r/mildlyinfuriating • u/relaqz • 9h ago

ಠ_ಠ Caught our exam grader pasting every essay into ChatGPT

Not a single word was read per grade.

35k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

2.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

393

u/WasabiLiving6465 8h ago

They were asking at the doc’s office the other day if they could plug my symptoms into AI…..like nah brah, I can do that. I want to see a medical professional 

168

u/Simba7 7h ago

Hyper-specific AI is actually the only reasonable use-case for it, like specific medical applications. It's called SAMD (software as a medical device).

I have was less problem with those, as they need to go through pretty rigorous testing*, aren't prone to hallucinating, require at least some degree of human oversight, and will be as (or more) accurate as a medical professional or they won't leave the testing phase.

*With exceptions for some low/no risk SAMD but fortunately the risk is not categorized by the creator.

46

u/All_Work_All_Play 7h ago

SAMD is probably the least visible aspect too. AI has now made it possible for people with software ideas to get Proof-of-Concept bordering Minimum Viable Product* status almost as quickly as they can provide feedback (provided they have the tokens for it). There are an awful number of ways AI can be misused, but there are plenty of domain specific applications beyond SAMD.

*viable for your internal home network unexposed to malicious actors

2

u/HBlight Hans Shot Second 1h ago

I saw someone with no experience programming creating an addon for a game on stream using voice input. It was impressive seeing it in action, until I saw them ask for a small bit of the UI to be closer to another part of the UI, and doing so in a long-winded manner, it felt so wasteful to see that amount of processing power get used to in essence just adjust a single variable. It hurt to see.

•

u/All_Work_All_Play 15m ago

I mean, how many tokens did it cost? I've burned about three million tokens so far on a personal project. It's automated a significant pain point in our family life. Three million sounds like a lot until you consider it's $2 per million for input tokens and $10 per million for output tokens (cache refresh tokens are their own mystery mumbo jumbo). Running these requests through the API costs would have cost ~$14, and a good chunk of that was improper usage on my end (churning the entire cache rather than regular compaction + self summarizing). Even if you use actual indians, you couldn't produce iterate through the software progression for $14. Using open source models, it's roughly 12 hours of 5090 running full tilt, a little more more than a buck an hour. Considering the 8760 hours of 5090 per card per year, and they "only" cost $6000, that's not an entirely improper use of resources. 

Of course, if you're using fable 5.1 your costs would be 5x this (as would your card hours) so it's about using the right model for the right task. 

As someone who lightly games, the fact that Claude can make near instant tweaks to mods without having to wait on another person  (or dig through another programming language I'm unfamiliar with) is crazy good. 

10

u/creative_usr_name 5h ago

Well maybe they should wait until they have they before they start using it. Because right now when they transcribe their notes with it now and say that a 78yo man is on birth control it's not really doing it's job well at all.

5

u/DiscoKittie Short Bus 3h ago

It will absolutely still halucinate answers. Dosen't matter how "trained" it is.

4

u/snakerjake 5h ago

I have was less problem with those, as they need to go through pretty rigorous testing

I have a huge problem with senidng that information out to a third party. It certainly makes sense when the models can run local but pulling the cloud into it is just asking for medical information to leak whether through a hack or employee anywhere in the chain misconduct

1

u/say592 2h ago

Just wait until you learn about electronic medical records.

50

u/DaaaahWhoosh 8h ago

The scary part is that in many ways AI actually does seem to be doing better than actual doctors. So many horror stories of people going in, telling their doctor their symptoms, and then being sent home with nothing, only to go back later dying or with a terminal diagnosis because 'it wasn't caught early enough'. I know how it sounds but it really does seem like some doctors need to be replaced with AI, because at least the AI can be loaded with enough context to actually pay attention to patients' concerns.

22

u/bkgn 7h ago edited 7h ago

I used to live in a rural area, and the medical services available were abysmal. I couldn't even see a doctor, the only person the local doctor's office would make available to me was a 50 year old PA that was a plumber until he was 45. He was completely clueless, I got better medical advice from google (pre-AI). AI would absolutely give better medical advice than millions of people in the US currently get, let alone worldwide.

