logo
AI in health care could save lives and money − but change won't happen overnight

AI in health care could save lives and money − but change won't happen overnight

Yahoo11-07-2025
Imagine walking into your doctor's office feeling sick – and rather than flipping through pages of your medical history or running tests that take days, your doctor instantly pulls together data from your health records, genetic profile and wearable devices to help decipher what's wrong.
This kind of rapid diagnosis is one of the big promises of artificial intelligence for use in health care. Proponents of the technology say that over the coming decades, AI has the potential to save hundreds of thousands, even millions of lives.
What's more, a 2023 study found that if the health care industry significantly increased its use of AI, up to US$360 billion annually could be saved.
But though artificial intelligence has become nearly ubiquitous, from smartphones to chatbots to self-driving cars, its impact on health care so far has been relatively low.
A 2024 American Medical Association survey found that 66% of U.S. physicians had used AI tools in some capacity, up from 38% in 2023. But most of it was for administrative or low-risk support. And although 43% of U.S. health care organizations had added or expanded AI use in 2024, many implementations are still exploratory, particularly when it comes to medical decisions and diagnoses.
I'm a professor and researcher who studies AI and health care analytics. I'll try to explain why AI's growth will be gradual, and how technical limitations and ethical concerns stand in the way of AI's widespread adoption by the medical industry.
Artificial intelligence excels at finding patterns in large sets of data. In medicine, these patterns could signal early signs of disease that a human physician might overlook – or indicate the best treatment option, based on how other patients with similar symptoms and backgrounds responded. Ultimately, this will lead to faster, more accurate diagnoses and more personalized care.
AI can also help hospitals run more efficiently by analyzing workflows, predicting staffing needs and scheduling surgeries so that precious resources, such as operating rooms, are used most effectively. By streamlining tasks that take hours of human effort, AI can let health care professionals focus more on direct patient care.
But for all its power, AI can make mistakes. Although these systems are trained on data from real patients, they can struggle when encountering something unusual, or when data doesn't perfectly match the patient in front of them.
As a result, AI doesn't always give an accurate diagnosis. This problem is called algorithmic drift – when AI systems perform well in controlled settings but lose accuracy in real-world situations.
Racial and ethnic bias is another issue. If data includes bias because it doesn't include enough patients of certain racial or ethnic groups, then AI might give inaccurate recommendations for them, leading to misdiagnoses. Some evidence suggests this has already happened.
Health care systems are labyrinthian in their complexity. The prospect of integrating artificial intelligence into existing workflows is daunting; introducing a new technology like AI disrupts daily routines. Staff will need extra training to use AI tools effectively. Many hospitals, clinics and doctor's offices simply don't have the time, personnel, money or will to implement AI.
Also, many cutting-edge AI systems operate as opaque 'black boxes.' They churn out recommendations, but even its developers might struggle to fully explain how. This opacity clashes with the needs of medicine, where decisions demand justification.
But developers are often reluctant to disclose their proprietary algorithms or data sources, both to protect intellectual property and because the complexity can be hard to distill. The lack of transparency feeds skepticism among practitioners, which then slows regulatory approval and erodes trust in AI outputs. Many experts argue that transparency is not just an ethical nicety but a practical necessity for adoption in health care settings.
There are also privacy concerns; data sharing could threaten patient confidentiality. To train algorithms or make predictions, medical AI systems often require huge amounts of patient data. If not handled properly, AI could expose sensitive health information, whether through data breaches or unintended use of patient records.
For instance, a clinician using a cloud-based AI assistant to draft a note must ensure no unauthorized party can access that patient's data. U.S. regulations such as the HIPAA law impose strict rules on health data sharing, which means AI developers need robust safeguards.
Privacy concerns also extend to patients' trust: If people fear their medical data might be misused by an algorithm, they may be less forthcoming or even refuse AI-guided care.
The grand promise of AI is a formidable barrier in itself. Expectations are tremendous. AI is often portrayed as a magical solution that can diagnose any disease and revolutionize the health care industry overnight. Unrealistic assumptions like that often lead to disappointment. AI may not immediately deliver on its promises.
Finally, developing an AI system that works well involves a lot of trial and error. AI systems must go through rigorous testing to make certain they're safe and effective. This takes years, and even after a system is approved, adjustments may be needed as it encounters new types of data and real-world situations.
Today, hospitals are rapidly adopting AI scribes that listen during patient visits and automatically draft clinical notes, reducing paperwork and letting physicians spend more time with patients. Surveys show over 20% of physicians now use AI for writing progress notes or discharge summaries. AI is also becoming a quiet force in administrative work. Hospitals deploy AI chatbots to handle appointment scheduling, triage common patient questions and translate languages in real time.
Clinical uses of AI exist but are more limited. At some hospitals, AI is a second eye for radiologists looking for early signs of disease. But physicians are still reluctant to hand decisions over to machines; only about 12% of them currently rely on AI for diagnostic help.
Suffice to say that health care's transition to AI will be incremental. Emerging technologies need time to mature, and the short-term needs of health care still outweigh long-term gains. In the meantime, AI's potential to treat millions and save trillions awaits.
This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit, independent news organization bringing you facts and trustworthy analysis to help you make sense of our complex world. It was written by: Turgay Ayer, Georgia Institute of Technology
Read more:
Biased AI can be bad for your health – here's how to promote algorithmic fairness
The White House's 'AI Bill of Rights' outlines five principles to make artificial intelligence safer, more transparent and less discriminatory
What is an AI agent? A computer scientist explains the next wave of artificial intelligence tools
Turgay Ayer owns shares in Value Analytics Labs, a healthcare technology company. He received funding from government agencies, including NSF, NIH, and CDC.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

