Let's talk about healthcare in 2030 | Dr Marcus Ranney | TEDxSurat
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 5 ก.ค. 2017
- Are we moving towards an era where robots will replace doctors? Hear out this dialogue by Dr Marcus Ranney where he points out the transition of the healthcare industry.
After completing graduation from University College Medical School in London, Marcus Ranney opted to practice clinical medicine in London and later he made the transition to Mumbai where for the past six years he has worked within the Healthcare industry as a consultant, for both private and public sector. Leveraging his network and domain expertise, to advise and develop strategies for a variety of healthcare organisations. Marcus is passionate about both sports and medicine, and is also a is a keen athlete and regularly participates in Half Marathons and Triathlons. He has recently been signed to publish his first book in the field of popular science. Marcus has always been a person of many interests and continues to expand his spheres of influence across different verticals through strategic mentorship and advisory roles to various startups.
This talk was given at a TEDx event using the TED conference format but independently organized by a local community. Learn more at www.ted.com/tedx
A doctor-robot is a very intriguing concept. I am a second-year medical student and learned enough to understand how complicated cases can be with overlapping symptoms, mysterious syndromes, comorbidities, exceptions, and various genetic conditions even for a single disease. I often wonder if it is possible for the computer to analyze all symptoms, draw perfect conclusions, and give the doctor the right diagnosis for a patient as well as give the best choice for the treatment plan. It could save doctors time and effort in addition to minimizing errors. Maybe it could even solve the problem of doctor shortage because doctors would have more time to see other patients and be more efficient. On the other hand, machines also can make an error because of wrong programming or disagreements in data that machines should analyze (articles, statistics, etc.).
But something machines cannot substitute for what doctors can do. I agree with Dr. Ranney about the importance of the doctor-patient relationship. Patients want to talk to a person and not a computer because interaction with the doctor is also a therapeutic process for the patient and even for the doctor. It is difficult to imagine if computers can really provide relief as doctors could. I believe computers can be programmed to imitate emotion, but we want to experience trust and other irreplaceable feelings, and doctors can provide it for us, who are humans with genuine emotions, genuine compassion. When I search the internet about my health problem and after I find satisfying information, I still look forward to meeting with my doctor to get the final, reassuring confirmation I need in addition to receiving an emotional response from the doctor.
I am sure that there are some people who are happy enough with the information they find on the internet, and many modern apps and sites can answer any questions faster than finding the right book or making and waiting for an appointment with the doctor. Some people do not always need to have an emotional response, but I believe at some point they might want to. But there are always people who will need help with mastering technology, for example, elderly people who are not skilled, people who do not have access to technology (however, they are in minority nowadays), or people with disabilities who cannot operate technology.
It is a controversial, interesting topic. It is hard to deny the benefits of technology with such a wide variety - biotechnologies, computers, cell phones, robots, and other devices that already save many lives. I remember days when we had no computers, internet, or cell phones and it is exciting to see what else is waiting for us in the future.
We're getting closer by the day and it can't come quickly enough. Gives me a bit of hope!
It is amazing how much has changed and developed since this video first came out over 5 years ago. We now have AI that can answer almost any question, have a conversation, and even write essays or complete some homework. Though it seems farfetched for our society now to trust the life of a human in the hands of an unmanned machine especially in a surgical setting. However, with the vast knowledge that can be so easily accessed by AI I think there is amazing untapped potential, as Dr. Ranney pointed out, to combine the ability of a physician with the abilities of AI to increase the quality of patient care. I do agree with Dr. Ranney in the point he made regarding trust and the importance of a physician and patient relationship.
I recently watched another Ted talk where the presenter was advocating for more AI in healthcare and the great impact new advancements can have in patient care. Not once did this presenter mention the importance of this relationship despite their career being one of a physician and neurologist. I found this surprising and shocking, one of the most asked questions when once applies to medical school or to a residency is, why do/did you pursue a career in medicine? Many individuals answer because they wanted to help others overcome their illness or improve their lives. I feel as though a physician that advocates for a machine to take their place in the healing process never really had true beneficence even if they had good intentions going into healthcare. More and more in our society we are seeing the increased understanding of mental health and the key role emotions and cognitive function have on an individual’s overall heath. As an osteopathic medical student, we focus on a person as a whole unit of body, mind, and spirit. We truly work under the assumption that all is interconnected and when one is out of balance so is the whole system. Although AI may have great potential to be a healer it does not have the ability to empathize or truly offer an understanding mind to a patient that is need of much more than a prescription or procedure.
