The recent documentary "You Can See Everything," co-directed by comedian Nathan Fielder, presents a compelling, albeit controversial, attempt to reframe the narrative surrounding Elizabeth Holmes and the defunct blood-testing startup Theranos. The film delves into Holmes’s life in the lead-up to her federal prison sentence, exploring her personal relationships and attempting to cast her as a victim of circumstance or a victim of a mind that simply processes information differently. However, for many, including CCI editorial director Jennifer L. Gaskin, the documentary’s nuanced portrayal fails to obscure the foundational evidence of fraud that led to Theranos’s spectacular downfall and Holmes’s conviction. Despite the film’s efforts to present Holmes in a new light, the core question remains: did Elizabeth Holmes knowingly deceive investors and the public, or was she a victim of her own literal interpretation of reality? The evidence, Gaskin argues, points overwhelmingly to the former, particularly when viewed through the lens of her relentless pursuit of capital.
Theranos: A Lingering Corporate Governance Cautionary Tale
The implosion of Theranos in 2018 and the subsequent federal criminal trials of its top executives have been a recurring case study in corporate governance failures. The company, once valued at $9 billion, promised to revolutionize blood testing with a proprietary device capable of performing hundreds of diagnostic tests from a single drop of blood. This audacious claim, however, proved to be an elaborate deception. Investigations by The Wall Street Journal, led by journalist John Carreyrou, revealed that Theranos’s technology was deeply flawed, unreliable, and incapable of delivering on its promises. The company’s operational and financial practices were found to be riddled with misrepresentations, leading to charges of wire fraud and conspiracy against Holmes and former Theranos president Ramesh "Sunny" Balwani.
"You Can See Everything": An Attempt at Recontextualization
Those anticipating that Nathan Fielder’s documentary would offer a significantly different perspective on Theranos or its founder, Elizabeth Holmes, now incarcerated at a federal prison in Bryan, Texas, are likely to be disappointed. The film, spanning nearly three hours, dedicates considerable time to portraying Holmes and her partner, Billy Evans, as individuals striving to illustrate Holmes as a strictly literal thinker. This narrative is reinforced through anecdotes, such as Holmes’s purported inability to grasp the nuances of the Abbott and Costello "Who’s on First?" comedy routine, her admitted struggles with basic culinary tasks like scrambling eggs, and her insistence that a single word in a New York Times article fundamentally altered the meaning of her statements.
The documentary carefully avoids explicitly using the term "neurodivergent," yet the implication is clear: Holmes’s cognitive processes differ significantly, thereby potentially excusing or at least contextualizing her actions. Multiple individuals interviewed by Fielder suggest that Holmes’s brain operates in an unconventional manner. Fielder himself, a figure known for his own unconventional approach and subject to speculation about his own neurotype, appears to engage with this possibility. The film poses a critical question: if Holmes and her investors held divergent understandings of what was "possible" or what the technology could "do," did she knowingly mislead them?
A Sympathetic Portrait Under Scrutiny
Beyond the theoretical discussion of neurotype, "You Can See Everything" endeavors to present Holmes, now adopting the nickname "Liz," as a sympathetic figure. The documentary begins as Holmes faces her impending federal prison sentence, a mere month away. It highlights her role as a mother to two young children, including a newborn she was breastfeeding. Her father, in a poignant moment, suggests to Fielder that significant negative shifts in Holmes’s life began after a traumatic sexual assault, a topic that is abruptly curtailed when Evans intervenes.
Billy Evans: The Controlling Partner
Billy Evans, 34, emerges as a central, and often unsettling, figure in the film. As the heir to a San Diego hotel company, Evans plays a dual role as Holmes’s business and romantic partner. His controlling behavior is palpable, particularly in scenes like the egg-scrambling incident, which elicits both amusement and discomfort. As the documentary progresses, Evans’s demeanor becomes increasingly hostile. He openly discusses carrying a firearm at all times and vows retribution against those he perceives as having wronged him and Holmes.
While Holmes serves her sentence, Evans has assumed control of her X (formerly Twitter) account, posting content that has been described as erratic. He has also been granted power of attorney, effectively placing him in a position to manage Holmes’s affairs and potentially influence her future. Evans has drawn comparisons to Ramesh "Sunny" Balwani, Holmes’s former business and romantic partner and co-defendant. Balwani, whom Holmes has previously accused of being controlling and abusive, was convicted on multiple fraud charges alongside her. The parallels are striking, raising concerns about Evans’s influence and motivations.
