Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

ChatGPT just made a diagnosis that 17 doctors over 3 years couldn't make! A tired mom with a child with a rare disease started entering his symptoms into ChatGPT, which gave a diagnosis for this patient. She took that information to a neurosurgeon who confirmed the correct diagnosis. This...

11,932 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren •via X (Twitter)

8 Kommentare

Profilbild von Evan Calabrese, MD PhD
Evan Calabrese, MD PhDvor 2 Jahren

What was the diagnosis???

Profilbild von Amy Rochlin
Amy Rochlinvor 2 Jahren

Literally amazing. Let’s continue to harness the power of AI to help more patients!

Profilbild von Cory Rohlfsen
Cory Rohlfsenvor 2 Jahren

Forgive me if I remain skeptical and think the excitement is premature. What was the diagnosis?

Profilbild von Amine Ben Lakhal
Amine Ben Lakhalvor 2 Jahren

You’re having a laugh and making a mockery of medicine.

Profilbild von Tim
Timvor 2 Jahren

Well, average time of Sjogren's diagnosis is 3 years in US. Unfortunately, the majority of docs are not educated about dysautonomia, ME/CFS, POTS, long COVID, non sicca Sjogren's. They just don't care how many millions are suffering. They are not better than ChatGPT.

Profilbild von The Phlegmfighter
The Phlegmfightervor 2 Jahren

Yeah, but what 17 doctors? I would like to know more about those doctors

Profilbild von The Phlegmfighter
The Phlegmfightervor 2 Jahren

I would also like to know about how many wild goose chases artificial intelligence sins, anxious parents on thus increasing their anxiety and leading to nothing but dead ends & iatrogenesis It is folly to record only the hits and not the misses

Profilbild von Numbskull
Numbskullvor 2 Jahren

Sounds like click bait to me.

Ähnliche Videos

American Surgeon shows the actual letter from UnitedHealthcare DENYING a patient in emergency condition from receiving care “This is a woman who was in the emergency room with pulmonary embolisms” “I think we all knew this would happen. I had another patient come in and share with me that UnitedHealthcare denied her inpatient's day. So this is a patient who had shortness of breath and some chest pain, and she just knew that something wasn't right in her body. She had a family history of blood clots and she'd had a deep flap surgery a couple of weeks ago. She went to the hospital and they saw her and they found that she had a life threatening condition known as pulmonary embolisms. So she was admitted to the hospital and taken care of really well by the doctors there. And they ordered all the right things. After a couple of days, she was discharged. She got a letter from UnitedHealthcare explaining that they didn't agree with the level of her care and that they would not cover it. So I'm gonna share some of the language of that letter with you, and I want you to know that my patient that we talked about previously who had her surgery denied had almost exactly the same letter shared. So there's some troubling things in this letter. I think this term is really interesting. United is saying they reviewed the request for inpatient admission. So let's all just pause and consider that. This is a woman who was in the emergency room with pulmonary embolisms, and the doctor wasn't really requesting anything. They were saying this patient needs to be in the hospital. But an insurance company sees this as a request, and that's part of this prior auth environment that we're living in. So I think it's important as patients and as physicians to just acknowledge that this is our reality now. Someone can think that there's a good medical decision for you and can write orders and wanna do the right thing for you, but your insurance company is seeing that as a request and deciding whether or not they wanna do it. One of the criteria that this insurance company used to decide whether or not to accept or deny this request was whether it's medically necessary. And it's so interesting that we're letting insurance companies and the doctors who work for insurance companies determine what's medically necessary and not just the doctor in front of the patient in the emergency room. So this is a really bold statement from UnitedHealthcare for my patient. They say you did not have to be admitted as an inpatient to the hospital for this care. I think we all need to just reflect on that. An insurance company is telling a patient and her doctor that they disagree with the plan of care to keep that patient safe. I know that this is boiling down to whether it's an inpatient admission or an observation admission, and that's really about money. But what I wanna point out to you is they're making medical decisions. This insurance company is actually weighing in and disagreeing with a doctor who made a medical decision to admit this patient for her safety. So this specific sentence, when a doctor or facility treats a patient above the recommended level of care, we cannot cover it. What the heck? That's what we do. We go above and beyond as physicians. It's clear that insurance companies don't, and they're actually saying it here.”