FACT FOCUS: RFK Jr.'s reasons for cutting mRNA vaccine not supported by evidence
FACT FOCUS: RFK Jr.'s reasons for cutting mRNA vaccine not supported by evidence

Yahoo

time5 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

FACT FOCUS: RFK Jr.'s reasons for cutting mRNA vaccine not supported by evidence

Although mRNA vaccines saved millions of lives during the COVID-19 pandemic, U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. incorrectly argued they are ineffective to justify the Department of Health and Human Service's recent decision to cancel $500 million in government-funded research projects to develop new vaccines using the technology. The longtime vaccine critic said in an X video posted Tuesday evening that mRNA vaccines do not adequately prevent upper respiratory infections such as COVID-19 and the flu, advocating instead for the development vaccines that use other processes. COVID-19 is the only virus for which real-world data on mRNA vaccine effectiveness is currently available, as mRNA vaccines for other diseases, including the flu, are still under development. The two scientists whose discoveries enabled the creation of mRNA vaccines against COVID-19 won a Nobel Prize in 2023 for their work. Kennedy's claim ignores how mRNA vaccines work, according to experts. They prevent against severe infection and death, but cannot completely prevent an infection from occurring in the first place. Plus, years of research supports the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines that use mRNA technology. Here's a closer look at the facts. KENNEDY: 'As the pandemic showed us, mRNA vaccines don't perform well against viruses that infect the upper respiratory tract.' THE FACTS: His claim is contradicted by scientific evidence. Countless studies show that vaccinated individuals fare far better against COVID-19 infections than those who are unvaccinated, while others have estimated that COVID-19 vaccines prevented millions of deaths during the global pandemic. The mRNA vaccines do not prevent respiratory diseases entirely, experts say. Rather, they can prevent more serious illness that leads to complications and death. For example, an mRNA vaccine against COVID-19 may prevent an infection in the upper respiratory tract that feels like a bad cold from spreading to the lower respiratory tract, where it could affect one's ability to breathe. 'A vaccine cannot block a respiratory infection,' said Dr. Jake Scott, an infectious diseases physician and clinical associate professor at Stanford University School of Medicine. 'That's never been the standard for a respiratory virus vaccine. And it's never been the expectation, and it's never been that realistic.' He called Kennedy's claim 'misguided.' Jeff Coller, a professor of RNA biology and therapeutics at Johns Hopkins University, had a similar outlook. 'Vaccinations don't have to be neutralizing, meaning that you're not going to get COVID,' he said. 'But the important part of a vaccination is that they reduce hospitalization and death. And a reduction in hospitalization and death is proof of an effective vaccine.' Vaccines have traditionally required growing viruses or pieces of viruses called proteins and then purifying them. Then a small dose of the vaccine is injected to train the body how to recognize when a real infection hits so it's ready to fight back. But this method takes a long time. The mRNA technology speeds up the process and allows existing vaccines to be updated more quickly. The 'm' in mRNA stands for messenger because the vaccine carries instructions for our bodies to make proteins. Scientists figured out how to harness that natural process for vaccines by making mRNA in a lab. They take a snippet of the genetic code that carries instructions for making the protein they want the vaccine to target. Injecting that snippet instructs the body to become its own mini-vaccine factory, making enough copies of the protein for the immune system to recognize and react. Scott explained that mRNA vaccines are not a 'magic force field' that the immune system can use to block an infection, as it can't detect whether a virus is nearby. It can only respond to a virus that has already entered the body. In the case of COVID-19, this means that the virus could cause an upper respiratory tract infection — a cold, essentially — but would be significantly less likely to cause more severe consequences elsewhere. Myriad studies on the effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines have been published since they first became available in late 2020. Although protection does wane over time, they provide the strongest barrier against severe infection and death. For example, a 2024 study by the World Health Organization found COVID-19 vaccines reduced deaths in the WHO's European region by at least 57%, saving more than 1.4 million lives since their introduction in December 2020. A 2022 study published in the journal Lancet Infectious Diseases found that nearly 20 million lives were saved by COVID-19 vaccines during their first year. Researchers used data from 185 countries to estimate that vaccines prevented 4.2 million COVID-19 deaths in India, 1.9 million in the United States, 1 million in Brazil, 631,000 in France and 507,000 in the United Kingdom. The main finding — that 19.8 million COVID-19 deaths were prevented — is based on estimates of how many more deaths than usual occurred during the time period. Using only reported COVID-19 deaths, the same model yielded 14.4 million deaths averted by vaccines. Another 2022 study, published in The New England Journal of Medicine, reported that two mRNA vaccines were more than 90% effective against COVID-19. Operation Warp Speed, the federal effort to facilitate the development and distribution of a COVID-19 vaccine, began under the first Trump administration. 'What I don't understand is why is President Trump is allowing RFK Jr. to undermine his legacy that led to a medical intervention that literally saved millions of lives?' Coller said. 'Why is Trump allowing RFK to undermine U.S. leadership in biomedical research and drug development?' ___ Find AP Fact Checks here: Solve the daily Crossword

Rivian, Lucid Brace for a Rough Ride as EV Headwinds Intensify
Rivian, Lucid Brace for a Rough Ride as EV Headwinds Intensify

Yahoo

time5 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Rivian, Lucid Brace for a Rough Ride as EV Headwinds Intensify

Rivian (RIVN, Financials) and Lucid Group (LCID, Financials) are warning that the rest of 2025 will be bumpy; policy changes, trade tensions and supply?chain snags are putting pressure on electric?vehicle makers. Rivian shares slid about 4% after hours; Lucid fell roughly 7%. Warning! GuruFocus has detected 5 Warning Signs with RIVN. The Trump administration has reshaped the EV landscape ending consumer tax credits; imposing steep tariffs on imported auto parts; and scrapping emission fines for gas?vehicle makers. China's tighter export limits on heavy rare earth metals critical for EV motors have only made things worse; supply chains are straining under the weight. For Rivian, that's meant higher costs and shrinking side income from selling regulatory credits. The company now expects a deeper adjusted core loss of $2 billion to $2.25 billion this year; that's up from its prior $1.7 billion to $1.9 billion range. Per?unit costs jumped 8% to about $118,375; lower production added roughly $14,000 per vehicle. A three?week production pause in September will prepare its lower?priced R2 SUV for a 2026 launch; management says the model is key to reaching a wider audience. Lucid avoided the worst of the rare?earth crunch by tapping into existing magnet inventory; still, tariffs have eaten into margins. The luxury EV maker cut its annual production goal; it also warned of softer demand in Q4 once the $7,500 federal tax credit expires at the end of September. Analysts expect a rush of Q3 sales as buyers race to lock in the incentive; the risk is that the pull?forward leaves a hole later in the year. This article first appeared on GuruFocus.

Trump says semiconductors will face 100% tariff unless companies build in US
Trump says semiconductors will face 100% tariff unless companies build in US

Yahoo

time5 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Trump says semiconductors will face 100% tariff unless companies build in US

President Trump said that he will implement a 100% tariff on semiconductors manufactured overseas unless the companies have committed to build in the US. Trump made the announcement during a press event in the Oval Office alongside Apple (AAPL) CEO Tim Cook who was on hand to unveil an additional $100 billion investment in research and manufacturing in the US. "The good news for companies like Apple is, if you're building in the United States, or have committed to build, without question, committed to build in the United States, there will be no charge," Trump said. The semiconductor tariff is a part of the Trump administration's Section 232 national security investigation into chip manufacturing. According to Trump, if a company says it will build in the US, but doesn't, it will once again face tariffs as well as back tariffs. The tech industry has been waiting on tenterhooks to find out what semiconductor tariffs would look like, and whether they would apply to individual semiconductors or to chips built into devices. Additional tariffs could drive up the price of everything from smartphones and laptops to home electronics and more. Apple also is also expected to dodge Trump's newest tariffs on India, which could reach as much as 50% in three weeks, with a White House official saying that the company wouldn't have to deal with the bulk of the tariffs. Email Daniel Howley at dhowley@ Follow him on X/Twitter at @DanielHowley. Sign in to access your portfolio

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store