Dr. Watson

[Taurus]

Dr. Watson: How IBM’s supercomputer could improve health care

"Watson could also dramatically change the way medical services are delivered. Once a machine with diagnostic expertise, no need for sleep and a proven track record can provide quality care, will it really be necessary for a physician to see every patient? We might want to create a new category of medical professional: people trained to examine patients and convey their symptoms to a system such as Watson. These lower-paid practitioners could help manage the growing number of patients with chronic conditions such as obesity and diabetes, practicing medicine without going to medical school."

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[smq123]

Moved to Topics in Healthcare.

 

[bronx43]

Dr. Watson: How IBM’s supercomputer could improve health care

"Watson could also dramatically change the way medical services are delivered. Once a machine with diagnostic expertise, no need for sleep and a proven track record can provide quality care, will it really be necessary for a physician to see every patient? We might want to create a new category of medical professional: people trained to examine patients and convey their symptoms to a system such as Watson. These lower-paid practitioners could help manage the growing number of patients with chronic conditions such as obesity and diabetes, practicing medicine without going to medical school."

A market ready product is at least a few decades away, but that's besides the point. My position is that the only value add of human being is creation and innovation. Machines are far superior in every other aspect, due to the lack of human error and other human limitations. The practice of medicine would be far more efficient and effective if Watson can be implemented and humans are used only to establish protocols of care.

 

[mTOR]

A market ready product is at least a few decades away, but that's besides the point. My position is that the only value add of human being is creation and innovation. Machines are far superior in every other aspect, due to the lack of human error and other human limitations. The practice of medicine would be far more efficient and effective if Watson can be implemented and humans are used only to establish protocols of care.

Agreed.

 

[eagleface]

A market ready product is at least a few decades away, but that's besides the point. My position is that the only value add of human being is creation and innovation. Machines are far superior in every other aspect, due to the lack of human error and other human limitations. The practice of medicine would be far more efficient and effective if Watson can be implemented and humans are used only to establish protocols of care.

As someone with a strong software background, I can say there's a major paradox with AI in skilled professions that change. By the time an AI becomes developed to solve major problems consistently like Watson, the problems and professions change to such an extent that the software becomes insufficient.

Also...for people who aren't too familiar with Watson, Watson is not the Jeopardy box. It really takes up an entire room(around 250 cubic feet), still has very limited problem solving consistency, and costs several million dollars.

 

[bronx43]

As someone with a strong software background, I can say there's a major paradox with AI in skilled professions that change. By the time an AI becomes developed to solve major problems consistently like Watson, the problems and professions change to such an extent that the software becomes insufficient.

Also...for people who aren't too familiar with Watson, Watson is not the Jeopardy box. It really takes up an entire room(around 250 cubic feet), still has very limited problem solving consistency, and costs several million dollars.

Ok, I'm not sure what exactly it is you're trying to get at. You'll have to explain how the medical profession will change to the extent that an "AI" software would not be able to provide certain types of care within a larger health care infrastructure.
And as far as the size of Watson, I don't understand how that's an issue at all, since I said a market ready product will not be available for another few decades. How big is your computer at home? How big was the first computer ever made?

 

[eagleface]

Ok, I'm not sure what exactly it is you're trying to get at. You'll have to explain how the medical profession will change to the extent that an "AI" software would not be able to provide certain types of care within a larger health care infrastructure.
And as far as the size of Watson, I don't understand how that's an issue at all, since I said a market ready product will not be available for another few decades. How big is your computer at home? How big was the first computer ever made?

My computer at home is roughly 0.3 cubic feet. The first computer ever made, the Antikythera mechanism, wasn't that big, and it wasn't used to aid in medical diagnosis or a physician like Galen would have mentioned it(correct me if I'm wrong because it'd be amazing if Galen wrote about something like that). Size would be an issue for anyone trying to use this to "automate" the diagnosing process because the physician's vital judgement is related to the basic ergonomics of simply looking at rashes and burns from the proper angles, analyzing a patient's motion, and even properly evaluating EKG and EEG(a gigantic machine isn't too likely to detect subtleties that can throw the readings off.

It kind of reminds me of an old episode of the Simpsons where Web MD tells Homer and Bart they have leprosy.

 

[Apollyon]

My computer at home is roughly 0.3 cubic feet. The first computer ever made, the Antikythera mechanism, wasn't that big, and it wasn't used to aid in medical diagnosis or a physician like Galen would have mentioned it(correct me if I'm wrong because it'd be amazing if Galen wrote about something like that). Size would be an issue for anyone trying to use this to "automate" the diagnosing process because the physician's vital judgement is related to the basic ergonomics of simply looking at rashes and burns from the proper angles, analyzing a patient's motion, and even properly evaluating EKG and EEG(a gigantic machine isn't too likely to detect subtleties that can throw the readings off.

It kind of reminds me of an old episode of the Simpsons where Web MD tells Homer and Bart they have leprosy.

To cite the Antikythera Mechanism is rather idiosyncratic, though, as it "shouldn't" exist (although it does), and nothing like it came after for almost 2000 years. Charles Babbage and Ada Lovelace (builder and programmer) in the 1800s were the analog/mechanical successors, and it was in the 20th century (1946 for ENIAC) for electrical, with vacuum tubes (!). That was 8ft x 3ft x 100ft, took up 1800 square feet, and weighed 30 tons. That is a truer comparison to your home computer.

 

[bronx43]

My computer at home is roughly 0.3 cubic feet. The first computer ever made, the Antikythera mechanism, wasn't that big, and it wasn't used to aid in medical diagnosis or a physician like Galen would have mentioned it(correct me if I'm wrong because it'd be amazing if Galen wrote about something like that). Size would be an issue for anyone trying to use this to "automate" the diagnosing process because the physician's vital judgement is related to the basic ergonomics of simply looking at rashes and burns from the proper angles, analyzing a patient's motion, and even properly evaluating EKG and EEG(a gigantic machine isn't too likely to detect subtleties that can throw the readings off.

It kind of reminds me of an old episode of the Simpsons where Web MD tells Homer and Bart they have leprosy.

Dude, are you being facetious or just obtuse by intention? I'm pretty sure you knew that I wasn't talking about some ancient analog device. I was referring to the first electronic digital computer that weighed like 30 tons and took up an entire room. The details of its size aren't important - the point is that technological advancement allows these complex machines to become smaller and more efficient over time. Therefore, your statement about how large Watson is and how much it costs is analogous to someone in the 40s saying that PCs aren't possible due to the size and cost of the ENIAC.

And you never explained how medicine changes at a pace where software innovations would never be able to catch up. If anything, practice of medicine is easily one of the slowest moving functions with certain aspects that haven't changed in millennia.

 

[Orbo]

As someone with a strong software background, I can say there's a major paradox with AI in skilled professions that change. By the time an AI becomes developed to solve major problems consistently like Watson, the problems and professions change to such an extent that the software becomes insufficient.

Also...for people who aren't too familiar with Watson, Watson is not the Jeopardy box. It really takes up an entire room(around 250 cubic feet), still has very limited problem solving consistency, and costs several million dollars.

There's this technology called wireless communication devices and the internet. You would need nothing more than an ipad to access the full spectrum of any software's capabilities. But as "someone with a strong software background," surely you already knew that.