"...There aren't any real benefits to a "finger prick" other than marketing spin..."
"...regular draws but used the best trained phlebotomists who can find the vein on the first stick..."
That's the advantage of a finger prick. You don't need to be a trained phlebotomist to do it. The microfluidics drove the idea that you only needed "a few drops" to perform the tests (since drawing 100mL out of a finger would take forever). Put those two together and you had the concept of a test that any semi-skilled person could perform in a drugstore. That was the hook Theranos was banking on.
> You don't need to be a trained phlebotomist to do it.
Yes, but Theranos still had phlebotomists doing their finger pricks. Also, phlebotomists aren't that expensive. Even in the Bay Area I think they only make around $18 an hour. Cheaper than a nurse, for sure.
They had phlebotomists because, as we discovered in the fall, they were still drawing the standard vacutainers for all of the tests except the one that actually worked on the microfluidic system.
The remainder were run through traditional ELISA and clin-chem machinery from other companies.
Part of the excitement around Theranos was that their finger prick approach opened up blood diagnostic technologies to situations (e.g., combat) and countries where it is difficult to get access to trained phlebotomists.
"...regular draws but used the best trained phlebotomists who can find the vein on the first stick..."
That's the advantage of a finger prick. You don't need to be a trained phlebotomist to do it. The microfluidics drove the idea that you only needed "a few drops" to perform the tests (since drawing 100mL out of a finger would take forever). Put those two together and you had the concept of a test that any semi-skilled person could perform in a drugstore. That was the hook Theranos was banking on.