And I hate current AI in most contexts.

2

u/Laiko_Kairen 5h ago

https://www.npr.org/2026/03/11/nx-s1-5744035/chatgpt-might-give-you-bad-medical-advice-studies-warn

5

u/bkgn 5h ago

I said better, not perfect.

1

u/atomic1fire 1h ago

I assume a local doctor using AI would probably be legally required to use a medically licensed AI model or hardware.

1

u/ComfortableNorth4479 4h ago

AI is better than NP's in every single way so hopefully it kills that entire profession. A good doctor is still miles ahead of AI though.

19

u/RancherFactoryHunter 7h ago

While that can and does happen in some obvious or unfortunate circumstances, the other side of that is as a diagnostician you are often faced with a constellation of nonspecific symptoms. For many patients, these are ultimately inconsequential without any need for intervention. In weighing what to do, it's about running up the bill on large number of patients running tests for less likely illnesses vs. potentially missing a serious illness.

AI could certainly have potential to catch missed conditions in its differential, but there's a distinct possibility it may also recommend every test known to man in the process, leaving one with a hefty bill unless it is also trained in cost-benefit scenarios. And at that point, who knows if it also won't make the same mistakes based on probabilities in evidence-based medicine.

3

u/ElectronFax 5h ago

Even if you completely remove the money and logistical aspect of testing everyone, there’s also the important balancing act that ordering some tests can cause more harm than good in some people. For example, ordering a PSA in a very elderly gentleman. If it’s high you’re going to subject him to a prostate biopsy when he’s unlikely to die from the cancer itself anyway.

2

u/Recent_Prompt1175 3h ago

I mean, it shouldn't take over 12 years for a woman to be diagnosed with endometriosis when she has ridiculous amounts of pain that leave her unable to function when menstruating. Especially when that woman saw at least 5 different OB/GYNs over those 12 years. Physicians make mistakes all the time and discount women's pain. A woman shouldn't have to suffer for 12 years before getting a diagnosis.

-2

u/bark-beetle 5h ago

I suspect you're a real doctor and not AI. Did it ever occur to you that a cost-benefit analysis shouldn't be a factor in treating your patients?

7

u/RancherFactoryHunter 5h ago

Is this some sort of gotcha? There's reasonable diagnostics to order based on the patient presentation and then there's overkill. Of course costs are not the primary concern in the course of treating someone, but I don't order tests that I consider unnecessary costs and risks to the patient. An AI unable to discern that you don't need a liver biopsy just because of ALT elevation in a diabetic on statin therapy is the concern I was expressing.

-3

u/bark-beetle 4h ago

"Overkill" is weird term for a doctor to use, but OK. I know the costs of all diagnostic tests. "Unnecessary costs", get fucking real bro. Real life isn't a TV show.

My differential diagnosis of you:

  • Not a good doctor

  • A very tired doctor, insufferable to work with

  • A mediocre dentist

4

u/RancherFactoryHunter 4h ago

Thanks for the laugh 😄

-1

u/bark-beetle 4h ago

Is this some sort of gotcha? There's reasonable diagnostics to order based on the patient presentation and then there's overkill. Of course costs are not the primary concern in the course of treating someone, but I don't order tests that I consider unnecessary costs and risks to the patient. An AI unable to discern that you don't need a liver biopsy just because of ALT elevation in a diabetic on statin therapy is the concern I was expressing.

Some doctors are like this.

4

u/Rahnna4 4h ago

And you’re clearly not a doctor, economist or public health professional. It sucks but in all systems healthcare resources have limits. In single payer/public funded systems there’s a budget and spending on one with will mean something else can’t be funded and they’re awful decisions to make. Even when the budget is increased there are essentially endless tests and experimental tests and treatments that could potentially be funded and a line will have to be drawn somewhere. In patient pays system you have an obligation to be mindful of the cost burdens you’re putting on the patient and consider if the test is really likely to help them or will just cause financial distress for little gain. There’s also then an issue of overdiagnosis, where you find things that don’t matter and aren’t causing symptoms but once detected on an MRI or whatever will set off a cascade of investigations and potentially even surgeries and we’re seeing that in terms of quality of life and health outcomes are actually worse than if it was never found. Not to mention tests themselves can be harmful with radiation, infection risks, pain and increased patient anxiety. Even if someone had all the money in the world it would still be bad medicine to just give them all the tests.

