Skip to main content

The context you need, when you need it

When news breaks, you need to understand what actually matters — and what to do about it. At Vox, our mission to help you make sense of the world has never been more vital. But we can’t do it on our own.

We rely on readers like you to fund our journalism. Will you support our work and become a Vox Member today?

Join now

Theranos CEO Holmes: We Turned Down Google Ventures, Not the Other Way Around

Elizabeth Holmes claims she never even met Google Ventures’ Bill Maris.

Gilbert Carrasquillo / Getty

Earlier today, Theranos CEO Elizabeth Holmes took the stage at the WSJDLive Conference to defend her company, which has faced severe criticism following a Wall Street Journal investigation questioning the veracity of her startup’s blood-testing tech.

Holmes repeatedly disputed the Wall Street Journal report, along with other recent claims about Theranos. Among those claims: That Bill Maris, the high-powered investor who runs Google Ventures, passed on Theranos two years ago. It was the other way around, Holmes said.

In an interview with Business Insider on Tuesday, Maris said his firm considered Theranos two years ago, but declined. Here’s Maris: “We looked at it a couple times, but there was so much hand-waving — like, Look over here! — that we couldn’t figure it out. So, we just had someone from our life-science investment team go into Walgreens and take the test. And it wasn’t that difficult for anyone to determine that things may not be what they seem here.”

Asked about Maris’s comments, Holmes claimed she has never met Maris. She went further, adding that Google Ventures, which has invested in multiple medical health companies, approached Theranos but Theranos turned them down. “His firm asked us at one point if we wanted to meet and we said, ‘No,’” the CEO claimed.

Update: Google Ventures has given Re/code a statement from Maris:

Our team constantly looks at opportunities in life sciences and as a part of the process, we looked at Theranos. We had one of our team members take the test and were underwhelmed by the results and experience. We did not pursue an investment. Bigger picture: The critical issue is that there are a lot of patients who deserve to know whether their blood test results are accurate. That’s what really matters.

This article originally appeared on Recode.net.

More in Technology

Podcasts
Are humanoid robots all hype?Are humanoid robots all hype?
Podcast
Podcasts

AI is making them better — but they’re not going to be doing your chores anytime soon.

By Avishay Artsy and Sean Rameswaram
Future Perfect
The old tech that could help stop the next airborne pandemicThe old tech that could help stop the next airborne pandemic
Future Perfect

Glycol vapors, explained.

By Shayna Korol
Future Perfect
Elon Musk could lose his case against OpenAI — and still get what he wantsElon Musk could lose his case against OpenAI — and still get what he wants
Future Perfect

It’s not about who wins. It’s about the dirty laundry you air along the way.

By Sara Herschander
Life
Why banning kids from AI isn’t the answerWhy banning kids from AI isn’t the answer
Life

What kids really need in the age of artificial intelligence.

By Anna North
Culture
Anthropic owes authors $1.5B for pirating work — but the claims process is a Kafkaesque messAnthropic owes authors $1.5B for pirating work — but the claims process is a Kafkaesque mess
Culture

“Your AI monster ate all our work. Now you’re trying to pay us off with this piece of garbage that doesn’t work.”

By Constance Grady
Future Perfect
Some deaf children are hearing again because of a new gene therapySome deaf children are hearing again because of a new gene therapy
Future Perfect

A medical field that almost died is quietly fixing one disease at a time.

By Bryan Walsh