Another aspect to consider is the autonomy of a patient, if the machine gives a recommendation and a patient refuse said treatment plan what next? A physician would encourage a patient, explain the risks/benefits, and then come up with alternative solutions if the patient is still unsure of their recommendation. However, with AI a patient could refuse and then what? We can’t force them to make the right decision and take away their autonomy. This is where the cooperation of man and machine can come up with the best treatment plan for a patient and then help that patient overcome their doubts and concerns that may impede them from accepting the proposed plan. Overall, a very interesting topic and technology that has and will continue to make its way into healthcare.
Such an underrated video.
It will be an interesting time. It will be exciting to see.
I really like that Dr. Ranney mentioned near the end of his talk how he would like to see the doctor-computer relationship augment experiences rather than replace them. The advancement of technology and its place in healthcare has always been such an interesting topic to me. It does however concern me because human contact is so important in a healthcare setting. I appreciate that Dr. Ranney brought this up too because technology can only go so far in ensuring quality patient care. It is also important to consider that errors are likely to happen with robots and technology. Not to say that human error doesn’t exist, but human error can be immediately recognized and corrected, while a technology error might go unnoticed for a considerable amount of time. Following the medical ethics principle of non-maleficence, I believe that robots in medicine are great, but they should be used with caution. Every precaution should be used in order to not cause harm to the patient. I think it would be interesting to see what current robots/technology are being used in hospitals and to take surveys to see how patients feel about this. I know that personally, I would be a bit apprehensive of knowing that a robot was on my healthcare team. I am just curious to see what other people think about this. But as I mentioned before, I don’t believe that human contact can or should ever be replaced in healthcare. Patients are generally experiencing feelings of fear and anxiety in what is likely a very vulnerable and frightening time for them. As humans, we lean towards others in times like this. We look for human connection and sometimes we just need someone to be there for us, listen to us, or hold our hand. The mind, body, and soul are all connected, and person to person connection will allow for greater understanding of the patient. Robots won’t be able to catch the nuances in a person’s voice. They are not able to fully get to know someone like a real person would. But, like I said before, I do believe that technology has a place in healthcare. For example, electronic charting changed the game in patient care. I am sure there were skeptics of that too when it was introduced. I would just assume that as technology takes on a more hands on approach in patient care, that it becomes more strictly regulated and observed to catch any errors. I am also interested to read into the safety statistics and patient outcomes of surgeries and procedures that are currently being performed with robot-like assistance compared to the outdated and possibly more invasive forms.
As I agree with Dr. Ranney that how technology in medicine will take over soon, as it already has, it raises few concerns as well. Although today we see that surgeons are using robotics during the surgery, it is the surgeon who is operating the robots. Robots aren’t doing the critical thinking. The patient-physician relationship has been the most important factor in providing the best possible healthcare outcomes. My question is how would patients trust the robots? How will the patients be convinced? I have a lot of questions about this topic just like everyone else.
During the surgery, there could be a lot of things that can go wrong. How would you program a machine that can be prepared for unforeseen problems? Would they be able to think like humans? What would be the cost of these robots? What would be the role of physicians then? These are all the things to think and ponder upon. As we keep on advancing in the technology, and certainly there are pros for both physicians and patients but replacing physicians with robots would raise a lot of eyebrows. The art of medicine lies between the patient/physician relationship.
This Ted talk by Dr. Ranney brings up some interesting concepts. It is quite remarkable that he was able to diagnose himself when he was younger. He seems to be an extremely intelligent individual, who has a love for medicine. Talk of having a robot replace a human for a doctor is somewhat frustrating to me. The reason I feel frustrated is that I honestly think that robots won’t have enough emotion to cultivate the doctor-patient relationship. For instance, when I am on the phone and it keeps giving me options through a automated system, all I want is to actually talk to a human. I understand that these companies have the right intentions, but in the end, it actually takes longer for my concern to be addressed. I can’t help but relate this situation to the doctor’s office. Although this is my view on the matter, I understand that others might not feel the same way about it.
Others will believe that taking this next great step is exciting and that it will save so many people from dying. It is incredible to think that a robot could diagnose someone and at a moment’s instance. With so many diseases, and complications, diagnosing someone is undoubtedly difficult at times.
