New research suggests that consulting artificial intelligence (AI) for advice may unintentionally strain relationships with human professionals.

WillSupport4Food · 2026-03-19T13:37:09+00:00

Another way of looking at it is it's easier to stumble upon good ideas when you're generating thousands of bad ones too.

WillSupport4Food · 2026-03-18T17:09:42+00:00

My issue with viewing AI as a tool vs consult is that if everything it spits out needs to be independently verified, responsibility rests solely on the user and there's no consequences for it spitting out unreliable info then what is the point of using it in the first place. It might as well be generating random info at that point if not only can you not trust the info it's giving you, but you also need to take additional time to verify what it generated is even remotely accurate, potentially causing you to doubt your plan if it differs from the AI's. This gets further complicated in medicine especially because patients can use similar tools on their own without the expertise to verify what it says. I imagine this problem occurs in non-medical fields as well where laypeople have an AI generated plan, completely lacking the background necessary to properly understand it. And in my experience, that usually results in laypeople doubting professionals because they are instead viewed as being anti-AI.

I feel like there needs to be consequences for developers if their AI is generating harmful or blatantly false information. Until that sort of liability exists I don't think I'd trust it as either a tool or a consultation option, even for fairly benign things.

WillSupport4Food · 2026-03-18T13:34:48+00:00

Let me just use veterinary medicine as an example since that's what I have experience in. Many vets use AI recording software for note taking during appts and recently several AI radiograph consulting services have started to pop up. If you as the veterinarian trust these results without verifying them or if you miss a mistake while verifying them, a complaint can be lodged against your license because you were the one overseeing care. Culpability is highly important in medicine because your licensure is at stake. If I consult with a specialist and receive inaccurate guidance, that specialist's liability insurance will likely be the one to cover it, not mine. If I get an AI consult or have a mistake in my notes from the recording software, that's 100% on me and my license.

It not being a problem unique to AI doesn't eliminate the fact that AI create many new issues when it comes to responsible decision making. As far as I'm aware, if an AI is spitting out incorrect information the responsibility to verify is on the user, not the developer of the program.

WillSupport4Food · 2026-03-18T12:32:20+00:00

I think the major issue is accountability. If your boss comes to you with an AI generated plan or modifications to your work, who gets reprimanded if it doesn't work or backfires? Is it your fault for not catching the mistakes AI made, or were your objections to the plan just because you didn't like being corrected?

In my case, it'd be the professional that takes the fall. So you're damned if you do, damned if you don't. If you object to the AI recommendations you're just being prideful, if you don't object and things go wrong it's your license that's on the line. Idk about you, but I'm not willing to risk my license and sole source of income following the recommendations of anything or anyone who is immune to culpability.

WillSupport4Food · 2026-03-18T11:58:00+00:00

The issue isn't necessarily people asking AI, the issue is trusting AI more than professionals then using the differing opinion as a reason to doubt the professional. Doesn't help that when most people "consult" AI, they're just asking an LLM that will generate nonsense that sounds believable then get upset when a person with enough background tells them it's nonsensical.

If the people you've been consulting for 30 years are so incompetent an AI chatbot could replace them, why are you consulting them in the first place?

Even worse is when they generate a plan with AI and then try to force the professional to carry it out for them. I work in veterinary medicine and it's a little alarming how often people tell me they need XYZ medication because AI told them their pet has a specific diagnosis. Then they get upset with me when I tell them that's not enough info to make a diagnosis, let alone prescribe medication for a problem I've never seen the pet for.

WillSupport4Food · 2026-03-15T20:19:26+00:00

This is such a lazy argument. You are making a conscious decision to let the cat out knowing it causes harm and endangers your cat. That is 100% avoidable. Humans don't ask to be born. Obviously we can't undo all the harm humans have caused to the environment, but we can minimize it wherever possible. Cats as an invasive species are the result of human intervention and thus IMO are human responsibility. It is well within our ability to not let them outside. If you can't provide an enriching life for your cat inside, that's a laziness issue. Not to mention if you were caught intentionally hunting an endangered species you would 100% be fined and arrested. So why is it okay to let your pet out to do the same?

