Comment by fellowniusmonk | Hacker News Reader

Comment by fellowniusmonk | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

While I have no particular position, my brother is a molecular biologist and bioinformatics guy who has been published in nature, featured in NYT, etc. A true scientific nerds nerd, and he endlessly ridiculed the poor science and poor scientific understanding of people on the M.D. track that he interacted with in labs while he was doing research.

I do have this anecdote from deep personal experience though... pediatric cardiologists working at research hospitals are some of the kindest, most compassionate, honest and respectful people I have met. Everyone tends to treat children with condescension and patronization (and I feel safe to extrapolate that toward their views of people in general), but those doctors seem to know that as a child you've been weighed... or maybe they just comes from a place of true compassion and pity, people underestimate the importance of compassion, kindness and listening by doctors.. especially as issues become more complex.

I do think AI assistance is going to make a large difference in medical diagnostics work even if reality hasn't caught up with the hype yet.

It’s a bit of a misunderstanding of the role of doctors as well IMO. Apart from a small fraction of them they aren’t scientists or researchers and aren’t supposed to be. And the human body is complex, problems can arise which can’t easily be understood. The expectation that every doctor is House and we’ll each get millions of dollar of diagnostics is wrong. There’s also a reason why experiments in science require an awful lot of preparation and rigor that doesn’t exist in the happenstance of the real world. No AI is going to solve for a lack of information or confounding factors that make understanding what’s happened impossible.

I had a heart attack nearly six weeks ago despite being healthy, fit and having no chronic health issues. They kept me in hospital for five days after I got a clot squished by a stent. I’ve come back negative for basically everything bar some immune disorder tests I’m waiting on the results of. The fact I’ve not heard probably means those were negative as well. So I got this fatal blood clot and the medical staff absolutely knocked it out of the park in terms of working out what the acute issue was, dealing with it without undue distress (seriously a PCI is magic) and my care and rehabilitation afterwards has been great. But I’ll likely never know why it happened.

The other side of that is I end up on a standard cocktail of medication despite having a normal blood pressure, normal cholesterol and so on. Essentially the drug regime seems calibrated for the average heart attack patient which is someone older with chronic problems. I had a rash as a side effect and the doctors swapped a med and I’m fine again. How did they know what to change of the six meds? I guess experience and wider statistical analysis in the medical community. It worked!

They get paid as if they are super experts even when most of them aren't. People wouldn't complain about the skills of doctors if they just earned 100k a year or so. I don't understand why USA doesn't just open up the floodgates and stop the requirement for doctors to get a bachelors before starting their doctors degree and with that get way more doctors and push down wages.

So are software engineers in the USA! Particularly FAANG ones! And we get sensible working hours, plush offices and all modern conveniences. Pay isn’t really related to how much of a super expert you are unless you really, really are one.

Both my brother and his wife are doctors in the UK as well and I wouldn’t put up with the level of assessment and work they have to go through. My brother is 37 and still studying for and taking exams. Getting your medical degree is just the start of the learning process.

I remember former fellow students telling how they corrected medical students' practical physics internship assignments. Apparently the statistical rigour is much lower. On the other hand, I guess in pure natural sciences you work with much more indirection and have zero results nowadays unless you use a lot of tools. Probably there aren't that many medical conditions that can be treated in-depth based on first principles but I think concluding that whole medical science can be replaced by an AI assistant might be a bit far-fetched. Compassion is probably under-estimated indeed. Some people with serious conditions prefer to be treated at objectively less sophisticated yet less industrialized facilities.

I also think "concluding that whole medical science can be replaced by an AI assistant" is far fetched. I hope that wasn't what you took away from my comment.

> poor science and poor scientific understanding of people on the M.D. track

Definitely a thing. At least historically, research is not a big part of a MD program in the US. MD/PhD programs are where its at -- Basically you do a few years of med school, then PhD, then finish MD. Its a very long haul. After which you usually go into Postdoc research or medical residency.

The best doctor I ever had was incredibly perceptive and compassionate. What did she teach in med school? How to work with patients (i.e. bedside manner). She moved on to head palliative care, another area where empathy is key.

Like any other profession doctors span a range of competency. There is an old joke: What do you call the person who finished last in medical school? Doctor.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com