> Many of America’s most critical sectors, such as healthcare, are especially slow to adopt due to a variety of factors, including distrust or lack of understanding of the technology, a complex regulatory landscape, and a lack of clear governance and risk mitigation standards. A coordinated Federal effort would be beneficial in establishing a dynamic, “try-first” culture for AI across American industry.

I'm sure "move fast and break things" will work out great for health care.

And there are already "clear governance and risk mitigation standards" in health care, they're just not compatible with "try first" and use unproven things.

> I'm sure "move fast and break things" will work out great for health care.

Health care is already broken to the point of borderline dystopia. When I contrast the experience I had as a young boy of visiting a rural country doctor to the fast food health care experience of "urgent care" clinics, it makes my head spin.

The last few doctors I've been to have been completely useless and generally uncaring as well. Every visit I've made to a doctor has resulted in my feeling the same at the end but with a big medical bill to go home with.

At this point the only way I'll intentionally end up in a medical facility is if I'm unconscious and someone else makes that call.

Dentistry has met a similar fate as more and more dentists have been swallowed up by private equity. I've had loads of dental work, including a 'surprise' root canal, and never had an issue. My last dentist had a person on staff dedicated to pushing things through on the insurance front and my dental procedure was so awful it boarded on torture.

I used to be an annual check + 3 times a year dentist person. Today I'm dead set on not stepping foot in any kind of medical facility unless the alternative is incredible pain or certain death.

AI for treatment is rightfully scrutinized. AI for billing or other administrative tasks could be a big cost saver since administrative costs are a huge expense and a major factor of high consumer costs.

Healthcare in the US is already in very poor shape. Thousands die because of waiting for care, misdiagnosis, or inefficiency leading to magnified costs which in turn leads to denied claims because insurers won't cover it. AI is already better at diagnosis than physicians in most cases.

> I'm sure "move fast and break things" will work out great for health care.

It probably would if you quantify risk correctly. I'm not likely to die from some experimental drug gone wrong, but extremely likely to die from some routine cause like cancer, heart disease, or other disease of old age. If I trade off an increase in risk from dying from some experimental treatment gone wrong for faster development of treatments that can delay or prevent routine causes of death, I will come out ahead in the trade unless the tradeoff ends up being extremely steep in favor of risk from bad treatments.

But that outcome is very unlikely because for this to be the case the bad treatments would have to actually harmful instead of just ineffective (which is much more common). And it also fails to take into account the possibility that there isn't even a tradeoff and AI actually makes it less likely that I will die by experimental treatment gone wrong or other medical mistake, so it's just a win-win. And there is already evidence that AI outperforms doctors in the emergency room. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11263899/

The American Healthcare is so broken already that further breakage could be seen as an improvement.

i’m getting super fatigued on this change we’ve had where what used to be beta testing to a closed group of invested parties has morphed into what we have now.

from video games to major product roll outs to cars.

will all of the knowledge gained from this product research testing of AI on medicine be given away to the public in the same way university research used to be to the scientific community? or will this beta test on the public’s health be kept as company’s “trade secret”

if they’re going to “move fast and break things” with the public, in other words beta research on the public, then it’s incredibly worrisome if the research is hidden and “gifted” to a handful of their cronies.

particularly so when quite a lot of these people in the AI sphere have vocally many times declared they despise the government and that the government helping people is awful. from one side of their mouth chastise government spending money to boost regular communities of people while simultaneously using it to help themselves.

> I'm sure "move fast and break things" will work out great for health care.

And the federal government at large.

It's not even true, OpenEvidence is widely used and officially sanctioned.

Welcome to our pitch for DenyBot.ai

Our product automates a lot of the repetitive tasks for health insurance companies and increases reliability of responses and profit margins.

Move fast and break things is why we have progressed from chopping off people's limbs and giving them cocaine to now.

And healthcare is still far from perfect.

Imagine what healthcare in 2500 will be like.