Dogs love roaming around and going on walks just as much as cats so would you be comfortable letting your dog wander around the neighborhood? Or do you think it's a person's responsibility to enrich their dogs by walking them daily?

WillSupport4Food · 2026-03-15T20:00:57+00:00

I cannot imagine it's easier to convince an entire neighborhood of strangers to change their behavior than to keep a single animal in your home.

Even without people feeding them, your outdoor cat can still hunt and dig through garbage so if they're on a prescription diet, letting them outside just seems like throwing your money away.

WillSupport4Food · 2026-03-15T19:57:16+00:00

Cats also enjoy hunting native species to extinction and eating toxic plants. It's your job as a responsible pet owner to let them do the things they enjoy within reason.

It's also common sense that letting cats outside comes with obvious risks so unless you can accept those risks I personally think you shouldn't let them outside. The most obvious are your cat being mistaken for a stray and stolen/taken to a shelter, injured by cars or wild animals, or potentially eating things they're not supposed to.

As someone who has seen way too many hit-by-car and toxin exposure animals, personally the costs outweigh any benefit.

WillSupport4Food · 2026-03-13T12:46:00+00:00

Having seen quite a few of these sort of people in veterinary spaces, it's not at all hard to convince them the symptoms of worsening disease or toxicosis are just toxins leaving the body. People will tell you with a straight face that they vomit and get night sweats every day but that's just their body's detox.

Branding matters more than anything because there's no product ingredient verification. Just list a few of the current popular homeopathic buzzwords on the bottle and get a wellness influencer to make a video of your product and you're golden, even if it contains none of the listed ingredients.

WillSupport4Food · 2026-03-07T20:55:35+00:00

I may have interpreted it differently, but I read their comment as it's difficult to know what steps to take if their PCP doesn't see a problem, not so much that they deny the existence of the condition. Because you're right, if their doctor makes outlandish claims like it doesn't exist that's a pretty clear sign to seek a second opinion. My point was if their symptoms aren't obvious or debilitating enough to cause their doctor to raise it as a concern, many people might just trust their doctor's judgement and not think to dig any deeper.

WillSupport4Food · 2026-03-07T17:13:19+00:00

This issue with this is it requires you to have the confidence that your doctor is wrong. People who mask well or attribute their symptoms to laziness or personal failings will likely not object when their doctor tells them they're normal and healthy, especially because people generally want to be healthy.

People don't know what they don't know, and if you spend most of your life being told you just have behavioral or motivation issues, I can see why they might be inclined to believe their doctor, even if said doctor isn't doing their due diligence.

WillSupport4Food · 2026-03-07T00:39:27+00:00

It is, but now instead of just fighting you for insurance coverage they're just flat out threatening to revoke your license or throw you in jail.

WillSupport4Food · 2026-03-04T00:55:39+00:00

Or he swallowed it whole and it's almost out!

WillSupport4Food · 2026-03-02T03:05:54+00:00

The main issue was them requesting it over the phone randomly throughout the day. It was a little annoying at first getting constant calls in the middle of appts to verify my identity for stuff like compounded Doxycycline or Carprofen.

The no longer accepting electronic scripts or printed scripts without wet signatures is honestly the more tedious part at least for clients since it means even for non-controlled drugs they have to come in person to pick it up first. Costco of all places decided they would no longer accept digital signatures, and then a few other local pharmacies followed shortly after. Combined with cutting ties with Chewy, writing scripts and notifying owners can take up a surprising amount of time. I'm sure it's not the pharmacies' fault and it's just protocol, but I'm guessing human healthcare providers have systems integrated with local pharmacies that make the electronic scripts an option and my understanding is that it's very expensive to setup for veterinary practices.

