At the minimum they'd have to change their name and probably do a huge down round if they need to raise more money.. Also, is the CEO really going to want to run a traditional lab that has little competitive advantage over their competitors? Doesn't really fit into her ideal of making the world a better place. Are any of the board members going to want to stay on and take responsibility for this train wreck? People like Kissinger, Schultz, etc have everything to lose and little to gain from being on the boards of controversial companies. They are mostly concerned about their brand and legacy above all else. I don't think it looks good for them
Nothing has changed at Theranos. They're still the same business they were before. Either they have a valuable product or they don't. The only thing that's changed is public perception, which doesn't necessarily have anything to do with attracting investors.
Public perception could make it a lot harder to hire talent but $400 million gives you a lot of ammo and runway. Unless the investors start piling on lawsuits then it could get interesting ...