Earlier quoted context omitted.
A medical textbook doesn't engage in trying to diagnose you.
So just diagnostic manuals then?
A diagnostic manual doesn't engage in trying to diagnose you.
ChatGPT Health
371–380 of 677 posts
Re: ChatGPT Health
#372Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
I don’t think this is a fair retort. This is not being marketed towards people who have any inkling about how any of this works. The linked press release is clearly trying to get the average person jazzed up about wiring their medical history and fitness data to ChatGPT. ChatGPT is just suppose to “work” for the lay person and it just doesn’t quite often. OpenAI is already being sued by people for stochastic parrotin…
Doctors get sued all the time. It doesn't mean doctors are no good.
I also don't think ChatGPT will pretend they are replacing doctors / committing to diagnosis with this tool. They will cover their ass legally.
Re: ChatGPT Health
#373I understand all the chatter about LLMs hallucinating, or making assumptions, or not being able to understand or provide the more human/emotional element of health care. But the question I ask myself is: is this better than the alternative? if I wasn't asking ChatGPT, where would I go to get help? The answers I can anticipate are: questionably trustworthy web content; an overconfident friend who may have read questio…
> if I wasn't asking ChatGPT, where would I go to get help? To an MD?
While you are technically correct, we live in the real world. People are busy and/or broke. Many cannot afford to go to the doctor every time they get the sniffles or have a question. Doing some preliminary research is fine and, I’d argue, responsible.
Re: ChatGPT Health
#374Here’s something: my chatGPT quietly assumed I had ADHD for around 9 months, up until October 2025. I don’t suffer from ADHD. I only found out through an answer that began “As you have ADHD..” I had it stop right there, and asked it to tell me exactly where it got this information; the date, the title of the chat, the exact moment it took this data on as an attribute of mine. It was unable to specify any of it, aside…
I feel like the right legal solution is to make the service providers liable in the same way if you offered a service where you got diagnosed by a human and they fucked up, the service is liable. And real liability, with developers and execs going to jail or fined heavily.
The AI models are just tools, but the providers who offer them are not just providing a tool.
This also means if you run the model locally, you're the one liable. I think this makes the most sense and is fairly simple to draw a line.
Re: ChatGPT Health
#375Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
I mean if someone talked to you your whole life assuming you are autistic,that's kind of fucked up ?
In your scenario, maybe yes.
The issue is it doesn't apply here as it's neither a person or a coherent memory/thinking being.
"Thinking" models are basically just a secondary separately prompted hidden output that prefaces yours so your output is hopefully more aligned to what you want, but there's no magic other than more tokens and trying what works.
Re: ChatGPT Health
#376Earlier quoted context omitted.
This actually highlights a big privacy problem with health AI. Say I’m interested in some condition and want to know more about it so I ask a chatbot about it. It decides “asking for a friend” means I actually have that condition and then silent passes that information on data brokers. Once it’s in the broker network it’s truth. We lack the proper infrastructure for to control our own personal data. Hell, I bet there…
What's the difference between Googling diseases/symptoms and asking ChatGPT?
That's a good question. I guess it could be depth of discussion but in the end they both come down to trust.
I guess unless you have an offline system you are at the mercy of whoever is running the services you use.
Re: ChatGPT Health
#377There’s a lot of negativity here. I’ll just say I’m extremely glad I had ChatGPT when I was going through some health issues last year.
Same here, right now (couldn't get up without numb back pain, can barely walk, ChatGPT educated me on the quadratus lumborum muscle and how to solve that ... which was a lot better than my brain going 'well, I'm wheelchair-bound'.
Re: ChatGPT Health
#378I 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…
>23andme was mostly useless. 23andme was massively successful in their mission. Sidenote: their mission was not about helping you understand your genomic information.
Yeah, their mission was to make money and collect data for AI training and other usages.
Re: ChatGPT Health
#379My uncle had an issue with his balance and slurred speech. Doctors claimed dementia and sent him home. It kept becoming worse and worse. Then one day I entered the symptoms in ChatGPT (or was it Gemini?) and asked it for the top 3 hypotheses. The first one was related to dementia. The second was something else (I forget the long name). I took all 3 to his primary care doc who had kept ignoring the problem, and asked…
I've heard a lot of such anecdotes. I'm not saying its ill-intentioned, but the skeptic in me is cautious that this is the type of reasoning which propels the anti-vax movement.
I wish / hope the medical community will address stories like this before people lose trust in them entirely. How frequent are mis-diagnosis like this? How often is "user research" helping or hurting the process of getting good health outcomes? Are there medical boards that are sending PSAs to help doctors improve common mis-diagnosis? Whats the role of LLMs in all of this?
Re: ChatGPT Health
#380maybe the openai moat is the data we shared along the way.
no seriously, openai seemingly lost interest in being the 'best' model - instead optimizing for other traits such as speech and general human likeness? there's obviously codex but from my experience it's slower and worse than the other big 2 in every single way: cost, speed and accuracy. codex does seem to be loved by vibe coders the most that don't really know how to code at all so maybe it is also what they're optimizing for and why it doesn't personally suit me.
others might have better models, but openai has the users emotionally attached to the models at this point even if they know it or don't. there were several times I recommended switching and the response I got is that "chatgpt knows me better".