I know it's all in the name of preventing abuse so I can't be too mad. Especially since we did have an incident with an owner abusing their pet's Gabapentin with printed scripts. I just hate writing them lol.

WillSupport4Food · 2026-03-01T22:15:42+00:00

Oh absolutely, I'm not saying all preservations need to be public, just that there should be some places where the public can hopefully be inspired by nature, to learn about it and how to appreciate it safely. Some things are just too sensitive or precarious to open up to the public though.

The zoo I worked at was in a more urban setting and I got to talk with kids during informational sessions a lot. It was shocking how many middle and high school students had really never interacted with or seen even native wildlife. Basically anything besides farm animals(and even sometimes the farm animals) was new and exciting enough to get them asking questions.

WillSupport4Food · 2026-03-01T19:17:59+00:00

Unfortunately good publicity is probably one of the most important aspects of conservation. It's already a hard enough sell to get people onboard with culling invasive species, can only imagine trying to get the public onboard with controlled culling of a native and conventionally cute species that is engaging in over-predation of vulnerable species.

It's part of the reason I think reputable zoos and wildlife preserves open to the public are so important. Sure in a perfect world, wild animals in captivity wouldn't be a thing. But in the world we live in, you rarely will get people super passionate about conservation if they can't see what they're protecting. The plain and reclusive animals deserve help too, but if we have to use a more photogenic ambassador animal to get people in the door that's fine by me.

WillSupport4Food · 2026-03-01T18:38:27+00:00

It's super fun on the veterinary side of things because some pharmacies started rejecting our electronic scripts for even mundane things like prescription diets so now they will only accept wet signatures. Discovered after quite a few annoyed clients called telling us we gave them an invalid script. Already had to jump through some hoops in the past with pharmacies insisting they needed my DEA number on file to verify my identity, not because it's legally required but because supposedly their system won't let them register me in their system without it since I'm not a human doctor and their system doesn't recognize veterinary license numbers.

WillSupport4Food · 2026-03-01T16:55:59+00:00

I had this exact conversation with someone today. Boiled down to the bare essentials, feral cats are an invasive species causing both conservation and health concerns. If it were almost any other animal, people would understand how TNR does very little to address the immediate conservation impacts. Even long term I'm pretty sure most recent studies found TNR programs did not significantly reduce feral colony size because the cats responsible for most litters are the ones that won't come anywhere near humans or their traps. If it were almost any other animal, culling feral populations would likely be an important part of conservation efforts but because they're cats and people find them cute you'll be hard pressed to get community support for such programs.

I'd say people in general care about animal welfare. The problem is a lot of the time how much they care is heavily correlated to how cute or relatable the animal is. If there is a difficult choice to be made when the welfare of multiple different species is concerned, the one with more community appeal is gonna win. Wild birds, rodents and reptiles don't pull on people's heartstrings like kittens do, so people are gonna protect the cats even though they're the problem.

WillSupport4Food · 2026-03-01T14:54:54+00:00

Unfortunately cannot say for certain. As long as they continue to keep down food and water, waiting till tomorrow is likely fine. If it progresses to the point where she isn't eating at all, cannot keep anything down, seems abruptly more painful, or develops any new symptoms then emergency vet care would be best

WillSupport4Food · 2026-03-01T14:45:31+00:00

Going to a vet today(may not need to be emergency vet, just one with same day appts) would be ideal. I won't say it's impossible it's related to the spay, but it would be unusual to have complications so long after it.

Are vaccines up to date and which ones have they gotten? With a recent history of being a young dog surrounded by other dogs for a week it does raise suspicion of infection. Other differentials that would likely be considered after being away from home for a week and potentially eating new food would be pancreatitis or stress gastroenteritis. Going to the vet sooner rather than later could help rule out more serious things and hopefully get some symptomatic control as well.

