Alright, let's get this straight. AI is now supposedly running amok in healthcare. A "savior," they're calling it. Give me a freakin' break.
AI Cures Healthcare...Or Just Hypes It?
The Hype Train is Leaving the Station (Again)
Every few years, there's a new miracle cure-all. Blockchain, the Metaverse, now AI. Arizona State University's Eugene Schneller says AI is "challenging healthcare, and healthcare is challenging AI." Oh, really? Sounds like a whole lotta nothin' is happening, just people trying to sound important at a summit.
They always trot out these summits, these "thought leaders," who pat themselves on the back while raking in grant money to "study" the problem. I'm sure the networking reception was the highlight for most attendees.
Ohad Kadan, some dean at ASU, says AI is "deeply embedded" in everything they do. Right. Just like "synergy" was deeply embedded in corporate strategy in the '90s. How'd that work out?
And Susan Feng Lu, a professor from Toronto, is already talking about clinicians becoming "AI supervisors." What, are doctors gonna be glorified babysitters for algorithms now? It's like we're automating the humanity right out of medicine.
But here's the real kicker: Sherine Gabriel from ASU Health admits health outcomes in the US are "frankly quite poor." So, instead of fixing the actual problems – like access, affordability, and, y'know, a system that doesn't treat patients like walking ATMs – we're throwing AI at it? That's like putting a fresh coat of paint on a condemned building.
AI Health: Great for the Rich, Screwed for the Rest?
The "Global South" Gets the Shaft (Surprise!)
And offcourse, there's the usual dose of global inequality. Apparently, most AI health systems are trained on data from rich countries, leaving "5 billion people in the Global South invisible." So, the fancy AI tools will work great for white, upper-middle-class folks, but everyone else is SOL. Sounds about right.
AI in healthcare risks could exclude 5 billion people
This isn't just a "technical error," as some egghead probably put it in a report. It's a life-or-death issue. A cancer detection algorithm that misses tumors on darker skin? That's not progress; that's just reinforcing existing biases with code.
The World Health Organization emphasizes "digital health equity." Yeah, that sounds great on paper. But let's be real, are these tech companies going to prioritize profits or people? I think we all know the answer.
AI Doctors: More Paperwork, Fewer Actual Doctors?
The Doctor Will See You Now… Eventually (Maybe)
Then there's the claim that AI can relieve doctors from "repetitive administrative tasks." Priya Radhakrishnan from ASU says it'll free clinicians for "high-value work." What is "high-value work?" More paperwork? More meetings about AI?
Look, I'm not a Luddite. I get that AI *could* have some benefits. Streamlining supply chains, maybe. Helping with drug discovery, possibly. But let's not pretend this is some utopian revolution. It's just another tool, and like any tool, it can be used for good or evil. And in a healthcare system as messed up as ours, I'm betting on the latter.
Then again, maybe I'm the crazy one here. Maybe AI will solve all our problems and usher in a new era of health and happiness. But I seriously doubt it.
The AMA survey says physician enthusiasm for AI rose by five percentage points. Five points! That's it? I'd expect more considering how much they're cramming this down our throats.
Doctors’ use of AI up dramatically. Here’s the CME they need.
So, What's the Catch?
It's all about the money, ain't it? The promise of efficiency, cost savings, and, of course, more profits. They'll sell it to us as "innovation," but it's just another way to squeeze more out of a system that's already on life support. And we'll be paying for it, one way or another.