The next concern of mine would be for people to trust in a robot doctor. Studies show how hard it is for patients to trust their human doctors. If people have difficulties trusting their human doctor, trusting their robot doctor will be so much harder. Being able to diagnose someone takes practice and having a knack to ask the right questions. I wonder how well a robot would be at asking the right questions and if the patients would be able to answer truthfully to those said questions.
Honestly, in my opinion, I hope that we don’t introduce robots for doctors. I feel like instead, we should be focusing on bettering the healthcare system and having doctors spend more time gaining the trust of their patients. If doctors as a whole continue to better themselves, we will see healthcare improve and more patient satisfaction.
very interesting
Nice sir
Great video and futuristic opinion expressed. Partially agree with tech becoming all-encompassing in health delivery and digital diagnosis But I'm afraid I have to disagree that there will be 100% acceptability of tech, AI or otherwise replacing care from the patient perspective. Almost all my patients liked that technology helped with quick turnaround and improved accuracy and efficiency. Still, None agreed that they would accept a complete diagnosis and treatment plan built by a computer however smart it may be. Human intelligence is equally important as Artificial intelligence. IBM Watson cited here by the speaker is struggling in many aspects of technology adaptation
Dr. Ranney, states in his talk that he states that by the year 2030, 90% of all medical consultations will happen with a computer. His talk was 5 years ago, and it is 2023 now, I really don’t think we are going to have 90% of all consultations move to computer based in the next 7 years, near do I think that is something we should aim for. In an era of overwhelming rates of loneliness and disconnection, we need more human interaction and connection, not less of it.
I am a second year osteopathic medical student and I would like to use the osteopathic lenses and ethical principles to make my argument that we should not aim to replace doctors with AI. I would like to start by saying that I do believe there are many benefits to increasing the use of AI in medicine to improve patient care and improve physicians work life balance, to be clear I am not arguing against the integration of AI and other technologies into healthcare, I am arguing against the replacement of physicians with AI.
A great physician cares for patients with a holistic view of the patient’s body mind and spirit. Being a doctor is about so much more than simply coming to a diagnosis and prescribing a treatment, if that is all a doctor does then I agree in the future with advancements in AI doctors could probably be replaced. Sitting across from another human and providing genuine care, a space to talk about your problems and how they affect you, and build a relationship with someone who’s only job it is is to try to help you be well… is healing in and of itself. I know many patients don’t get that these days and truly feel their physician could be replaced by a robot, but I many of my colleagues aim to change that. Medicine is as much of an art as it is a science, and the humanity should be a healing aspect of medicine, AI could not ever replace that nor should we desire AI to replace physicians. There is so much work to be done on this front and I know the new generation of Osteopathic Physicians are able to handle the challenge and truly make a change.
Dr. Ranney talks about the concept of a “robotic doctor” in his discussion. While the technology may not be there yet, you can’t argue about the potential effectiveness of these robots. As a second-year medical student this scares me. A robot can make a perfect incision, remove only what needs to be removed, do it faster than a human, and close the wound cleanly with a physician sitting in the corner in case an emergency happens. By moving towards “doctor robots” we move away from human interaction. More and more patients claim now that the problem with healthcare is that there isn’t enough time with their doctors, how does taking the doctor away fix this? Can a robot follow the principles of justice, non-maleficence, and beneficence? Can a robot, that is programmed to take out an appendix for example, when something happens, make the proper decision for the patients help to do good and is that good according to the patient’s wishes? How does it know? We must take advantage of technology in healthcare, but not depend on it. Computers, tablets, apps, and machines are all great resources. These allow us to get to a more accurate diagnosis, chart quicker, and heal safer all while still relying on the human traits of the doctor running the programs and machines. By removing the physician, you remove the safety net for the patient, the human in the room that is generally concerned about their well-being and health. They already make robotic machines for surgery that doctor’s control, this should be our future if robotics are entering. The doctor is still guiding the machine, making the decisions, and dictating the outcome while still benefiting from technological advances. We have a shortage of physicians in America now, by pushing for “robot doctors” this will only drive people away from a career in medicine, not towards it. I can tell you from my own personal viewpoint that I don’t want to be a doctor “sitting in a corner doing a crossword puzzle” while a robot does the work that I’ve dedicated so much of my life to perfect. Let’s take advantage of technology while simultaneously taking advantage of a doctor’s skills. If doctors and scientists can work together with similar goals we can create products to better help each patient while still maintaining the human interaction and the wishes of the patients.