0

u/bark-beetle 3h ago

And you’re clearly not a doctor, economist or public health professional. It sucks but in all systems healthcare resources have limits.

I'm lucky enough to not give a shit what you think about my medical background.

a line will have to be drawn somewhere

brown paper bag test to decide who is black or white? the line has to be drawn? get fucked.

if the test is really likely to help them or will just cause financial distress for little gain

get fucked.

Not to mention tests themselves can be harmful with radiation, infection risks, pain and increased patient anxiety.

MRI risks? GET FUCKED

you find things that don’t matter and aren’t causing symptoms but once detected on an MRI or whatever will set off a cascade of investigations and potentially even surgeries and we’re seeing that in terms of quality of life and health outcomes are actually worse than if it was never found

GET FUCKED

it would still be bad medicine to just give them all the tests.

How would it be bad medicine to order a test? Fuck you.

3

u/Rahnna4 1h ago

Not that you’re discussing in good faith, but for anyone curious about a case study that illustrates a lot of these issues look at what happened when Australia rolled out routine PSA screening for men. More cases of prostate cancer were identified, lots of men got chemo, lots of men and their families went through all the emotional turmoil of a cancer diagnosis. Lives were upended. The mortality rate of testicular cancer didn’t change at all. Lots of men had their quality of life shattered for the same outcome had they been tested when symptoms emerged, and for a good chunk of them they’d have never known they had it and died with it not from it. The screening program was ended because it was going more harm than good.

0

u/bark-beetle 1h ago

You think you're discussing this in good faith?

My partner literally has prostate cancer and he's not being treated by chemo or any drugs. They test him, which REQUIRES A DOCTOR, and he's decided to NOT TREAT IT WITH CHEMO, which also r quires a doctor, so why don't you FUCK OFF.

Also,

The screening program was ended because it was going more harm than good

GET FUCKED

5

u/Apprehensive_Ear9187 3h ago

Even if you take out the money and the potential inherent complications of some tests as other have already mentioned, false positives and false negatives exist.

No test has 100% specificity and 100% sensitivity. In a world where we test everything for every patient (hyperbole, obviously) the outcomes would be worse, that’s why the science behind what, when and where to test is used to dictate it.

-2

u/bark-beetle 3h ago

You seem like AI or a high school student, which is fine.

3

u/Apprehensive_Ear9187 3h ago

English is not my first language.

-1

u/bark-beetle 3h ago

Mine neither, AI.

GET FUCKED.

2

u/Funexamination 2h ago

It is. We are concerned about patient life and quality of life. Financial burden affects quality of life quite a bit.

Death, Disease, Distress, Disability, Dissatisfaction and Destitution are the clinically relevant end points. Last one relates to money

-2

u/bark-beetle 2h ago

You'd have to be the dumbest dipshit doctor in the world to not know that four out of five relates to money.

1

u/caffpanda 3h ago

It absolutely should, because the patient and the broader system still have to pay for it. Do you want a $3000 bill for a CT scan for something that could've been caught with an ultrasound for a fraction of the price? Do you want a $1200 diagnostic for a rare condition that occurs 1/150,000 people or a $60 diagnostic for a far more likely condition first?

0

u/bark-beetle 3h ago

because the patient and the broader system still have to pay for it

why am I the only person in this conversation that understands the public cost of medical care?

I never said that you shouldn't have an ultrasound. i had multiple ultrasounds on by balls which is clearly cheaper than an MRI.

a fraction of the price?

It would have been cheaper to cut my balls off, but I'm glad i have better doctors than you.