Fielder’s Engagement and Holmes’s Ambitions
Fielder, a cultural figure known for his enigmatic persona, appears to be genuinely captivated by Elizabeth Holmes. He seems eager to believe her narrative or, at the very least, to comprehend her perspective. He manages to elicit a clarification from Holmes regarding her assertion that Theranos’s machines could perform blood tests, which she explains as the ability to "download a testing protocol."
Despite Fielder’s efforts to uncover definitive truths, "You Can See Everything" offers few concrete answers. However, by opening their lives to Fielder’s unique directorial style, Holmes and Evans have seemingly achieved a significant objective: to sow seeds of doubt regarding Holmes’s culpability in the Theranos affair and, potentially, to begin rehabilitating her public image and trustworthiness.
The Unwavering Need for Trust: The Financial Imperative
The question of why Holmes’s trustworthiness matters now, given her conviction, leads directly to the film’s most critical revelation: money. Beyond her status as a convicted felon, with an expected release date of February 22, 2030, Holmes remains an active entrepreneur. The documentary captures Holmes and Evans in phone calls with potential investors for a new startup, a venture formally established by Evans. Significantly, only Evans is listed on the Texas state filing documents for this new company.
The new enterprise, astonishingly, mirrors Theranos’s core mission: to disrupt the health diagnostics industry. This time, however, the focus reportedly involves lasers. The film shows Evans rapidly consuming science videos on YouTube, despite neither he nor Holmes possessing specialized scientific training or degrees. Holmes herself famously dropped out of Stanford University, a fact that underscores the dramatic contrast between her pronouncements and her formal qualifications.
A Pattern of Deception, A Call for Vigilance
Elizabeth Holmes appears to have learned little from the Theranos debacle. Yet, the world at large has. The film’s title, "You Can See Everything," is drawn from Holmes’s plea to Fielder, urging him to trust her. The documentary’s central thesis, however, is that we can indeed see everything – not necessarily as Holmes intends, but as the evidence has laid bare.
The trial record provides irrefutable evidence of Holmes’s deliberate misrepresentations. Her testimony revealed that she personally affixed Pfizer’s logo to a report intended for Walgreens executives, a clear attempt to imply endorsement. Text messages exposed her dismissal of warnings from Balwani regarding excessive media exposure, given the precarious state of the company’s technology. Jurors heard recordings of Holmes falsely claiming that Theranos’s technology was actively being used by the U.S. military "in the battlefield." Furthermore, she grossly inflated the company’s revenue, claiming approximately $200 million from military and pharmaceutical contracts when the actual figure was less than 5% of that amount. The volume of evidence demonstrating intentional deception is extensive.
These actions cannot be attributed to a literal-minded or neurodivergent mind; they represent clear and calculated fraud. Holmes, however, requires the public and potential investors in Evans’s new venture to perceive her differently. She seeks to be seen as a new mother, shedding her signature black turtleneck and power suits for more subdued, "trad-wife" attire, a modest gold cross adorning her. She presents herself as someone merely seeking understanding.
The Enduring Specter of Theranos
The narrative presented in "You Can See Everything" attempts to recast Elizabeth Holmes, but the fundamental facts of the Theranos fraud remain. Her conviction stands, supported by extensive documentary and testimonial evidence. The attempt to reframe her as a victim of circumstance or a miscommunicator fails to negate the deliberate nature of her actions.
The implications of the Theranos saga extend far beyond the fate of one individual. It serves as a stark reminder of the critical importance of due diligence, ethical leadership, and robust regulatory oversight in the innovation sector. Investors, scientists, and the public alike must remain vigilant against claims that appear too good to be true, especially when they involve complex scientific or technological advancements.
The emergence of a new venture, ostensibly led by Billy Evans and with Elizabeth Holmes as a key figure, raises significant red flags. The repetition of Theranos’s mission, coupled with the lack of demonstrable scientific foundation and Holmes’s history, suggests a concerning lack of contrition and a continued pursuit of capital through potentially deceptive means.
The public’s ability to "see everything" should not be confined to the carefully curated narrative of a documentary. It must encompass the full weight of the evidence, the legal judgments rendered, and the profound impact of Theranos’s deception on its investors, employees, and the broader healthcare landscape. This time, the public and potential investors must not fall prey to a revised narrative that seeks to absolve a convicted fraudster of her responsibilities. The lessons of Theranos are clear, and adherence to them is paramount.