Dr. Ranney brings up an important question - if the traditional doctor-patient interaction becomes extinct, where will the trust reside once the doctor is no longer there? How long will it take us to build trust in the automated algorithms which analyze our health? I can’t help but think about how our medical data will be used in the near future. Using medical data for behavioral modification raises ethical concerns that need to be carefully evaluated. On one hand, medical data can provide valuable insights into a person's health and well-being and can be used to identify potential risk factors for various conditions. This information could be used to develop personalized interventions aimed at promoting healthier behaviors. However, it is important to respect an individual's privacy and autonomy when using their medical data for behavioral modification. Any use of medical data should be done with the person's explicit consent, and they should be informed of how their data will be used and who will have access to it. Additionally, the data should be used in a way that is respectful and supportive, rather than punitive or coercive. There is also the risk of stigmatizing individuals based on their medical data. For example, using medical data to shame someone for being overweight or having a mental health condition could be harmful and counterproductive. Overall, while medical data can provide useful information for behavioral modification, it is important to approach its use with caution and with a focus on respecting individuals' privacy and autonomy.
The issue of trust is related to the concept of accountability. When you go to an algorithm as part of healthcare, who is responsible for potential mistakes? Is it the doctor who is using the tool? Is it the manufacturer who designed the program? Is it the AI system itself? It likely isn’t the patient who consented to being treated by an algorithm that they likely don’t understand. Trust can’t be built until this issue is addressed. This starts by establishing clear guidelines for how AI should be used in healthcare, and who is responsible for ensuring its accuracy and reliability.
His question of "are we ready to trust something that we cannot form a relationship with?" is something that shouldn’t be taken lightly. Trust is not something that should automatically assumed, but it should be developed through consistent demonstration that the doctor has the best interest of the patient in mind and makes decisions that are right for them. Over time, we see predictable patterns of action. I don't know how we could ever get to that place with machines or AI systems running our medical care, because they are not predicable and their programming can be changed at any point in time. Also, who’s the one that would be deciding the programming and processing of the computers? The health care systems that people already don't trust to have their best interest in mind. How could we ensure that these programs would be free of bias and act with the same ethical principles that the heath care workers are bound to, such as justice. As AI algorithms are trained based on data, if the data used to train them if biased, it will result in biased care and outcomes. It would disproportionately affect certain populations. We already struggle with bias and inequality in the health care systems, and I don't see that getting any better with the use of computers and machines. Outside of the trust and bias issues, I worry about other considerations like the risk to patient privacy and data security. There would be large amounts of personal data that would be stored in these systems. How can we know for certain that they would be protected from hacking or data leaks? We also must consider how easy it may for that information to be accessed by insurance companies and used to raise premiums or deny access to people. We also must ensure that equitable access to AI technologies in medicine. Using computers and machines in healthcare has the potential to exacerbate pre-existing disparities in healthcare, as I predict that AI healthcare would be a pricy interaction.
The last point I want to make on the subject is the lack of human-to-human connection that would accompany replacement of doctors and other healthcare workers with machines and Ai. In populations like the elderly, touch is one of the most powerful things a doctor can give to their patient. Elderly populations are often socially isolated, and doctors’ visits are often the only source of human interaction that have. In one of my medical school lectures, we learned that talk and physical touch build stronger physician-patient relationship because the doctor becomes part of the patient’s life in a real way. All of that would disappear if we replaced the doctors with machines and AI. I really hope doctors don’t get replaced by machines because medicine as an art will disappear as we know it.
i haven't watched the video yet.... but i think all that you mentioned here are fair concerns and all of these are supposed to be taken into consideration when designing an AI technology, i advice you to take that course on coursera called "trustworthy ai in healthcare management " it will help you understand how these concerns are actually being address and what are the benefits and challenges of ai being used in healthcare
The ethical principles of justice, equity, beneficence are essential in considering the potential benefits and harms that could arise from technological advancements in healthcare. One of the significant benefits of future healthcare is the availability of personal health data at the touch of a button. This could provide individuals with more control over their health, allowing them to make more informed decisions and manage their health more effectively. However, the principle of equity suggests that everyone should have equal access to healthcare and personal health data, regardless of socio-economic status. Using this principle, it is necessary for those developing the technology to reach the majority at a reasonably price to ensure that these advancements do not create further disparities in healthcare.
