I am not a medical expert, but as a user of AI in the current context, I believe AI can enhance diagnostics and efficiency. However, it cannot replace the empathy, intuition, and ethical judgment of human doctors. The future lies in collaboration—AI as a supportive tool, not a replacement. A balanced approach that integrates machine precision with human compassion will ensure effective, ethical, and patient-centered healthcare advancements.

The researchers also explored how the healthcare value chain might evolve if artificial intelligence (AI) served as a complement to physicians rather than a replacement. The healthcare value chain encompasses all stakeholders who contribute to and benefit from the system: patients, doctors, nurses, hospitals, pharmaceutical companies, insurance providers, and others. Like any industry, healthcare generates value—such as improved patient outcomes, provider earnings, and corporate profits—while also incurring significant costs.

Physicians, being central to this system, often capture a substantial portion of the value, primarily through high salaries. However, if AI were to assume responsibility for key tasks like diagnosis and treatment planning, the perceived value of physicians could decline, potentially leading to lower compensation.

Radiology, often viewed as one of the medical specialties most susceptible to AI disruption, illustrates this tension. Dranove and Garthwaite examined the range of services radiologists bill for—such as X-rays, CT scans, ultrasounds, and mammograms—which at first glance appear highly technical and well-suited for automation.

Yet, a more comprehensive task analysis from the Occupational Information Network reveals that radiology still involves considerable interpersonal responsibilities. Radiologists routinely collaborate with other medical professionals and communicate directly with patients to explain results, risks, benefits, and treatment options. These human-centered aspects of the job remain challenging for AI to replicate.

Human beings are social creatures we crave interaction with other beings like ourselves. AI can provide insights and suggestions for more effective treatments of medical problems, but cannot provide the human interaction that is a necessary part of the healing process. AI can hopefully be a valuable tool in the medical field, but it cannot replace human interaction.

A senior IT engineer patient of mine, made a crucial observation regarding this issue. He asserted that the push to replace doctors with AI presupposes two fundamental assumptions: first, AI is an actual manifestation of intelligence; and second, medicine is inherently algorithmic.

Based on his extensive experience as an IT engineer, he stated that neither assumption holds true. Numerous AI experts, pioneers, and academics in related fields, including Noam Chomsky, have consistently argued that AI lacks genuine intelligence. Furthermore, medicine is not a simplistic, algorithmic discipline.

My patient pointed out that while AI could potentially serve as a tool for doctors, the primary motivation behind the hype surrounding AI medicine is to establish a two-tiered medical system based on socioeconomic status. Consequently, the majority of individuals will be denied access to inferior care through AI medicine, while wealthy individuals will retain the ability to seek medical attention from human doctors.

I assert that my patient is quite correct in this matter. Don't believe the AI hype.

There is a lot of meaningful critique of AI out there, but here is one accessible source via Arvind Narayanan, a computer scientist and professor at Princeton University Sayash Kapoor, A computer science PhD candidate at Princeton University.

https://substack.com/@aisnakeoil

https://youtu.be/M3U5UVyGTuQ?si=CfRXksryTNch_eHP. FROM 3:34,