She obviously didn't write a C++ compiler worth selling at that age in that time period , so at most it was likely some sort of off-the-shelf reselling sales gig.
Except, in many ways, it isn't: 'disrupting' lab blood testing[1] is far from a public health priority --just because the founder is scared of blood and thinks phlebotomies are "barbaric" doesn't make it so.
[1] As opposed to point-of-care (viz, no-lab) testing, which is a genuine public health priority: i.e. portable glucose monitors, field tests for malaria, and so on.
FWIW, this isn't the only company to be trying this sort of thing, there was a company in the first batch of indie.bio claiming to do this, perhaps tellingly at demo day, the attempted live demo failed.
It could have easily began with good intentions but slowly devolved into a house of cards over the course of a decade.
However, the company was the most secretive I've interviewed at and the employees complained about being overworked. The fact the founder sold C++ compilers to Chinese universities when g++ is open-source sounded odd.
But I still had hope in them even after they passed on me -- a Silicon Valley company actually making a difference in the people's health. I WANT TO BELIEVE.
If this turns out to be smokes and mirrors, I'd be very saddened. Theranos' failure would confirm what everyone interested in biotech knows but wishes wasn't true: that advancements in this field do not move at the speed of the digital economy.