Improved and continuous health monitoring could lead to the detection of even minor changes in an individual's health, potentially leading to earlier detection, treatment and recovery of illnesses. However, the availability of this information raises concerns about privacy and data security. The principle of beneficence suggests that healthcare professionals should aim to promote the well-being of individuals, but it is crucial to ensure that personal health data is used in a way that respects individuals' autonomy and privacy. Additionally, constant health changes and awareness of health data could have significant affects on individuals mental health and understanding of their health. With implementation of this technology there needs to be education surrounding the implications of these changes and how the changes will affect individuals mental health. Next, Advancements in healthcare technology could drastically change the doctor-patient interaction. While, providers could use AI to analyze vast amounts of data and provide more personalized treatment plans, the in person discourse, connection and physical exam may be less of a requirement when receiving healthcare.
Further, the use of technology to perform surgeries from thousands of miles away could have extremely positive implications for individuals who would not have access to specialized care otherwise. The principle of beneficence suggests that healthcare professionals should aim to maximize the potential benefits of healthcare interventions, but it is crucial to ensure that the use of technology does not lead to harm or infringe upon individuals' autonomy. Lastly, the use of extremely detailed health data being sent to insurance companies raises concerns about the principle of nonmaleficence. Individuals' personal health data could be used to deny or increase insurance coverage, leading to adverse health outcomes. It is crucial to ensure that the use of personal health data does not lead to discrimination or harm to individuals.
Such a great speech!
Oh look another world economic forum member promoting the 2030 agenda where they say you will own nothing and be happy wake up people!
Good video
Dr. Ranney proposed that by 2030, medical consultation will be with an automated system and not an actual physician. He addresses the question that all of us thought of: what about the patient/physician relationship? Who will patients be trusting, if not their physicians? He follows up by stating that we need to create technology that promotes trust of the patients. He believes that the computer, physician and patient triad of relationship will bring us closer to better health and patient care.
With artificial technology on the rise, it is crucial to assess this topic through an ethical perspective. Medical ethics are built on four pillars of beneficence, non-maleficence, autonomy, and justice. The pillars most pertinent to this discussion are autonomy and justice.
Autonomy is the principle of giving the patient the freedom to make informed decisions about their medical treatment. Autonomy is based on a patient’s decision capacity and competency which requires assessment prior to granting a patient decision making rights. The following question arises: how can an automated system using artificial intelligence assess a patient’s capacity? I would argue that automated intelligence is venturing into a dangerous territory where patients without capacity could be granted decision making rights; thus, improperly upholding a patient’s right to autonomy.
The second ethical consideration to automated medical consultation is justice. Justice is ensuring the fair and equitable distribution of heath to all people. Automated intelligence threatens to increase social gaps in healthcare. Automated medical systems have the potential to widen the gap between developing and advanced countries in a multitude of ways. An increase in automated intelligence in the medical field decreases the need to employ many individuals, including bookkeepers, office managers, nurses, and physicians. As artificial intelligence and robot prevalence increases, the job market for healthcare providers is threatened; resulting in decreased salaries. This could lead to an increase in social inequality and a decrease in social justice.
There are many aspects of artificial intelligence in the medical world needing to be thoroughly evaluated. It is imperative to keep the pillars of medical ethics at the forefront of the discussion of integrating artificial intelligence into medical treatment. As an osteopathic medical student, I strongly believe that human touch and interaction is at the basis of healing. So much of medicine will be lost if we turn to artificial intelligence. It is my deep desire that the art of medicine is never lost.
Sometimes I really wish TH-cam gave us ways to connect with people here. Because, this line of thinking. My God. We can be best of friends so easily.
I can see his point that healthcare will become automated, because so many things in our daily lives are moving in that direction. The algorithms can make decisions that are getting increasingly better. They may not even make the mistakes that human physicians make. And if it provides cheaper care, then isn’t it better for the patients to experience healthcare this way? I think that is something we need to think about, because lowering healthcare costs is an important topic that needs to be addressed.
However, I think he just briefly hit on what might be the most important part of this change to more automation and artificial intelligence in healthcare. There is a healing effect that happens between a human doctor and their patients that a machine cannot replicate. It might be hard to quantify, there is evidence showing that the human connection is one of the most important parts of the healing process. Patients who feel a connection to their doctors are more likely to follow through with their treatment plans and will have better outcomes. So while AI and robots might bring the cost of healthcare down, they may not actually provide better long term health outcomes, and that should be the main goal of everyone trying to work on the problem of how healthcare is evolving.
debatable topic: will AI be smart and sophisticated enough to replace human doctors to operate a surgery? And will humans be good enough to optimize AI to do surgeries in 100% accurate way and solve unpredictable issues?
someday maybe? But I don’t believe AI will be there by 2030
Ma'am,
In India, robotic surgery already replaced human doctors in many of the hospitals...
