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

ChatGPT Health

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 677 posts

Re: ChatGPT Health

#291

Post by TeMPOraL »

mangamadaiyan wrote: post #258
qgin wrote: post #126

I help take care of my 80-ish year old mother. ChatGPT figured out in 5 minutes the reason behind a pretty serious chronic problem that her very good doctors hadn't been able to figure out in 3 years. Her doctors came around to the possibility, tested out the hypothesis, and it was 100% right. She's doing great now (at least with that one thing). That's not to say that it's better than doctors or even that it's a goo…

Something to think about: perhaps the problem is with the duration of the appointment, and the difficulty of getting one in the first place? Elsewhere in the world, doctors can and do spend more than 12 minutes figuring out what's wrong with their patients. It's the healthcare system that's broken, and it _can_ be fixed without resorting to chatgpt. That it won't is the reality, though

Can't really compete with LLMs on duration of attention - SOTA LLMs can ingest years of research on the spot, and spend however long you need on your case. No place on Earth has that many specialists available to people (much less affordable); you'd have to have 50% of the population become MDs, and that would still cover just one sub-specialty of one specialization.

Re: ChatGPT Health

#292

Post by csomar »

roger_ wrote: post #22

I personally don’t care who has access to my health data, but I understand those who might. Either way, I’m excited for some actual innovation in the personal health field. Apple Health is more about aggregating data than actually producing actionable insights. 23andme was mostly useless. Today I have a ChatGPT project with my health history as a system prompt and it’s been very helpful. Recently I snapped a photo of…

> I personally don’t care who has access to my health data

There's a reason this data is heavily regulated. It's deeply intimate and gives others enormous leverage over you. This is also why the medical industry can charge premium rates while often providing poor service. Something as simple as knowing whether you need insulin to survive might seem harmless, but it creates an asymmetric power dynamic that can be exploited. And we know these companies will absolutely use this data to extract every possible gain.

Re: ChatGPT Health

#293

Post by nadam »

I am amazed at the false dichotomy (ChatGPT vs. Doctors) discussed in the comments. Let's look at it from the perspective of how a complex software is developed with a team of software engineers and with AI assistance. There is GitHub, Slack discussions, Pull Request, reviews, agents, etc...

Why a patient's health cannot be seen this way?

Version controlled source code -> medical records, health data

Slack channels -> discussion forum dedicated to one patient's health: among human doctors (specialists), AI agents and the patient.

In my opinion we are in the stone age compared to the above.

Re: ChatGPT Health

#294

Post by csomar »

fnoef wrote: post #65

I’m kind of torn on this. From one side, I can’t seem to trust doctors any more. I recently had a tooth removed (by the advice of two different doctors), in a claim that it will resolve my pain, which it did not, and now 3 different doctors don’t know what’s causing my pain. Most doctor advice boil down to drink some water and take a painkiller, while glancing for 15 seconds at my medical history before they dedicate…

> Most doctor advice boil down to drink some water and take a painkiller, while glancing for 15 seconds at my medical history before they dedicate me 7 minutes, after which they move to yet another patient.

Most of the time, that's the correct approach. However, you can actually do better by avoiding painkillers, since they can have side effects. There are illnesses that are easily diagnosable and have established medications; doctors typically prescribe what pharmaceutical companies have demonstrated to them. But the rest of the "illnesses," which make up the majority, are pretty much still a mystery.

For the most part, neither you nor your doctor can do much about these. Modern medicine often feels like just a painkiller subscription.

Re: ChatGPT Health

#295

Post by klardotsh »

nadam wrote: post #293

I am amazed at the false dichotomy (ChatGPT vs. Doctors) discussed in the comments. Let's look at it from the perspective of how a complex software is developed with a team of software engineers and with AI assistance. There is GitHub, Slack discussions, Pull Request, reviews, agents, etc... Why a patient's health cannot be seen this way? Version controlled source code -> medical records, health data Slack channels -…

I think you vastly overestimate the number of orgs using “agents” at all in software development, let alone as an active part of the review process for code, and ESPECIALLY the number who consider such bots equally valuable contributors to humans.

