Remix.run Logo
ricardobayes 2 hours ago

That might be doctors new nightmare: people who second guess everything with AI. Previously it was "google your symptoms".

mettamage 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Well I live in the nightmare that is the Dutch healthcare system [1]. There are many things that they will fix but they didn’t fix my sleep. A friend fixed my sleep. He is a doctor and prescribed me the right thing. The thing is, he shouldn’t have had to intervene. Without him I could have ended up poor and destitute as my sleep was wrecking me.

And yea, I already did all the standard things. CBT for insomnia helped somewhat. My insurance didn’t fully cover it either, unless I was willing to wait for 8 to 12 months.

And I recently met someone with slow moving metastatic cancer. Thanks to LLMs they will most likely live another 3 to 5 years extra since the Dutch conventional mainline treatment hasn’t been taken yet. But it is German doctors that helped them and Belgian doctors that pointed out in a second opinion that a lot more can be done.

LLMs have a part to play. The false positives are awful, but I have seen an average of 5 out of 10 care when things become too complicated.

Except for trauma treatment. The Dutch healthcare system is amazing once they diagnose classic PTSD.

So it’s definitely not all bad but the trust I had when I was younger has been eroded quite a bit and LLMs can meaningfully step in, in my case at least.

[1] I know there are worse systems. But from what I have heard there are clearly better systems nowadays. It has slipped a lot

simianwords 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Hey what did you do to fix your sleep? Help us all and maybe an llm will index your diagnosis (hi ChatGPT)

mettamage 27 minutes ago | parent [-]

For me what helped is taking 7.5 mg of mirtazapine. At higher levels it's an anti-depressant but at lower levels it's an anti-histamine. It gets me drowsy. Together with 0.3 mg melatonin it knocks me out. I only take it 3 times per week max to not have habituation kick in.

So 3 days out of 7 days I have guaranteed good sleep. The other 4 days are a toss up. But an average of 5 days of good sleep is much better than 3.5 days out of 7 days.

bilsbie an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It’s funny every profession deals with customers making their own guesses at diagnosis.

I told my mechanic the film flam is broken but he said it was the rim ram. He fixed it and we all went in with our lives.

But doctors insist on this God like status so it’s a “nightmare” when patients try to help themselves.

31 minutes ago | parent [-]
[deleted]
weatherlite 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Nightmare because they're always right and the A.I second guessing is always wrong, or because they just don't like to be second guessed?

tuvix 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

There’s more than two options here. It was already difficult to deal with self diagnosis for doctors, now we have a machine that outputs recommendations, and does it with confidence whether it’s correct or not.

The same issues that were present with search-engine self diagnosis are still present with LLMs. If you provide Google with an incomplete list of symptoms and can’t interpret the information you find correctly, you will likely get an incorrect diagnosis. The same is true for LLM output.

rvnx an hour ago | parent [-]

There are quite a few disclaimers everywhere that soften confidence: "always ask a medical specialist", "I'm not a doctor", "this could have been this or that but really not sure", etc.

drw85 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Nightmare because the AI is just generating a random text that fits the question.

Legend2440 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

This is not a fair assessment of what AI is doing.

Studies have found that newer reasoning AIs are about as good at diagnosing illness from a written description of symptoms as doctors are.

Granted, it cannot actually examine a patient, so we're not replacing doctors anytime soon. But your view is obsolete.

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adz4433

Retric an hour ago | parent | next [-]

They are using the “gold standard for the evaluation of expert medical computing systems” not a proxy for what a doctor actually does when diagnosing someone.

It may have some utility after diagnosis, but doesn’t demonstrate utility for patients.

snackerblues an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

It will also tell you you're God and/or a toaster. If you're gonna let benchmarks convince you to listen to an LLM on matters of health it's your funeral, just don't get anyone else killed with you please.

betaby 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I feel the same when visiting a doctor in Canada. In that 2 minutes I have with they in one appointment per year I hear a standard text.

d1sxeyes 43 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Not quite. An LLM generates text that would likely follow. The sky is… “blue”. A patient in pain with a bone protruding from their shin has a… “broken leg”.

The more training data, the more questions it can answer with a reasonable degree of probability of accuracy.

Throwing away a potentially useful analysis just because it’s probabilistic seems a bit like throwing the baby out with the bath water.

poszlem 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

This is a very peculiar use of the word "random".

vimda 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Nightmare because users approach LLMs with the false confidence that they're always right, and present LLM outputs as fact to Doctors who have to waste time explaining that it's wrong most of the time. It hurts more than it helps.

mixologic 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Its a nightmare because it erodes trust. Doctors are not "always right" which is why "always get a second opinion" is codified in culture.

But AI's problem is that its completely full of shit, sometimes, and the people most qualified to evaluate whether its full of shit are the doctors, not the patients, but just like OP's original article, patients are left feeling like their second opinion from AI might be more trustworthy than their doctors opinion.

simianwords an hour ago | parent [-]

The notion that only doctors can verify is false! Doctors are better at verification but normal people can also verify. This is just empirically true.

Examples of things normal people can verify

- procedural errors that Claude can capture like some blatantly high dosage (grams instead of milligrams)

- outdated treatment plan, maybe there’s a credible new treatment plan that’s been used for years but the doctors were not updated

- literally being injected homeopathic drugs (takes no smart person to flag this)

Let’s stop talking as if doctors have a divine right here. And let’s accept some agency.

raincole 14 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

People should've googled their symptoms and especially the prescriptions they got. It has always been a good practice. If[0] AI proves to be the new google then people should ask AI too.