4

u/caffpanda 2h ago

Ask any of your doctors if they consider cost vs benefits in their treatment and diagnostics, you'll get a very similar answer to what's been said here.

22

u/Truhls 8h ago

i mean, AI can remember everything we know about medical science. A doctor cant, so it makes sense that they would be getting better are diag than doctors tbh. Especially considering a lot of doctors get out of class and then proceed to never really keep up with changes.

24

u/DontHaesMeBro 8h ago

modern doctors should be using automation, but modern medical practices should not be charging you full price to route you through the automation when you booked an appointment to be seen by the human.

11

u/regoapps 5-0 Radio Police Scanner 7h ago

Greedy people will never pass the savings onto you. They already knew that you're willing to pay those high prices back before they had automation.

13

u/pleasedothenerdful 7h ago

It's almost like we should as a society just remove the profit motive from medical care, the way almost every other society on earth has done.

1

u/Laiko_Kairen 5h ago

I agree with you. However, people like their governments to run on fumes and pay as little in tax as they can.

"Hey taxpayers, it's cheaper to send people to AI doctors!"

"Nurses with AI are now responsible for x y z care that used to be done by physicians..."

It's not like countries with socialized medicine won't feel the effects of budgetary squeezes. This is bad for everyone imo

6

u/pleasedothenerdful 5h ago

There is no perfect system. But the US' is worse than any other developed country's for anyone who isn't wealthy, and it's because of the profit motive.

1

u/Laiko_Kairen 5h ago

Again, I agree. But in suggesting that the "cost savings" motive will also undermine care elsewhere

2

u/HelperOfHamburgers 7h ago

I would settle for them hiring just one more office staffer so that hold times get reduced and the person who answers may possibly not be so stressed out and overworked that they can take a moment to breathe and help callers instead of being so frantic and desperate to keep up with the deluge of paperwork that something might get missed or overlooked.

1

u/CyanVince 3h ago

The entire point of American capitalism is that the "extra value" goes to the shareholder.

4

u/LapinTade 7h ago

You still need to be a doctor to understand if the ai is hallucinating or not. That's the same as developpers, ai alone can do good but ai with human that has experience and understand the shit, will do wonder.

5

u/DontHaesMeBro 6h ago

my experiences in modern healthcare and its satellite fields tell me that given the chance, most medical business environments will split one clinician as thin as possible.

3

u/Dabbling_in_Pacifism 7h ago

You're still getting "the human," though? You aren't just getting unfiltered LLM output when you go into a doctor's office, you're getting a medical professional's opinion. They may have arrived at it using AI tools, but as long as they're utilizing their education to validate and springboard off of that output and not just serving as a human harness and passing what it shits out along to you, i don't see the issue.

As far as how much anyone is paying for that, that's an entirely separate conversation lol.

1

u/DontHaesMeBro 6h ago

my experiences in modern healthcare and its satellite fields tell me that given the chance, most medical business environments will split one clinician as thin as possible.

•

u/Dabbling_in_Pacifism 36m ago

You're not wrong, but that's more an issue with how practices are run as opposed to the tools available to the individual doctors.

A professional using their background to validate LLM output is identical in nature, in my perspective, to if they were using their background to validate diagnosis you brought them yourself. The problem is when they can't or don't separate the wheat from the chaff.

13

u/baconboner69xD 8h ago

I really don’t think it’s a terrible jumping off point for a diagnosis so long as you stick to established methods of verification. It’s quite good at identifying the “that’s so obvious why didn’t I think of that” possibilities that humans are very good at not considering

3

u/Truhls 8h ago

oh yes, im not saying we should believe them, of course tests need to be done.

6

u/bisectional 8h ago

It can also remember the symptoms we requested for a specific 43 year old male patient, weight and height at a specific time. It's a bit of a privacy nightmare in medicine.

2

u/Historical_Course587 8h ago

The tech side is innovating faster than regulation keeps up, but 3rd parties protecting PMI is not new. Epic has been doing it for decades. And the whole 'preventing ChatGPT from teaching you how to build a pipe bomb' issue has been solved for some time.

1

u/CyanVince 3h ago

I have no problem with an AI being able to recall any super specific things from my medical history. The issue is prevent unscrupulous humans from treating this information like the government treats metadata.

2

u/EkrishAO 7h ago

Yeah I know a few doctors and they were telling me AI actually helps them a lot, just as a way to refresh their memory and make sure they don't miss things, it can offer suggestions they didn't think about in the moment + it's really good at flagging things like conflicting meds etc.

When used as an "assistant", rather than actually replacing the doctor, it seems like a genuinely good tool that makes them better at their jobs.

2

u/ComfortableNorth4479 4h ago

And there's studies showing that once doctors stop using AI their performance and skills drop to below what they originally were. It's literally making them dumber so that they have to remain reliant on it forever.

I know a doctor who uses AI more than anyone else (incl non-doctors) who's managed to be fired twice within a year that's now opening their own practice. The name, business model, marketing, literally all of it is from ChatGPT so we'll see how that goes lol.

3

u/EkrishAO 4h ago

And there's studies showing that once doctors stop using AI their performance and skills drop to below what they originally were

Care to share them? Sounds interesting

1

u/Funexamination 2h ago

HereHere00133-5/abstract) is the famous deskilling study

1

u/EkrishAO 2h ago

Thanks, Reddit screwed up your link, but I managed to put it together: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/langas/article/PIIS2468-1253(25)00133-5/abstract

It's very interesting, but this study is specifically about AI-assisted colonoscopy, which is very different from what I was talking about. That's AI mostly taking over the role of identifying and marking polyps, that's a perceptual skill that obviously should become worse when not regularly honed.

0

u/Medic-86 1h ago

This is what happens when you get laypeople that don't understand research. They think this is some fuckin' gotcha, but they're applying the conclusions incorrectly.

Hell, they probably didn't even read the fucking paper.

1

u/AndromedaAirlines 8h ago

AI can remember everything we know about medical science

If only that was actually true and it couldn't hallucinate.

1

u/Capercaillie 7h ago

It's not just about how much they know. Have you ever had to interact with a customer service AI "rep?" They have difficulty understanding some accents, they assume that you're a fucking idiot, ("Did you try hitting the 'submit' button?"), they're made especially to make sure that you don't get any customer service. You want that handling your cancer?

3

u/BeginningAd4658 8h ago

Look how many deaths are caused by medical malpractice

1

u/joe4553 8h ago

You hear the horror stories and not all the times the doctor got it right. On the other hand if somebody took AI medical advice and it was wrong you'd brush it off as that person being a moron for taking it's advice.

2

u/DaaaahWhoosh 7h ago

yep, exactly. One of the big risks of implementing AI is throwing the baby out with the bathwater, especially when the baby in this case is actual humans who still need a paycheck to live. It's tough to decouple the bad stuff that needs replacing with the good stuff that needs to stick around to keep an eye on the changes.

1

u/creative_usr_name 6h ago

It seems like a lot because we don't hear about the 99.99% of times that doctors just get it right and there is no need to resort to using AI. Or the percent that do use AI and get told to inject bleach or use ivermectin to cure their cancer and we don't hear about because they just die.

1

u/Sir_PressedMemories 4h ago

My ex-wife, while we were married, was suffering badly from stomach cramps and pain and acid reflux.

She saw multiple doctors over the course of nearly 2 years, and all of them were like, "Nope, nothing's wrong."

So one night I sat down and began researching; as she slept beside me, I began pouring over medical books for first-year students learning differential diagnosis and whatnot and eventually came to a few conclusions, with the most likely being a hiatal hernia.

So we set an appointment, we went in together, and as I explained to the doctor all of what I had researched, he was smug as shit and referenced "Dr. Google" multiple times.

Finally, I got loud and told him I was sick of his bullshit and to just schedule the damn appointment, or I would pay for it out of pocket and sue his ass into insolvency for malpractice if I was right. So he "humored me" as he said.

One week later she comes out of the office after a scope under anesthesia where they find, what do you know, a strangulated hiatal hernia.

Two weeks later she comes out of surgery right as rain; a couple of years later we were divorced.

My son has to go see a doc, and we end up in the same building, and in walks the doc that misdiagnosed my ex multiple times. He recognized me and was all smiles and super sweet, and since it was only a simple physical with my son, I let it happen, but on our way out I made it clear that never was that doctor to so much as even look at the charts for my family ever again, let alone be a member of our care team.

Apparently he was a bit of a problem because not long after that I heard he was moved to a different facility on the other side of the city.

1

u/Otherwise_Nobody8148 3h ago

I don't think that's scary at all - that's us using AI appropriately!

Putting it in charge of military applications and things to that nature is scary - putting it in charge of maximizing someone's health? Honestly seems to be a pretty good idea. It's a very effective tool - that's a benefit not a hindrance here

1

u/Chucknorium101 8h ago

"I'll only see an AI's expertise equal to a Doctor's if it starts diagnosing women as being hysterical and prescribing them weight-loss drugs." /s

All medical knowledge with no bias or god complex? Might be one of the few uses of AI that I can actually get behind.

1

u/lilbelleandsebastian 7h ago

no one is stopping you from getting your medical advice from AI, why not put your money where your mouth is

7

u/Opening-Cream5448 7h ago

Doctors have been Google searching symptoms ever since they could. It’s impossible to memorize everything and the guess work would take a long time. They aren’t just randomly putting it into AI either though, they know what wordage to use and guide it better than what you could.

11

u/HoidToTheMoon 7h ago

You aren't a medical professional. A medical professional will have a better understanding of how to input symptoms and read the outputted results.

There are countless illness, conditions, disorders, etc. that can afflict humans. I am entirely for medical professionals having an intelligent tool they can plug symptoms into to get back associated conditions and likely effective treatments. And I'm far more comfortable with them doing it than you or me.

It's the same as the "vibe coding" shit. If you don't understand what you're asking the AI to do, it will create a bad product. If you understand what you are asking it to help you do, then it is infinitely more productive.

4

u/KrytenKoro 6h ago

A medical professional will have a better understanding of how to input symptoms and read the outputted results.

On what basis, though?

Previously, the basis is that we put them through rigorous testing where they proved their skill without the ability to rely on AI.

If we allow them to rely on AI, then....?

6

u/nopenopenahnahaha 6h ago

They can’t use AI during board exams

1

u/Funexamination 2h ago

Is it known that better board scores = better doctors?

1

u/fogleaf 5h ago

From a fairly anti-ai person: I'm in IT as a professional googler. The things that I used to find via google are kind of harder to find now due to ai slop articles being boosted to the top of the SEO rankings. So sometimes when I'm doing some deeper searching I do try out AI. Then I compare the results to what I know and decide if it makes sense or not. I would not take the doctor plugging symptoms into ai as an inherent problem. They're not going to plug in: "headache, hearing reduced" and then give you morphine.

1

u/Stubborn_Shove 5h ago

It's true for the same reason a medical professional would be better suited than you to go to a library and research your condition. Would you say that you can just go check out books on whatever medical conditions were relevant? Because you certainly can.

0

u/HoidToTheMoon 3h ago

If we allow them to rely on AI, then....?

Then we make their tests harder and let people complain that it's cheating to use technology to make saving lives easier.

2

u/Cuchillos_Adios 8h ago

Obviously not defending pasting your patients symptoms on Chat GPT but the medical field is probably the one that could apply AI in a benign and productive way. I don't think we should discount that if (Big if, I know) it's applied well it can help eliminate bias when diagnosing certain conditions.

At the very least it will never be too tired to miss a tumor and is not likely to tell you you're making up your pain.

4

u/WasabiLiving6465 8h ago

I’d be more inclined to believe it would benefit male patients.  With female patients it will probably just ask if we’re pregnant or on our period 🙄 We’ve already seen how many of these systems end up being racist or misogynistic

1

u/Cuchillos_Adios 6h ago edited 6h ago

I mean yeah the goal would be to be conscious of the biases that exists, hire a very diverse group of people to catch them and mitigate them as much as possible. But that would be DEI and require for a lot of techbros to suddenly stop thinking of ethics as the lame ass subject in college they cheated to pass on.

