In this video, When Your Doctor is a Robot, several "experts" discuss where medicine "is going". That means what the corporate world plans to do to take over how you receive medical care which will be through artificial intelligence (AI). Healthcare is being destroyed right in front of our eyes and we are nothing but its victims. The "experts" include Leif Johansson, AstraZeneca Board Chairman; Jody Halpern, Professor Bioethics & Medical Humanities, University of California, Berkley; Lisa Sanders, Associate Professor Yale Medical School, New York Times columnist; and Amy Bernstein, Harvard Business Review Editor. In a brief summary, the panel began by announcing AI in healthcare is "going very quickly" in research in genetics that generates "a lot of data" and how that data should be used. Mr. Johansson claims good healthcare won't be "delivered without robots and healthcare data". What a brash statement. Ms. Sanders reports AI is "in the background" but that mammograms are "read by robots". Does anyone check those robots for accuracy? At least she addressed some of the current limitations of AI but can "augment" doctors in a useful way. Ms. Halpern brought in the importance of empathy and how that makes healthcare more effective which was a nice counter to Ms. Sanders statement on AI needing to pull data from the patient, how cold is that. She asked a legitimate question, what is the problem in healthcare now that brings the need for AI to solve. While AI is helping with diagnostics, she referenced provider burn out with use of computers and having to type documentation which interferes in the patient visit, less time with patients, She also pointed out the importance of the relationship with the physician, adherence to care which is predicated on trust, and helping the patient deal with bad news. All of these can never be replaced with AI or a robot. Good for you Ms. Halpern. Ms. Sanders was taken aback by this, and no Ms. Sanders EMR (electronic medical records) were not set up for better billing, they were set up to collect data on patients for sharing and dictate what information is required, whether relevant or not. Mr. Johansson mistakenly believes "building good healthcare systems" somehow magically brings good healthcare to people. A building with equipment will never replace a skilled provider, and a fancy system doesn't guarantee a skilled provider. He also thinks it would be just dandy to have everyone's DNA on file, for example having that for a subgroup of patients for medicines. Unfortunately Ms. Halpern supported this and suggested infant genome sequencing is needed for metabolic disorder treatment. These disorders aren't already being treated? Ms. Halpern's next disclosure is chilling, "ambient medical records". Ambient clinical intelligence (ACI) is AI-powered, voice recognizing technology that listens in on doctor-patient encounters then writes the transcription, note taking, and documentation which is then stored on servers. While these experts may think this is a new concept, providers have been using medical transcription for years, dictating notes then transcribed and delivered to them to sign. But having them stored in a server? As she suggests, the owner of the server thinks it owns the data and can be used to mix data with "smart" devices, then used that data to target for advertising its products. Yes, all of that is true in the 4th Industrial Revolution. Oh goodness, Mr. Johansson speaks to aggregating genetic data for hierarchical use, and the technology to do this is coming. It appears he only sees humans as lab rats. Ms. Sanders is under the delusion that all of this patient information needs to be protected with "strong laws". What planet is she from? Laws are meant to be broken by nefarious characters and once that data is collected and stored somewhere, it will always be available to anyone who wants to misuse it, laws be damned. Right now, written clinical charts are more protected than what they are discussing. Ms. Halpern pointed out that tech companies are already collecting data through various genetic testing sites which is not protected, how that data can be used for predictive phenotyping, and how it can be used to harm mankind. The audience was allowed to ask some questions. Overall, this is clearly an agenda that usurps all authority over our own bodies and how treatment is provided. There was not discussion about how this direction is more reflective of a Frankenstein nightmare. Ethics? How about all of you work on stopping this direction rather than advancing it and trying to figure out how to do it?
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Concerned Idahoans:This website is non-partisan and is solely dedicated to removing the harmful controls placed on our state and nation through associated programs of Agenda 21, Agenda 2030, and the Great Reset. We invite all Idahoans to join us in this fight for freedom! Categories
All
Archives
April 2024
|