AI will make doctor-computer - relationship
@@CoachPrewit are robots controlled by humans or they do surgical by itselfs?
in the end we will foot the bill for it all but still wont be able to afford it
As a second year medical student, I have considered this possibility of being replaced by a machine in the future. I think it is rational to say that all professions have been troubled by such thoughts at one point or another. Our recent advances in technology are nothing short of incredible. AI is readily available and has the potential to be extremely useful. To me, replacing humans with machines in healthcare becomes an ethical issue more than it is a practical one. In the long term it is reasonable to think that employing machines would be much more fiscally responsible than employing humans. But let’s consider that ethical implications of such actions. As a base, we first have to establish the ethical pillars healthcare professionals are bound to. The first is beneficence or the idea that doctors act in the best interest of their patient in everything that they do. The second is non-maleficence or the commonly stated do no harm. The third is autonomy which embodies the idea that physicians are to educate their patients so that the patient is capable of making informed decisions regarding their own healthcare. These are not all of the ethical principles that I could mention but I believe they are the most pertinent to this issue. Now, the question becomes can we hold machines to the same ethical practices that we hold our current human physicians to? How would having a machine based healthcare system impact the quality of care? Would it, in any way, decrease the quality of care provided to patients? I believe that as we move forward we need to not only consider the business side of medicine but we need to also and perhaps chiefly consider how our decisions are going to impact those we care for. Replacing doctors with machines will make medicine an algorithm based profession which may be statistically accurate but practicing such medicine can lead to unnecessary treatment, inappropriate diagnoses, and decreased quality of care. It is the humanness of physicians that allows them to see nuances machines can’t. Human physicians can better understand emotions and language and circumstance, all which allow them to make informed decisions regarding patient care. Plus, human connection in and of itself goes a long way. I agree that the physician patient relationship is something that should be regarded as sacred and compromising that relationship or expecting humans to make that relationship with a machine is, in my opinion, unrealistic. But, I am not averse to technological advancement. I think the best thing to do moving forward is to create a hybrid system as is already somewhat in place. Giving physicians access to such technology would increase quality of care without sacrificing the human connection that so many patients want. Not to mention it would greatly increase the efficiency of the whole healthcare experience by streamlining charting and all the mundane tasks involved in healthcare.
Amazing indeed but how would these metallic surgeons give a human touch before the patient goes into anesthesia. Human communication is lost.
Hello
Their may be a dr also for providing moral support
4 Billions IBM machine will have a very good placebo or nocebo effect !
He didn't know, man. He didn't KNOW!!!
Agak lain ya kakak ini, orang mah setiap lebaran cari ketupat sayur lontong kue. Ini kok bisa-bisanya lebaran malah nyari kopi, emang boleh?
Although AI and new technologies are transforming healthcare as we know it, can we fully replace physicians with technology for all? This does sound like something that may happen to us, but we have to consider the fact that not everyone will be able to afford this. This comes to mind with everyone wanting to get electric cars, but the only people it is really accessible too is those with the funds to be able to buy them. With healthcare being already inaccessible to many worldwide, how can we ensure this doesn’t happen with computers replacing physicians? We also need to consider the issue of safety and legal issues. How do we hold robots accountable for doing harm to a patient? I think 2030 is unlikely a time where all of this will happen and even though it is definitely becoming more computerized, medicine will need human healthcare workers for decades to come.
A computer can read thousands of CT scans in a minute more accurately than a radiologist can in a month.
I don't think the AI replace doctors so soon
It will not take 2030, by 2025 AI will replace doctors
Will we be able to do more than pills for ferver and flu? Our medicine is so pathetic.
Id kinda find it funny if doctors are replaced by machines but nurses who provide faceto face care stay 😂
Robots will assist doctors but it won’t replace humans for atkeast 50 years. More so In india.( other developing countries)
🕋🕌Astagfirullah
May Allah SWT guide you and forgive you.🤲🏼
Haha he's so right I can do that with my smart phone for free 😅 and now we have watches that are starting to be able to monitor more and more vitals. A doctors vist will cost you 1k just buy a Google dot for 40 buck haha I laugh at people who say now they want to become a doctor 🤣. Your gonna be broke for a living at this rate.