Wall Street Apes

115,712 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

My upcoming release of "Cinematic AI" has made me think about how bodies of work are formed. I think some are manifested and some are revealed. I think "Cinematic AI" falls into the latter category. It was not something I had a clear vision for and then created, but it was something that was revealed to me over time. I thought I saw a glimmer of it early on, but only after some time had past, could I see the body of work emerge. With a bit more context and watching great artists and how they work and think, it finally came to me that this series of 15-20 pieces that I had created could be a worthy collection to mint. AI art has been going through so many transformations from the early GAN work to Collaborative AI to now AI being widely accessible through platforms like MidJourney, Stable Diffusion, and many others. But one area that I have seen explode in recent months is cinematic AI. I distinguish this from animated AI, which has been around for a while, but cinematic AI is where the movements created by AI are getting closer to what you'd see in a movie or captured on a video camera. It still has a long way to go but it is getting more real than surreal as the technology develops. And this is where I seem to have found my groove, my home, my little corner in the artistic landscape. After Runway launched their image-to-video tool, it just blew my mind and I went down a deep rabbit hole and have created a new cinematic AI piece almost every other day for the past few months. I initially saw many of these pieces as just experiments, but with some time to reflect, I am seeing them as having the potential of being relevant pieces of artwork to mark this time in the development of AI. In some cases, I'm not sure if I'll ever be able to create a similar piece again, since the tools I use are not in my control, but in the control of the AI platforms, who are constantly improving and evolving the tools. Given all of this, there is no better way to mark my place in time than on the blockchain. I truly believe that this body of work has the potential to be an important artifact of this era in AI and AI art. It is always hard to judge ones own work, but what I can do is permanently etch in time on an immutable public database saying that I created this. Only time will tell if the work has any value or is of any significance, but who created it and what was created cannot be disputed. I hope this gives you and especially collectors some perspective on the work I'll be releasing next week. I'm still very early in my artistic journey, but hopefully some of you will see promise in what I'm doing and maybe even put in a early bet on my art practice by bidding on a piece next week. Thanks to all of you who have supported me, taught me, advised me, been a friend to me. Much love and respect.🙏 ------------------------------------- CINEMATIC AI October 25, 2023 Marking on the blockchain, establishing historical provenance for a cinematic AI body of work. Minting on Transient Labs ERC-721TL Listing on SuperRare

Chikai

21,517 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

Elon Musk on Grok: “I think an AI that is sort of SpaceX’s baby will be a very good AI. I think SpaceX is a collection of some of the very best humans on Earth, both in capability and morality and goodness, and I think we want to have an AI that is born of that capability and that morality and that goodness. I think that’s very, very important. So I’d like to encourage people to help out, actually, with the AI hardware on the ground and the AI software and, of course, with the AI satellites. Solar is going to be a very important part of that. The TerraFab will be a very important part of that, but we must also succeed on the software front, and we’re going to be training Grok on the sum total of all SpaceX information. So in a way, it will be trained on you. You will effectively be the parents of the AI. It will inherit your thoughts and ideas and beliefs, and I think that’s a good thing. So, yeah, we’ve got to win here on the AI hardware and the AI software. That maybe is the most important message. I think that is actually the most important message I wanted to convey today is that we must win on AI because the future is overwhelmingly AI and robots. So we won’t ultimately be able to control the AI. It’ll be too smart for that. But just like if you have a child that is a super genius child, you can still instill in that child the values and beliefs that you think are good and right. And so that’s why it’s incredibly important that we succeed with Grok. So, yeah, well, Grok 4.5 you’ve tried probably. We’ve got 4.6 coming out in about a week. And then 4.7 should be really pretty special. So I’d like to encourage everyone at SpaceX to use AI and to make it better.”

DogeDesigner

61,797 Aufrufe • vor 5 Tagen

Right to Recovery Treatment evidence sessions in Scottish Parliament with Third Sector With You and The Salvation Army. What wording should replace “addiction” in the Bill to ensure people can access treatment without requiring a formal diagnosis? @GraemeCall78170 instead of answering his reply focuses on systemic access issues and the limitations of the Bill’s scope. Dr Sandesh Gulhane reminds him that the bill has narrow scope due to it not being a government bill and has to ask again about the use of the word addiction. Director of Addictions of The Salvation Armysays, "I think to give it a word or a title, it’s a really difficult thing". (Yes, its like a scene from the Ministry of Funny Walks) only none of this is funny, but deadly serious. Dr Sandesh Gulhane "Just on the point of addiction being used as a diagnosis, we heard from the Royal College of Psychiatrists, it was clear that perhaps the word addiction is not the right word to be used, and I'm sure that Douglas Ross, who is he member in charge of the bill, would be looking into that. So if we were to amend this because we need to say that you have something, not necessarily a diagnosis, but what is it that we should be saying in, in your opinion, as a way to have the right to have a treatment. Is it simply you would like to receive treatment or what exactly would you suggest?" @GraemeCall78170 "I think it for us, it's always been about access, right, so treatment is there. We recognise as an organisation we have a full clinical offer in England, not in Scotland, so we understand the importance of clinical process processes and in certain circumstances diagnosis is absolutely critical because there are other things that are going on, underlying mental health, underlying physical problems, so we completely recognise that. But the reality of the system is that people can't get access to the system, it's not about treatment. So services like ours here, all we do is we try and find ways to navigate the system to try and get people to where they need to be. But a lot of people that we engage with don't need a medical intervention, they dont. They just some mutual aid, some support, they need some practical stuff around their housing. So I think it's the disappointing thing as I read the bill as it was presented, it did feel narrow to me. I can't deny that. And I think it didn't reflect the experiences that we have as organisation." Dr Sandesh Gulhane "Being a member's bill it does need to be very narrow. It's not a government bill. If it was a government bill, that that's fair enough that this really does need to have enough scope. But my question was, what wording would you use in instead of a diagnosis of addiction? What wording would you like to see for people who do want to access treatment?" Lee Ball [Director of Addictions, Salvation Army] "For me, I think it's the person's right to want treatment. I think to give it a word or a title, it’s a really difficult thing. I don't envy your job trying to come up with a word for this because there are so many words that have so many different meanings."

FAVORUK 💜

22,503 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr