
Google’s lung cancer detection AI outperforms 6 human radiologists - jseip
https://venturebeat.com/2019/05/20/googles-lung-cancer-detection-ai-outperforms-6-human-radiologists/
======
avgDev
Having seen many specialist/doctors I generally think they suck at diagnosing,
unless its something you could literally discover yourself by a google search
and access to a specific test. I don't think they are bad doctors, I just
learned that sometimes diagnosis can be rather difficult.

Then, you have a computer, it can reference recent studies compare symptoms
with hundreds of diseases and generate a test plan accordingly based on
probability of a disease or urgency. Frankly, I am surprised not more work is
being done with algorithms in medicine.

Humans are biased, egoistic and most don't like being told they are wrong.

~~~
gremlinsinc
I tend to agree, doctors is going to be the holy shit moment for society when
we begin replacing them across the board. I mean we still might need 100 or so
(nationwide in the usa), maybe keep the top 1000 doctors/surgeons for times
when creativity and unique problem solving is needed and to 'sign off' on
computers' work remotely (for awhile, till they're not needed at all
anymore)...

If the only job left per se for doctors is to 'okay and sign off' on
prescriptions that a computer recommends, after a computer does the entire
intake/evaluation, then 1 doctor can replace 100 or 1000 for 20 second evals
over skype.

~~~
mfatica
I don't think surgery will be done without human hand for a very long time

~~~
gremlinsinc
If you consider 2006 a very long time 'ago', then you're absolutely right...
[https://www.engadget.com/2006/05/19/robot-surgeon-
performs-w...](https://www.engadget.com/2006/05/19/robot-surgeon-performs-
worlds-first-unassisted-operation/)

Then there's a more modern article at: [https://curiosity.com/topics/a-robot-
performed-soft-tissue-s...](https://curiosity.com/topics/a-robot-performed-
soft-tissue-surgery-by-itself-curiosity/)

So, it's definitely possible. Doctors will be replaced probably before
software devs, so I think my job is safe(r).

~~~
jazoom
I'm a doctor and a software developer. I frequently perform surgery. There's
no way a computer/robot will be doing what I do as a doctor in the next 10
years.

Believe what you will. I don't really have a personal horse in this race,
since I wouldn't mind if I was replaced as a doctor/surgeon. I actually took
last year off medicine and focused on my tech businesses and it was great.

~~~
gremlinsinc
I have very high hopes for ai/automation. Maybe not 10 years, but can you be
sure 20 years is safe? What if your kid started med school in 10 years, and by
the time they get through residency they could be replaced by robots? It's a
possibility...

I think specific 'parts' of medicine are more adaptable to change... PCP's
could be 'mostly' automated. I'm not saying it'll be 100%, but say 20% stay
around for a decade or two as management overseeing the robotic slaves --
making sure they have > levels of care and lower death rates than a human
would by a magnitude big enough to avoid lawsuits.

There's not a job in sight that can't someday be done better by a robot. Even
software developer. I don't know when, I just know on a long enough timeline
it's almost inevitable.

~~~
jazoom
> can you be sure 20 years is safe?

I think you're looking at this all wrong. If robots replace me then that means
the robots are safer than I am and do a better job. That's awesome. By the
time robots have replaced me, they would have long ago replaced accountants
and lawyers. We'd be living in a super efficient world. The human element is
extremely important in medicine/surgery so we won't be replaced for a little
longer. For a long time it'll be there to help us and make our jobs easier.

It's like another industrial revolution where we all have more time to... not
work.

I am not defined by my career.

