• Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    11 months ago

    I probably don’t need to point this out, but AIs do not have to follow any sort of doctor-patient confidentiality issues what with them not being doctors.

      • Adulated_Aspersion@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        So why push to prevent abortion?

        Real question, no troll.

        Kill people by preventing care on one side. Prevent people from unwanted pregnancy on the other. Maybe they want a rapid turnover in population because the older generations aren’t compliant.

        With the massive changes to the Department of Education, maybe they have plans to severely dumb down the next few generations into maleable, controllable wage slaves.

        Maybe I just answered my own question.

        • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          the older generations aren’t compliant

          Where are you coming from with this statement?

          In my experience the older the person, the bigger the bootlicker. Boomers as a group behave like obedient dogs, they will accept anything as long as their macmansion price and 401k goes up.

          • Adulated_Aspersion@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            11 months ago

            I am trying to understand why they would both prevent abortion AND cut healthcare. I don’t believe any generation is more or less compliant. I think that each group is compliant to different things.

            • sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              why they would both prevent abortion AND cut healthcare

              fake news teevee told them that’s what they should support, they don’t give much thought to issues beyond that.

  • Fermion@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Currently insurance claim denial appeals have to be reviewed by a licensed physician. I bet insurance companies would love to cut out the human element in their denials.

  • BlueLineBae@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Very interesting. The way I see people fucking with AI at the moment, there’s no way someone won’t game an AI doctor to give them whatever they want. But also knowing that UnitedHealthcare was using AI to deny claims, this only legitimizes those denials for them more. Either way, the negatives appear to outweigh the positives at least for me.

  • Plebcouncilman@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Not too long ago I wrote on Reddit that doctors were one of the easiest professions to replace with AI and everyone jumped at me telling me how ridiculous that was. Wish I wasn’t banned so I could back there and rub this in their faces.

  • BertramDitore@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 months ago

    So AI practitioners would also be held to the same standards and be subject to the same consequences as human doctors then, right? Obviously not. So this means a few lines of code will get all the benefits of being a practitioner and bear none of the responsibilities. What could possibly go wrong? Oh right, tons of people will die.

  • Solidoxygen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    11 months ago

    I’m not 100% against this. Sure it is a risk some might not be willing to make - but if I can take a strept test on my own and goto a robot and get my antibiotics at 12:30 am on a Sunday and it doesn’t cost me $150 office visit -sign me up. Most of the time docs just give a test and prescribe a pill. I can do it. They aren’t hard tests - usually 3 steps. Just make the tests available over the counter!!!

    • thallamabond@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      But all this could be done without ai, or any sort of machine learning. If it is a simple positive negative test why not have a machine that vends and reads a colorful dots?

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      I’ll use myself as an even better example.

      I have to take medicine for a chronic condition

      • there is almost no chance of that changing, and the medicine wouldn’t be dangerous
      • it’s not addictive
      • not expensive
      • can’t be abused
      • it’s a common medicine with no black market value

      Yet every 30 days, the doctor needs to write a refill. I never talk to him, there are no tests, I just leave a voicemail and they send it to the pharmacy the next day. That doctor adds no value.

      Most of us would say I should at least be able to get 90 day supply or automatic renewal by the pharmacy. However a way to save the cost of that useless doctor without actually fixing anything is to have an “ai” do it. Or a cron job

      • amino@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        that’s in a fantasy world without capitalism. in the current one you’d be getting your refills denied both by your doctor and by your pharmacy.

        I do agree though that in cases like yours it should be more akin to an OTC experience