Researchers at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland have found through an actual experiment that robots could be used in surgery. A robot performed a flawless gall bladder removal on a patient guided only by AI input. The patient made no complaints, being a model of a human.
It's easy to accept that there's a real future for AI in medical diagnostics, since that aspect of medicine is already immersed in digital input. The point of the research must be that a. there aren't enough humans presently capable of surgery and unlikely to be more in the future; b. it's more cost effective to build surgery robots than educate humans in the field; c. a trained robot could work 24 hours per day seven days a week: c. the robot would demand no compensation for its work but it's likely that its owner would; d. being machinery the robots will be continuously technically improved and replaced by better robots.
Certainly there would be no more operations performed by surgeons with hangovers or the lingering effects of an argument with a housemate. But in reality is there an advantage in the outcomes? Will people survive surgery and live better lives if their knees are replaced by machines? Will heart surgery become a routine affair with robotic surgeons? If something is possible does that mean it should be done?
No comments:
Post a Comment