But... I don't see this happening even in the next 20 years. We can't even yet
trust cars to drive forward, back, left and right safely with strict rules,
markings and signage to guide them.

~~~
gremlinsinc
Not to undermine what you do, or what any doctor does, I honestly believe
driving a car to be something that's tougher than surgery (for a robot). Now
of course, when I say 20 years, I think by then we'll have robots who can do a
number of 'routine' surgeries at least. Maybe each robot is specialized and
can only do 1 surgery but there's 15 different types of robots who all have
mastered 1 surgery.

When performing a surgery, I'm sure you need to think on your feet a bit, but
how many scenarios can you think of that might happen in a surgery ? Knick a
blood vessel, throw a blood clot, drop a tool in the patient, unforseen
bleeder/hemorrhage, alergy to drug, etc... I'm sure there's quite a list...

How many scenarios can happen in a driving situation - magnitudes more than a
surgery, because a surgery is in an isolated room and controlled environment.
Driving is not. On the road you need to worry about:

* Pedestrians from front, and sides.

* Animals from all angles.

* Rain/Snow. Hydroplaning.

* Traffic construction.

* Other idiots on the road.

* Helicopter Crash.

* Police Chase.

* Sheep stuck in the road.

* Forest fires. (Obey the speed limit or floor it to escape?)

* Billing (If you're an uber ai car).

* Drivers that are angry, sad, happy, distracted, having a medical emergency, falling asleep.

* Natural disasters like an earthquake.

* Bad directions.

* Loss of internet/connectivity.

* Running out of gas/electric.

* Curves in the road.

* Signs that could be permanent or temporary.

* Obeying traffic laws.

* Being aggressive when needed to take a lane.

* Be courteous and move over for faster traffic passing on the left.

* Sensor failures and malfunctions.

* Tire blowout.

My point is it's a LOT more than just forward/back/left/right, if you had an
enclosed building w/ a driving track, and could control who was in the room,
where they were standing, what their jobs were, before the car took off, then
you mitigate MANY of the issues that self-driving cars have, and the
technology as it exists today is good enough for that scenario.

Personally though I see us (hopefully) moving towards a post-scarcity society,
sort of like Wall-e, but hopefully without the laziness (I'm sure we can find
fulfillment in other ways) -- Research for instance will be a hobby instead of
career because people --especially scientists will always have curiosity
pushing them forward.

If we survive global warming, the next 100 years is going to be unfathomably
different from the last 100...

~~~
jazoom
Maybe I should mention I perform surgery on awake patients. What happens when
the patient gives me feedback? I have to negotiate with them and accommodate
them. What about when the surgeon communicates with the assistants/nurses?
What about with the anesthetist? What if the power goes out? What about the
discussion with the patient/family when things don't go as planned? What about
deciding with the patient if surgery is even appropriate in the first place?
Will a robot be a good judge of when it's important to ignore what the patient
is saying?

You know about driving because you do it. It makes sense you think
medicine/surgery is simple, since you've never done it.

~~~
gremlinsinc
Also -- if something does come up, couldn't you as a master surgeon
technically have 5 surgeries on huge monitors around you, and if the robot
hits a snag you can swoop in and fill in? Using a microscopic tool you couid
even do that remotely, just take over the robot's hands? In this scenario you
replaced 5 surgeons combined w/ robots. Still a win for efficiency.

~~~
jazoom
Yes. And? Are there not millions of people in your country who need surgical
procedures but aren't getting them because they cannot afford them?

------
j7ake
Aren't these algorithms trained on expert-annotated data? If so how does it
end up performing better than radiologists? Or are these radiologists only
mediocre at detecting cancer?

~~~
jazoom
I'm a doctor but not a radiologist. I imagine it would go like this:

Computer makes diagnosis on image of lesion that has already been biopsied and
has a known correct diagnosis.

I don't know how it would work for human false negatives that were never
biopsied. Possibly the AI could be trusted enough to make a biopsy on its
recommendation.

------
jseip
It's only a matter of time before all X-Ray, CTScans, etc. use algorithms for
secondary if not primary screens.

------
ashleyn
What makes this different from where IBM Watson failed?

~~~
forgot-my-pw
Watson was mostly a marketing jargon built by IBM. They marketed and sold the
product before the technology was ready.

Google, Microsoft, Facebook, (and probably soon Amazon) have advanced the AI
industry further than IBM at this point. You can predict this by the number of
papers released by each company. Stats from 2017:
[https://medium.com/@chuvpilo/whos-ahead-in-ai-research-
insig...](https://medium.com/@chuvpilo/whos-ahead-in-ai-research-insights-
from-nips-most-prestigious-ai-conference-df2c361236f6)

------
option_greek
One thing for sure is that all these AIs (or their creators) are pretty good
at marketing than the actual doctors :).

------
Daviey
What is the Google's long term goal here? Is there a plan to monetise this?

~~~
gremlinsinc
Seriously? Build AI hospital, charge 1/2 the cost across the board, begin
replacing doctors/surgeons worldwide w/ google doctor. If google could take
home 1/3rd of all GDP spending on medical that would make them the top company
in the world.

~~~
JPLeRouzic
Are not they searching for new area to expand their business? Their turnover
is around $150b, if they go in healthcare they could reach $1 trillion. Which
other business path can safely offer similar potential?

