Post

I agree with RFK Jr. (Partly.) On AI and medicine this week, he said: "You may have a medical record that is 1000 pages long. You have 6 minutes with a doctor today. He is not gonna be able to review it, but the AI can."

Totally agree. AI can read a 1000 pages faster than me, and can retrieve more information than I'll ever hold in my head. That "feature set" can be incredibly powerful in many circumstances. (He's not wrong about "6 minutes," either.

That's a business-model problem, not a knowledge problem that I'd love his attention on, as HHS Secretary.)

But then he makes a leap: AI can give you a second opinion "much better informed than any doctor in the country." And then: "We're never ever again gonna be able to be dominated by public officials who tell us, 'Trust the experts.'" You lost me there, Secretary.

1️⃣ Reading does not equal "better informed," and "better informed" isn't the same as deciding better. Medicine isn't a trivia contest. The hard part is deciding what *matters*: which abnormality deserves attention, which diagnosis is unlikely enough to ignore.

AI didn't discover that antibiotics treat bacterial meningitis. It didn't run the randomized trials, or spend decades figuring out which cancer treatments improve survival, or figure out how the kidney works. Or discover vaccines. Or the Starling curve.

Or that tick-borne diseases often causes fevers with headaches and rashes. Human EXPERTS did. Generations of them. Your AI model can explain all of it remarkably well... because it's trained on EXPERTS. Not just Reddit threads.

It's weird to me to point at a machine, built by engineering experts, trained on knowledge from medical experts, and then say we're freed from the tyranny of expertise. "Trust the experts" doesn't disappear. It becomes 𝘵𝘳𝘶𝘴𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘮𝘰𝘥𝘦𝘭 — which is, theoretically, experts... compressed.