Science, Capitalism, Fraud, and Gullibility

Drop science from the thread title. Your other three nouns are indeed what people do, but science is only about understanding our world.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

This is true but most of them eventually get caught out.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

The fraud here, of course, was falsely inflating their revenue numbers by 3 orders of magnitude.

As for the science, it was not peer reviewed, it was not independently validated and, despite their claims of developing a device that could accomplish the task, it did not work in any practical way in the clinic. This lab had problems from the very beginning and their investors did not thoroughly inspect or seek validation for the invention. Seemingly, no patients were harmed.

I'm in no way defending the company, but if all their claims were indeed speculative, venture capitalists should know what they're getting into here given the above huge caveats. It was a good but invalidated idea. The trick to investment in biotech is that their valuation is essentially zero until they develop a marketable product, and then it skyrockets. Investors want in RIGHT before the jump, but R&D is expensive and time-consuming and there is no guarantee that it will work. Their greed (and yes, greed of the executives and boards of the companies) often outweighs practical considerations.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

Science depends on people, who are well flawed as you know. But the scientific methods keep moving things toward correct understanding, don't you think?

Or, you are aware of a better method?

The post that was quoted here has been removed

You just said I was right! You probably strained a tendon somewhere though.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

Aoathist?

Originally posted by @wildgrass
The fraud here, of course, was falsely inflating their revenue numbers by 3 orders of magnitude.

As for the science, it was not peer reviewed, it was not independently validated and, despite their claims of developing a device that could accomplish the task, it did not work in any practical way in the clinic. This lab had problems from the very beginning and their investors did not thoroughly inspect or seek validation for the invention.

Quite. So, to hold this case against science is just as wilfully stupid as taking my games as evidence that chess is a casual, meaningless game.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

I wonder how they fared with that:NOT whistleblowing.