5 ms·

I'm a doctor and I've been following this saga for a while. What you wrote does not match my experience. Firstly, you overestimate our political reach by a larg

by rscho 3y ago

I'm a doctor and I've been following this saga for a while. What you wrote does not match my experience. Firstly, you overestimate our political reach by a large margin. If you can have acceptable service for massively cheaper, it will happen regardless of any lobbying. What _is_ true, is that AI systems outperform docs for very select, often trivial situations (e.g. routine chest X-ray). I don't believe this would shrink the market for radiologists significantly. Secondly, the non-trivial work is exceedingly difficult to automate, because those cases currently have a prevalence to complexity ratio that make them impossible to train for. The US are making great strides towards that kind of thing, though. But not available yet.

onlyrealcuzzo 3y ago
If you're counting mammograms as routine chest X-rays, AI has been able to outperform and do this substantially cheaper since 2019. Yet this is not an option for patients, and likely won't be in the next 10 years.
- rrr_oh_man 3y ago
  > Yet this is not an option for patients, and likely won't be in the next 10 years. Happening in Austria since 2018-ish: https://contextflow.com/ https://contextflow.com/
- epcoa 3y ago
  The radiologist fee isn't even the majority of the cost of a mammogram in the US. There's a lot more to it that has nothing to do with any radiologist protectionism. AI outperforming on mammograms and a few other basic routine modalities and leading to conclude that this means the AI "outperforms" radiologists in general is like claiming programmers are obsolete because Makefiles can run build commands better. You don't even need AI for most automation. Somehow you still have a job. As for Chest Xrays https://pubs.rsna.org/doi/10.1148/radiol.231236 https://pubs.rsna.org/doi/10.1148/radiol.231236 AI has not even demonstrated superiority outside of "routine". Maybe revisit this in a decade. But your entire argument was that we still have radiologists because of protectionism (and the lawyer case isn’t any more load bearing either). Seems a bit uninformed and premature.

by rscho 3y ago

onlyrealcuzzo 3y ago

If you're counting mammograms as routine chest X-rays, AI has been able to outperform and do this substantially cheaper since 2019. Yet this is not an option for patients, and likely won't be in the next 10 years.

rrr_oh_man 3y ago
> Yet this is not an option for patients, and likely won't be in the next 10 years. Happening in Austria since 2018-ish: https://contextflow.com/ https://contextflow.com/
epcoa 3y ago
The radiologist fee isn't even the majority of the cost of a mammogram in the US. There's a lot more to it that has nothing to do with any radiologist protectionism. AI outperforming on mammograms and a few other basic routine modalities and leading to conclude that this means the AI "outperforms" radiologists in general is like claiming programmers are obsolete because Makefiles can run build commands better. You don't even need AI for most automation. Somehow you still have a job. As for Chest Xrays https://pubs.rsna.org/doi/10.1148/radiol.231236 https://pubs.rsna.org/doi/10.1148/radiol.231236 AI has not even demonstrated superiority outside of "routine". Maybe revisit this in a decade. But your entire argument was that we still have radiologists because of protectionism (and the lawyer case isn’t any more load bearing either). Seems a bit uninformed and premature.