Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I used Claude Code to get a second opinion on my MRI

antoine.fi

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 748 posts

Re: I used Claude Code to get a second opinion on my MRI

#121

Post by tnchr »

nostrebored wrote: post #97
linsomniac wrote: post #91

~2 years ago I used ChatGPT "deep research" to investigate a chronic sinus infection I'd been fighting for ~3 years. After seeing 3 GPs and 3 visits with an ENT, I fed all the observations I had into the AI. In particular, I couldn't get the ENT to explain why he visually saw, via a scope, evidence of allergic reaction in my sinuses, but then later concluded, after an allergy test, that it couldn't be treated via all…

Daily allergy tablets are associated with huge increases in early onset Alzheimer’s. Glad you found something that works, but might be good to get some of the allergen injections :)

I believe it depends on which ones, the older gen or certain classes of antihistamines

Re: I used Claude Code to get a second opinion on my MRI

#124

Post by cenamus »

nostrebored wrote: post #97
linsomniac wrote: post #91

~2 years ago I used ChatGPT "deep research" to investigate a chronic sinus infection I'd been fighting for ~3 years. After seeing 3 GPs and 3 visits with an ENT, I fed all the observations I had into the AI. In particular, I couldn't get the ENT to explain why he visually saw, via a scope, evidence of allergic reaction in my sinuses, but then later concluded, after an allergy test, that it couldn't be treated via all…

Daily allergy tablets are associated with huge increases in early onset Alzheimer’s. Glad you found something that works, but might be good to get some of the allergen injections :)

Where are getting that from?

All I can find is about 1st gen antihistamines (i.e. Benadryl, which I doubt many people take daily, because of the drowsiness).

Even for those, evidence seems to be mixed at best. "Huge increases" seems like hyperbole.

Re: I used Claude Code to get a second opinion on my MRI

#125

Post by EA-3167 »

bilsbie wrote: post #82
EA-3167 wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People, especially in medical crises, are desperate for answers that they often can't get because their clinicians don't know. The illusion of an all-knowing guru who sounds like their doctor and tells them ANYTHING is extremely alluring. If you're waiting to hear back from a doctor about test results (which these days probably showed up on your online account the moment they were completed) can be agonizing. Ok for…

> but how about Whatever scenario you come up with my answer is the same. As an adult I’d like to be able to choose what tools I use to learn about my condition regardless of how well it works or even if it’s likely to mislead me. There’s risk in every aspect of life and we can’t baby proof everything.

If it's helping you learn about your condition then sure I agree. The issue here is that's not really the case, it's giving you the illusion that you're learning about your condition while feeding you hallucinations and half-truths at best. A recent look at medical advice from these things showed they're no better than a coin flip.

So if you MUST have answers that are at most random guesses, I'd suggest saving a few bucks and asking a coin before flipping it.

Re: I used Claude Code to get a second opinion on my MRI

#126

Post by lazide »

jstummbillig wrote: post #87
rafterydj wrote: post #15

I feel like I'm going nuts. There are other commenters saying this is a good practice they've also done for other injuries. You are saying you are an actual radiologist and immediately clock the problems with its advice. I have seen this pattern over and over again. Anytime someone is an actual expert at anything, AI output appears insufficient or incomplete or outright misleading. It is only when you do not know wha…

No, not anytime someone is an actual expert at anything, AI output appears insufficient. That is why experts in various fields use AI. Then to say "Aha, but all of that is AI psychosis" makes obviously no sense: Why would we trust experts when they offer critique but not when they say "this is helpful"? Overall: People are not insane. AI makes mistakes and, often, fails completely. AI also helps them do things better…

I’ve never seen an expert use AI in their field beyond the initial ‘oh interesting’ stage.

Re: I used Claude Code to get a second opinion on my MRI

#127

Post by meowface »

rafterydj wrote: post #15

I feel like I'm going nuts. There are other commenters saying this is a good practice they've also done for other injuries. You are saying you are an actual radiologist and immediately clock the problems with its advice. I have seen this pattern over and over again. Anytime someone is an actual expert at anything, AI output appears insufficient or incomplete or outright misleading. It is only when you do not know wha…

I may be missing something, but I think it's unclear that the parent poster here is necessarily actually contradicting anything the AI said. It may depend on the exact information the OP wrote to Claude and GPT. The full transcripts would be needed. (Though there is definitely a separate point that a doctor would generally better know all the right questions to ask, while current LLMs may be making certain assumptions.)

The LLM may have, from its "perspective", implicitly thought the OP was telling it that he had strong reason to believe there was no calcification and was not considering the bigger picture of possibly receiving an incomplete/poor assessment from the medical staff. In fact, the issue here may be the LLM overly trusting doctors vs. trusting its own expertise.

Re: I used Claude Code to get a second opinion on my MRI

#128

Post by je42 »

rafterydj wrote: post #15

I feel like I'm going nuts. There are other commenters saying this is a good practice they've also done for other injuries. You are saying you are an actual radiologist and immediately clock the problems with its advice. I have seen this pattern over and over again. Anytime someone is an actual expert at anything, AI output appears insufficient or incomplete or outright misleading. It is only when you do not know wha…

The question is how far is AI off compared to the professional that we have access to. World best experts are not accessible to most of us. :(

Re: I used Claude Code to get a second opinion on my MRI

#129

Post by alistairSH »

throwforfeds wrote: post #100

I've seen a lot of friends and family members almost immediately get offered surgery for shoulder pain. It's just often the default for people that do surgeries for a living. I also had a pretty painful shoulder issue at one point, where the pain just wasn't subsiding for months. I tried massages and acupuncture as I didn't want to do surgery, but it wasn't helping at all. The thing that fixed it for me was just real…

On the flip side, when I had rotator cuff issues, the surgeon recommended months of physiotherapy before resorting to the knife. And it worked. And by weight training regularly with a focus on correct shoulder movement, the pain stays away.

It really seems like if you, as a patient, go looking for a quick fix, that’s what you’ll be offered. And if you educate yourself a bit and then go t for the best fix for you, you usually get they.

Re: I used Claude Code to get a second opinion on my MRI

#130

Post by rvnx »

lazide wrote: post #107
appplication wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the root of AI psychosis. There’s a lot of unpack here, and I won’t go too deep because you can’t really have a discussion with affected folks because their fundamental basis is not evidence, it’s belief. It is weirdly religious in a way, because if you were to present contrary evidence (e.g. experts in a field weighing in about how plausible sounding responses are bunk), you would only be told you don’t beli…

I don’t think they will improve, there is too much incentive to poison the datasets going forward. A lot of the models up to this point have been benefitted - like Google did - from essentially ‘pre SEO’ internet. Now the same tools are being used to generate nigh infinite good sounding bullshit, which poisons the dataset in all sorts of hard to detect ways. To add insult to injury, the human experts are also not as.…

Human doctors use LLMs to diagnose too

OpenEvidence claims

    "More than 40% of U.S. physicians use it daily, and it handled around 20 million clinical consultations per month. Over 100 million Americans were treated by a doctor using it in 2025."
https://www.cnbc.com/2026/01/21/openevidence-chatgpt-for-doc...
Post reply on HN