1

u/ascarymoviereview 6h ago

They ask out of courtesy, but still do it when you aren’t looking

1

u/GreyGhostPhoto 5h ago

I had a heart attack last year that chatGPT diagnosed for me, so it's not all bad. They were non-standard symptoms that I probably would never have associated to a heart attack at the time.

1

u/GizmoMechanism 5h ago

At least they asked first...

1

u/MRiley84 4h ago

I haven't seen where it was used to assist in diagnosis yet, but healthcare AI is capable of spotting community health trends to identify concerns for awareness. It's also used in some systems to assist providers in writing their notes after a visit. It won't write it for them exactly but will offer suggestions and summaries. This type of AI is isolated and HIPAA compliant so it's a bit different from chatGPT.

I have also seen notices going out to providers reminding them that chatGPT is not HIPAA compliant and not to plug patient data into it.

1

u/Happy_Brilliant7827 3h ago

Ai diagnostic tools beat human alone 100% of the time

1

u/Ayahuesquero 1h ago

I was at the clinic days ago and the doctor said "you dont mind me recording this conversation so i can use ai for notes later?"... what? no.

1

u/HBlight Hans Shot Second 1h ago

If you see symptoms and biological information as a collection of keywords and a disease or condition being another collection of keywords, LLMs are pretty good at parsing through the massive amount of possible inputs and pointing to the most relevant results out of a massive amount of possible outcomes. This is what doctors do during the diagnosis stage, it's why they need to do so many tests and ask so many questions, and why it takes so many years to learn the problems.
Diagnosis is only one part of medical treatment, LLMs (currently branded as AI) has it's use there, but a human still needs to understand the mechanics behind the condition and comprehend so much more in order to treat a patient. A good doctor can use the tool to refine their ability, maybe even prompt them to ask more pointed questions or do more specific tests to get a more accurate results. They should be able to do it themselves of course, but it would be like having an automatic second-ish opinion to take into consideration.

-2

u/Wugtrio777 8h ago

noone ever asked if they could put your symptoms into AI, so stop lying, it would litelrlay be malpractice with a record of it.

3

u/WasabiLiving6465 8h ago

Confidently incorrect. There are a lot of AI services for medicine now.

And as a former attorney, you throwing the word malpractice around is hilarious

-1

u/Wugtrio777 8h ago

and as a FORMER attorney i suggest you stay in whatever you do well enough to stick with it.

Im a STILL a nat'l certified paralegal only , i wrote the pleadings on , and we literlay just ran through two settlements in cases of malpractice involving the use of AI by a clinic.

Go to Lexis Nexis sometime if you still have access, and look it up. You CANNOT use AI in the US to diagnose or in any way, interact with any patient records, care plans, or diagnosis. The ONLY approved use currently is for summaries of billing/coding,

2

u/WasabiLiving6465 8h ago

Oh honey, no wonder you’re a paralegal and not an attorney  🤣🤣🤣 Thanks for the laughs

2

u/mddesigner 8h ago

Yes and no. There are ai services advertised for medical professionals that claim to protect hippa. How much you should trust them if at all is another topic

2

u/TheGlorpMonster 8h ago

They aren't lying, I have been asked by multiple health care providers if they could use AI for symptom note taking.

1

u/Wugtrio777 6h ago

NOTE TAKING, not diagnosis.

1

u/movzx 8h ago

They actually do ask this question buddy. Sometimes it's on the form(s) you fill out too.

The issue would be doing it without asking.

0

u/Wugtrio777 8h ago

show me prof, i;ve ,iterally just worked on two settled cases involving using AI for diagnosis or car eplans both were settled in favor of our clients, the plaintiffs.

0

u/electricheat 8h ago

you're acting far too confident about a subject you're not knowledgeable about