CEO AMA John Whyte has initiated a debate over one of the hottest topics in modern medicine – if technology could do it better, should it do it instead?

CEO AMA John Whyte has raised a fascinating controversy over the application of artificial intelligence (AI) in medicine. While it could be utilized to enhance diagnostic and therapeutic capabilities, it should not replace the judgment, responsibility and empathy of physicians.

The comments made by the director of the American Medical Association came as artificial intelligence (AI) seemed poised to undertake. “Not help a physician identify the cancer. Not analyze the scan, synthesize your medical history, or recommend the treatment most likely to work.”

The discussion of AI’s role in medicine goes beyond what it could or should do. The more philosophical question, however, is – what medicine should allow it to do?

AI Can Be Powerful Without Becoming the Doctor

Whyte’s argument is straightforward, although it raises more questions than it purports to answer.

While a machine could potentially recognize “an abnormality on a scan or recommend a diagnosis based on algorithms,” practicing medicine entails more than just ticking off boxes.

A Patient Is Not A Diagnostic Puzzle

A physician must grapple with the ramifications of every decision, weighing the costs and benefits and how they apply to that specific patient. Rarely is it a simple matter of choosing between A, B, or C, based solely on their relative merits. Each patient and situation must be considered individually, with all relevant circumstances taken into account. Such an involved procedure may not necessarily lend itself to an algorithm.

Whyte himself notes that there is a difference between AI being able to perform medical tasks and making medical judgments.

Who Takes Responsibility When AI Gets It Wrong?

Perhaps the most fascinating question in this discussion is – who takes responsibility when AI gets it wrong?

Doesn’t medicine, by its very nature, have a responsibility to make the most beneficial decisions for society?

A physician is a licensed practitioner whose services can be regulated – Whyte suggests that those who design AI systems should be held to similar standards. Whyte wants those who create such technology to understand that they bear responsibility for its actions, particularly as its influence grows and it begins to impact society.

It must be noted that Whyte is not unsympathetic to the concept of technology in medicine. On the contrary – he states that the ability of computers to assist physicians is not in question. The problem is that they will have to take on far greater responsibility if they wish to enjoy greater power in the medical field.

AI Could Still Transform Patient Care

There is much to be said for Whyte’s perspective. AI has the potential to augment physicians, increasing their efficiency, effectiveness and accuracy.

It could enable them to accomplish more in less time, while providing high-quality care to more patients. It could bring cutting-edge treatments to patients who might otherwise not have been able to afford it. Physicians in remote locations could provide second opinions to patients thousands of miles away, offering them the benefit of their experience. This is particularly valuable in fields like oncology, where timely diagnosis is crucial to the patient’s survival. Cancer care, in fact, offers an excellent illustration of the value of human judgment in medicine, even as computers take on more tasks.

The Cancer Question Says It All

Whyte’s argument finds its most compelling expression in a single question – would you want an AI to tell you that you have cancer?

After all, the computer could do it, but that does not mean it should.

An oncologic diagnosis is often a defining moment in a patient’s life; they have to grapple with the information and make many difficult decisions based on it. How they spend the rest of their life, what treatment options they choose – all have a significant impact on their quality of existence. They may need to make many difficult adjustments to their behavior, lifestyle and interactions with others. As Whyte notes, “Some moments in medicine require something other than information.”

This, perhaps, is the most fundamental difference between human and machine in medicine.

Business Fortune believes that AI can enable physicians to be more effective. It can make them better at their jobs. However, it cannot replace their judgment, responsibility and empathy, which are essential if medicine is to remain genuinely human.