathway for doing that. She could finish her college degree, apply for a PhD program, and spend several years working long hours under the tutelage of experienced scientists. Then, *maybe*, if she's smart and hard-working, she'll come up with some useful "research and inventions".
Nothing stopping her from doing any of that; PhD programs aren't that hard to get into, and more than half of the candidates (in the medical research space) are women. It's not a boys' club and there aren't a lot of obstacles to getting started. The main obstacle is getting things done once you're in.
But I'm guessing that this option has never even occurred to her. People like Holmes start with the assumption that they are special, that they are geniuses and "natural leaders", and that the ordinary rules of life don't apply to them.
Re: (Score:3)
You don't need to do all that stuff, although it's not a bad idea. Plenty of people with little education invent stuff in their garage in their spare time. What you need to do is not lie about how well it works.
Holmes' story is well known. She was an undergrad, thought she had a wonderful world changing idea and, despite being told by her professors that it wouldn't work took the risk to drop out and work on it. There's nothing wrong with any of that, although it is pretty risky. But then, when it didn't wo
Re: (Score:2)
In the *medical* field, though? I would think the solitary garage-tinkerer/inventor is rare, although maybe there are exceptions I don't know about. There's so much prior art, and so many billions of dollars already thrown at the problems you're trying to solve (especially if the problem is "how to do an accurate immunoassay"). Most of the garage inventors I can think of succeeded because they were among the first to tackle a specific problem (like Wozniak with the Apple).
Re: (Score:2)
Sure. The *medical* field isn't special. Stuff gets invented the usual way. The only thing that's different is the later stages of development, which are expensive and bureaucratic, for very good safety reasons.
The general public hears lots of stories about pharma trials and stuff with very important MDs giving very important opinions but that's just the very end stage. PCR was dreamed up by a guy who was high on LSD while driving. Dimethyl fumarate, which is an anti-inflammatory used to treat psoriasis and
Treat her like just another perp (Score:2)
Maybe we shouldn't give unrepentant celebrity criminals attention and publicity.
Hmmm (Score:2)
Has she stopped using... (Score:2)
Dear Parole Board: (Score:2)
Please note the complete lack of contrition.
Such a double standard (Score:2)
It's all about (Score:2)
It all seems to be about her. Poor little thing. Reform is a word not in this woman's vocabulary. If she does somehow enter the health care system again expect fraud and deceit, which I suppose is par for the industry in the first place sadly.
the voice (Score:3)
"...and those ripped away from their children" (Score:2)
"...and those ripped away from their children"
It's important to note that she didn't have children before the scandal started falling apart.
No remorse (Score:2)
Say What? (Score:2)
American Freedom Act? (Score:2)
She recently drafted an American Freedom Act bill -- a seven-page handwritten document -- to bolster the presumption of innocence and change criminal procedure
This is the bit that I'm confused by. Was she presumed guilty prior to conviction? I don't believe so. Why does the presumption of innocence need bolstering? And what would that look like?
Don't get me wrong, I think the American criminal justice system is insane, but... just like how I believe the worst person to give HIV safety advice is someone who has AIDS (I think people at risk would pay far more attention to someone who actually followed said advice than someone saying "I didn't do this but you should
Spill the Beans (Score:2)
She didn't "accidentally" get Kissinger on her Board of Directors.
She should go to Congresswoman Luna's Transparency Commission with the op to collect all Americans' DNA for TIA the same way USAID did in Pakistan and East Africa with their scam "vaccine clinics".
Her big problem is the music stopped before DARPA could develop the tech and she was left without a chair.
Sucks to be a patsy but she was willing and complicit. But if she turns State's she can get a deal.
Glad (Score:2)
I'm glad to see she is under the delusion that she is working on science and inventions. At least she is not under the delusion that she is a man. Or is she?
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, her parents were well off. She's a descendant of the Fleischmann's Yeast fortune. Her dad was also a Vice President at Enron.