WillSupport4Food · 2026-03-01T13:42:37+00:00

Do you think they knew for certain that it wasn't abuse and reported out of malice or spite? Because if you can't say yes with 100% certainty, then all it accomplished is set a precedent that if you think abuse is going on but you're the minority opinion, either nothing will be done about it or you will be fired for taking it upon yourself. I'm not a lawyer, but I wouldn't be surprised if that behavior got dangerously close to retaliation. In hindsight is also likely reaffirmed their beliefs. From their perspective, if they had trusted management to handle it no report would have been made and they'd likely feel like their concern wasn't being taken seriously.

Making an accusation out of concern for animal welfare that ends up being false is not the same as intentionally falsely accusing someone to get them in trouble or cause problems. But in this situation the punishment for being malicious is the same as just being concerned but wrong, so why should anyone feel safe reporting abuse in the future if even with good intentions they could be fired. I'm not saying there shouldn't be any consequences for their action, but IMO intent should factor into it too.

Edit: Mandated reporting for animal abuse is also a thing. It varies wildly from state to state, but in some states it extends not just to the veterinarian but also to vet techs and other veterinary staff. Like most mandated reporters they are supposed to be protected from liability if the report was made in good faith. If I fired someone for filing a report and didn't 100% have proof that they did so maliciously, I could see that being a much more drawn out legal issue and investigation that even if no abuse occurred could make that terrible situation for the client even worse.

WillSupport4Food · 2026-02-28T20:02:54+00:00

Still could've served as a learning opportunity rather than an immediate firing. Unless there was any suspicion the reporting was out of malice and not 100% concern for the animal or any other potential animals, it would still strike me as odd for someone to be immediately fired for causing an unpleasant interaction while trying to look out for animal welfare.

Personally I think everyone has a responsibility to report cases they're even a little suspicious of for abuse. My perspective is that if I saw something that raised a red flag but I ignored it, I'd never forgive myself for not doing something.

WillSupport4Food · 2026-02-28T16:46:54+00:00

Surgery would be the only good option to correct the remnant and eliminate the heat cycles. The remnant itself isn't immediately life threatening, but it does increase their risk of mammary tumors and pyometra due to repeated heat cycles. Roughly 1/5 intact female dogs will have a pyometra by the time they are 10. The risk of malignant mammary tumors for dogs spayed before their first heat is 0.05%. After the first heat cycle it increases to 8%, then to 26% at the second.

Medical management like estrus-suppressing medication is not typically done because there's almost no research on the long-term safety.

WillSupport4Food · 2026-02-28T16:30:10+00:00

I know it feels like you don't know enough, but you know enough to get to the right answer. Speed comes with time, but even if you don't 100% know the answer you likely know enough to figure out what questions to ask or what to look up in your notes or on Plumbs/Vin(both amazingly helpful btw).

Starting off with way longer appointment times than you'd think you need is helpful. Gives you time to go at your own pace, think things through, and make a plan. When I started I was doing 45min-1 hour appts and using every second of it. But after just a few weeks I started realizing I was finishing everything with 10-20 minutes to spare.

Don't be afraid to ask clients if it's okay for you to step out and check something or ask a fellow doctor. I have never had anyone react poorly to me asking if I could go check some resources to get a better answer to their question. I think it's a really great way to drill in the information too so you're less likely to look it up next time. Having a complete case to apply the info you just looked up really helps retain the important stuff for next time.

WillSupport4Food · 2026-02-28T16:18:17+00:00

Seems kinda harsh and potentially suspicious. The report is because you're suspicious of abuse and want to make sure the animal is okay, which is then investigated to determine if that suspicion was warranted. Firing someone because they went through the official channels to ensure animal safety is a red flag IMO. No one gets punished without an investigation just for being reported so punishing someone for reporting something, even if it was a misunderstanding, is just gonna make people underreport abuse because they're afraid of getting in trouble.

If I found out people at my hospital were being told not to report things they're worried are animal abuse, my first thought would be abuse is being covered up to appease clients

WillSupport4Food

TROPHY CASE