Yeah this is an important distinction here: Theranos's technology never reached the level of accuracy it needed in order to do the thing it set out to do: report accurate blood tests. uBiome's core technology _did_ work: it revealed counts of various flora in your gut.
What they did that was problematic was they basically offered the service with a nod and wink guarantee that they wouldn't bill you for the service, but would rather have a doc in their employ rubber stamp a "prescription" for the test, to then bill your insurance. They would bill insurance some fairly astronomical amount, too, like, IIRC, $3k-$4k. They'd warn you the entire time "if the insurance company sends you an EOB telling you there's a balance you may owe from us, don't worry, we won't charge you!"
Multiple layers of problematic, both with regards to how they threaded the needle to get a script written for the test to be defensibly "covered" by insurers, and the rates they were charging.
But at least the tech seemed validated and fairly accurate.