They are tools, they are sometimes useful tools in particular domains and on particular teams, but your comment reads like one that assumes they are universally agreed upon already, and thus that the health industry has a trustee example they could follow by watching our industry. I firmly disagree with that basis.

Re: ChatGPT Health

#296

Post by bean469 »

fnoef wrote: post #65

I’m kind of torn on this. From one side, I can’t seem to trust doctors any more. I recently had a tooth removed (by the advice of two different doctors), in a claim that it will resolve my pain, which it did not, and now 3 different doctors don’t know what’s causing my pain. Most doctor advice boil down to drink some water and take a painkiller, while glancing for 15 seconds at my medical history before they dedicate…

> But at the same time technofeudalism, dystopia, etc.

You could run LLMs locally to mitigate this. Of course, running large models like GLM-4.6 is not feasible for most people, but smaller models can run even on Macbooks and sometimes punch way above their weight

Re: ChatGPT Health

#297

Post by Timwi »

ShakataGaNai wrote: post #168
roger_ wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disable memories so each chat is independent. If you want chats to shared info, then use a project.

Unfortunately I don't think that's a good solution. Memories are an excellent feature and you see them on.... most similar services now. Yes, projects have their uses. But as an example - I do python across many projects and non-projects alike. I don't want to want to need to tell ChatGPT exactly how I like my python each and everytime, or with each project. If it was just one or two items like that, fine, I can upda…

I have not really seen ChatGPT learn who I “am”, what I “like” etc. With memories enabled it seems to mostly remember random one-off things from one chat that are definitely irrelevant for all future chats. I much prefer writing a system prompt where I can decide what's relevant.

Re: ChatGPT Health

#298

Post by nadam »

klardotsh wrote: post #295
nadam wrote: post #293

I am amazed at the false dichotomy (ChatGPT vs. Doctors) discussed in the comments. Let's look at it from the perspective of how a complex software is developed with a team of software engineers and with AI assistance. There is GitHub, Slack discussions, Pull Request, reviews, agents, etc... Why a patient's health cannot be seen this way? Version controlled source code -> medical records, health data Slack channels -…

I think you vastly overestimate the number of orgs using “agents” at all in software development, let alone as an active part of the review process for code, and ESPECIALLY the number who consider such bots equally valuable contributors to humans. They are tools, they are sometimes useful tools in particular domains and on particular teams, but your comment reads like one that assumes they are universally agreed upon…

Maybe. But I am working with these agents and I see the sophisticated patterns using LLMs, using ground truth data and human experts working together. It could be much more effective than 'patient asking chatgpt' vs. 'general doctor one-shotting a problem without AI assistance and enough context'.

Re: ChatGPT Health

#299

Post by ndsipa_pomu »

dash2 wrote: post #233
midldei wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> i’m a fitness conscious 30 something white male Right. So able bodied, and the gender and race least associated with violence from the state. > being discriminated against for insurance if you have a drug habit "drug habit", Why choose an example that is often admonished as a personal failing? How about we say the same, but have something wholly, inarguably, outside of your control, like race, be the discriminating…

These points seem to be arguments against giving your health data to anybody, not just to an AI company.

Quite - personal data should remain under your control so it's always going to be a bad deal to "give" your data to someone else. It may well make sense to allow them to "use" your data temporarily and for a specific purpose though.

Re: ChatGPT Health

#300

Post by throwaway12093 »

risyachka wrote: post #285
nomel wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

General doctors aren't trained for problem solving, they're trained for memorization. The doctors that are good at problem solving aren't general doctors.

This. I wouldn't be surprised if AI was better than going to GP or many other specialists in majority of cases. And the issue is not with the doctors themselves, but the complexity of human body. Like many digestive issues can cause migraines or a ton of other problems. I am yet to see when someone is referred to gut health professional because of the migraine. And a lot of similar cases when absolutely random system…

And speaking of migraines, even neurological causes can apparently be tricky: Around here, cluster headaches would go without proper diagnosis for about 10 years on average. In my case, it also took about 10 years and 3 very confused GPs before one would refer me to a neurologist who in turn would come up with the diagnosis in about 30 seconds.
Post reply on HN