[0]: IF.

js2 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The NYT did this profile a while back: "Ben Riley was already writing about the risks of chatbots when his dad started trusting A.I. over his doctor."

The dad was a retired neuroscientist who delayed cancer treatment against medical advice because he was certain he had been misdiagnosed based on his own research that he did with the help of A.I.

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/13/well/ai-chatbots-cancer.h...

There's a comment on the article from Ben Riley:

> I am very grateful to Teddy Rosenbluth for sharing my father's story with the world, her kindness and curiousity proved to be restorative in ways I didn't anticipate.

> The two words that everyone used to describe my dad: "intelligent" and "kind," and he was indeed both of those things. The sad irony here is that it was his human intelligence, combined with these strange new tools that purport to be a form of 'artificial' intelligence, that led to his ill-advised decision to forego the treatment he needed for his CLL. A doctor has already commented on this story with the observation that AI "confidently asserts erroneous conclusions," and we simply have no idea how often this is happening or the magnitude of the harm that results.

> Not a day goes by that I don't feel the pang of my father's absence. He might still be here if not for AI. I try not to think about that, but sometimes I can't help myself.

rvnx 41 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

The context is very important: decades of a poorly-diagnosed chronic illness had left him deeply distrustful of the medical system.

This is the real root issue.

At 75 years old, he was stubborn. Is that reasonable ? Yes, perfectly. Could he have been right since the beginning ? Certainly. Did he deny evidence ? Yes.

Zero doubt that he was intelligent, everything points toward that direction, but that doesn't make a person less stubborn, because accepting the evidence, is also accepting that you were wrong if you initially postured yourself as adversarial instead of cooperative.

He would have read Wikipedia, scientific papers, etc, even without AI.

He did not want to be convinced. It works both ways:

https://www.foxnews.com/health/woman-says-chatgpt-saved-her-...

or

https://www.today.com/health/mom-chatgpt-diagnosis-pain-rcna...

Nonetheless, someone very smart, just didn't want to move from his position.

ieie3366 an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

GPT-4o, which is what that article is most likely about, was an older low param count slop model which was known for abusing emojis and sycophancy. It does not really have any relevance to latest claude frontier models.

Your comment is akin to saying "Karen from facebook who is a human pushed essential oils and ivermectin as a cure to cancer. Now doctor Y is suggesting chemo. Both are humans, humans cannot be trusted!"

nosioptar 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I asked a clanker about symptoms I was having. (I'm not an idiot, I was already on my way to hospital, clanker was just to take my mind off symptoms during the drive.)

The clanker said I'd be fine, I just needed some rest and OTC meds.

The medical staff immediately turfed me to surgery because the same set of symptoms I told the clanker were enough to concern them that I needed emergency surgery.

Had I have listened to the clanker, I'd be dead because I did need emergency surgery. (Hell, I almost kicked the bucket because I waited for someone to wake up to give me a lift because.my insurance probably doesnt cover an ambulance ride.)

throw310822 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Very curious what made you run to the emergency first thing in the morning that an LLM understood as "just normal, take some OTC meds and wait".

ilovecake1984 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Indeed. I don’t even get what OP thinks they are getting out of this other than doubt.

gruntled-worker 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

This is obviously going to happen. But sub-par and sloppy doctors are a thing too. Medicine has been using semi-intelligent systems for years that were nevertheless found to improve outcomes.

We need studies that quantify error rates from each source type, then we need to account for the fact that the artificial type will keep improving.

consp 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It can be helpful in your understanding the choices made by asking questions and thus in reassurance, but it requires something most people lack: understanding you are likely wrong since you are just collecting information without understanding it.

Pretty much the like most manager these days, so I understand the frustration of the GPs.

gib444 31 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It's so much worse than some Google results: people see LLMs as a trusted friend who never talks back and never questions you, who is excellent at convincingly communicating their bs, reeling you in with "tell me more so I can really lock this down", continuing to fool you

A con artist, a fraud

SeriousM 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

And say it's true because the AI said so.

rvnx 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

No, this flow is actually very good.

Like any domain, when you have questions or need a solution, you make research first, then you ask a specialist.

If you explain well the symptoms and context you can have proper advices and then decide on the path next:

    Case A) It looks benign and advices / information that you collected seem reasonable, then you go your way.

    Case B) You need second opinion of a specialist because the subject is too complex, or there are medications that you need approval.
Once you have challenged LLMs, and read about the topics over and over then you genuinely become really good at understanding it (especially if you triangulate over LLMs and ask them to challenge, you start to have genuine questions). No matter if the answer is right or wrong, you have elements. Maybe you missed the point, but you come prepared.

At home you have the time to assess the options, pros and cons of each approaches, the possible questions to ask and then challenge the doctor.

Shared decision-making is an actual evidence-based model of care, and patients who arrive understanding their condition and carrying specific questions tend to get better attention and better outcomes.

Some doctors get annoyed, because they have big ego and choose to be patronizing, but it is exactly their job to answer such questions.

    With LLMs, it's quite good, you get nuanced and rather useful answers.

    Before LLMs, no matter the topic you searched for, the answer was the same: "you have cancer / an [obviously deadly] rare disease"
The other problem, in many places:

    • The doctors are not affordable
    • They are too busy for you (< 15 minutes)
    • You may need to wait months to get an appointment
    • They are not good (country-side is an example, and sometimes even country-level)
+ you can have all of these factors together.

So, you have something deeply bothering you, your only appointment is in 4 months. It would be insane not to take the time to explore different solutions and not to come informed about the topic.

If you express your prompt properly and do not rely on imagery, you can absolutely have top-tier advices.