In one sense you are correct, just because investors are knowingly making speculative investments, that doesn't make it OK to defraud them.
On the other hand, perhaps the argument was that investors know there's a risk and know they should be skeptical. It would be unreasonable to expect patients requesting a blood test to be suspicious and question the results.
> On the other hand, perhaps the argument was that investors know there's a risk and know they should be skeptical.
If you've ever dealt with competent VCs, they are very skeptical, which is why they pretty much ignore your forward looking statements and just look at your current data. And the reason they do that is because forward looking statements can be all kinds of BS, but current data is just facts (unless you're lying about them, in which case it's fraud).
Of course, they also want to know your vision and drive for the future, but they'll basically ignore statements like "We have 10 big deals I'm the pipeline" and just say "How many signed contracts do you have?"
On the other hand, perhaps the argument was that investors know there's a risk and know they should be skeptical. It would be unreasonable to expect patients requesting a blood test to be suspicious and question the results.