| Hmm that's not what I read from the article. The author says the opposite, actually: > [the orthopedist] suggested I get an MRI, which the clinic conveniently had available. [...] This, of course, means little to me, but their suggested course of treatment was extensive; [...] Coming out of the clinic, I had the feeling they had jumped the gun. The author also says: > They injected me with Traumeel, which is registered in Germany as a homeopathic medicine "without a therapeutic indication". I personally wouldn't want to be injected homeopathic medicine "without a therapeutic indication" without even knowing it is homeopathy. And my recent experience with multiple doctors at multiple hospitals is that just like LLMs, you shouldn't blindly trust them. Sometimes they make mistakes, and in my experience they never, ever admit it (maybe even to themselves). So trying to get informed "on the internet" (including with LLMs) feels sane to me, but that's worth what it is worth. What concerns me in the article is that they have GPT make a diagnosis, Claude review it, and somehow seem to assume that if both LLMs agree, they must not be completely wrong. Just like for code, it takes an expert to leverage an LLM to take an expert decision. A beginner can leverage the LLM to understand the problem better, but they never reach the level of expert just from that. Unfortunately it's part of lowering the confidence towards doctors, and the solution to that is to try and get informed and ask another doctor. And of course they don't like it if you say "I already asked someone else but I don't trust doctors in general, so I am now asking you to test the both of you". |