IIRC she doesn't know anything about science (did she even take a science lab class, let alone basic chemistry?) and she seems to have finagled entrance to Stanford via a Chinese language course she took during summers.
The way EH talks about the chemistry of her product is laughable.
In one of the documentaries, there's a woman professor (Phyllis Gardner) who would be the health startup person EH would want to suck up to and get the green light from. She talks about EH, who was a student. She is very blunt. She had NOTHING positive to say about EH. There's some VERY salty language.
Here's an article:
Meet the fearless female professor who helped bring down Elizabeth Holmes
Here is a quote from Phyllis Gardner in that article:
“To this day, I can’t explain it,” she added. “Except to say that she’s a sociopathic liar, and a narcissist. I don’t think she’s brilliant. She’s just a good liar.”
In general, I notice a startling gender divide in those who believed EH and those who saw "emperor's new clothes": men tend to have fallen for the schtick (consider her lawyers, investors, board), and women see through it and are repelled. The most significant men who saw fraud and said something were the Schulz grandson and Carreyrou. Oh, and Jimmy Ma with a famous eyeroll.
This jury might be very interesting from a gender point of view.
One of my favorites from Phyllis Gardner:
“Those men’s brains went south in their anatomy,” Gardner mused to The Sunday Times.
I hope Gardner testifies. This could be awesome fun.
