[zoomablemind]

Is ML result considered as a first/second opinion, or as just 'a quick check' for reference only?

I believe that ML should not be taken in lieu of human opinion. The consensus, be it medical or legal, has to be explicitly human with all the responsibility attached.

Shifting the responsibility for the misses onto a faceless ML is only eroding trust in the professional opinions and cementing the biases.

[jogundas]

I fully agree that treatment should be prescribed by a human doctor who can explain and answer questions. However, I would not agree that each of the data inputs to the treatment decision should be generated manually. That is already not the case.