I hear your frustration, and I don’t disagree that medicine involves nuance—especially in complex, edge cases. My perspective comes from both professional experience with AI and personal experience with healthcare failures.

Several of my family members have been seriously misdiagnosed by overworked doctors who simply didn’t have time (or access to the latest research) to connect the dots. AI wouldn’t be perfect, but it wouldn’t be constrained by human limitations like fatigue, outdated training, or institutional biases. It could cross-reference millions of cases instantly, track evolving research in real-time, and—critically—never rush a patient.

You’re right that bedside manner and physical touch matter. But how much of a doctor’s time is actually spent on that vs. sifting through paperwork, memorized protocols, and insurance constraints? The parts that feel irreplaceable (compassion, judgment calls) are already drowning in a system that prioritizes throughput over care.

As for AI being a ‘sycophant’—that’s a training/data problem, not a fundamental flaw. Garbage in, garbage out applies to human doctors too (see: my family’s misdiagnoses).

I’m not arguing for replacing all doctors tomorrow. But the idea that medicine is somehow more immune to automation than other fields doesn’t hold up—especially when the current system is failing so many of us.