Stupid question - robots

SDN Members don't see this ad. (About Ads)

I would say that most of us would believe that robots may replace us at some point in time in the future - whether it be 100 or 1000 years from now.

This topic stems from the Optometry forum where there are these auto-refracting machines that a company plans on putting up at your local supermarket (that was approved by the Utah board, poor optometrists ) that can refract and print out your eye's Rx for you to get your prescription filled at a Lenscrafters or any other optical place.

Someone said that this will happen to medicine too - to which I disagreed that there is nothing in the technological pipeline which can diagnose (h&p, clinical gestalt, ultrasound, interpret XR and CT scans), intervene (central line, intubate, run a code, deep brachials, reduce, conscious sedate, call consults), and multitask (keep the room moving) all while being clinically relevant to the situation. Atleast not in the pipeline just yet.

All they have come up with are diagnostic machines that ask a patient a series of questions and it pumps out the most probable diagnosis - but even that's flawed and it won't work because no one wants the malpractice liability.

But then it got me into thinking - it will happen someday. Perhaps not in our lifetimes or our children's lifetimes.... but it is inevitable.

Just look at how far we have come in the past 1000 years.

I don't know, not exactly an EM-stimulating topic I brought up here, but just some food for thought.

Maybe my senioritis is hitting me now.

Have you not watched the Terminator series? They will someday rebel against their human masters and take over!

"The wars of the future will not be fought on the battlefield or at sea. They will be fought in space, or possibly on top of a very tall mountain. In either case, most of the actual fighting will be done by small robots. And as you go forth today remember always your duty is clear: To build and maintain those robots."

Originally Posted by pinipig523

For me, so far...

Tintinalli for 7 months (I read about half).

Then 1000 questions. Then I did all of Peer VII.

Currently reading through the second half of River's 2 books and will start Peer VIII tomorrow (too tired today).

Then finish up end of January.

And then repeat through the questions before the 2/29/12 inservice.

After that, I'll go back to reading another 500-700 pages of Tintinalli before my year is over. Then I'll start with the Ohio Acep CDs for the real deal and re-read my stuff. :

I'm quoting pinipig523 previously stated study regiment for the inservice exam....clearly, we've already been infiltrated by robots and it's only a matter of time.

To replace EPs you would have to have a system that could do diagnosis, management and procedures.

The current state of computer diagnosis is poor. We can see this in the results patients achieve when they try to use the internet to self diagnose.

I think that medicine in general and EM in particular fall into the category of things computers are really bad at. The amount of gestalt recognition, understanding emotion, secondary gain, body language and so on are very tough for machines.

China will soon fall into rebellion and chaos, and nobody will know how to build robots anymore, so this won't be an issue.

I have said it before on SDN - the intubating robot. You just sit it on the patient's face. There is suction, a CCD camera, and a chemical sniffer for CO2. The robot can get in just like a fiberoptic, and identify the cords compared to protocol, and can find it's way through distorted anatomy. Combined with the CO2 sniffer, it just plugs the tube in. If it is attached to a circuit, it starts ventilating immediately. I have predicted this to happen sooner than later. The technology already exists.

Originally Posted by Apollyon

I have said it before on SDN - the intubating robot. You just sit it on the patient's face. There is suction, a CCD camera, and a chemical sniffer for CO2. The robot can get in just like a fiberoptic, and identify the cords compared to protocol, and can find it's way through distorted anatomy. Combined with the CO2 sniffer, it just plugs the tube in. If it is attached to a circuit, it starts ventilating immediately. I have predicted this to happen sooner than later. The technology already exists.

It'll be like one of those little sewer dredging robots.

Originally Posted by AztecTurtle

"The wars of the future will not be fought on the battlefield or at sea. They will be fought in space, or possibly on top of a very tall mountain. In either case, most of the actual fighting will be done by small robots. And as you go forth today remember always your duty is clear: To build and maintain those robots."

Yes.... we must build and maintain those robots. ROFL!!!

Originally Posted by blackavar

I'm quoting pinipig523 previously stated study regiment for the inservice exam....clearly, we've already been infiltrated by robots and it's only a matter of time.

**Uh oh... danger Will Robinson!**

EKG machine reads are pretty much a sign. They are okay, but still not accurate.

Originally Posted by EM2BE

EKG machine reads are pretty much a sign. They are okay, but still not accurate.

Our EKG machines are particularly weird. There's one that reads everything as "Junctional Rhythm." That thing can't find a P wave to save its life. We pay no attention to it but it makes for good learning for the students. "What rhythm is this?" Pimp Pointer: Whenever an attending hands you an EKG and asks what the rhythm is it isn't what the machine read it as.

Originally Posted by Apollyon

I have said it before on SDN - the intubating robot. You just sit it on the patient's face. There is suction, a CCD camera, and a chemical sniffer for CO2. The robot can get in just like a fiberoptic, and identify the cords compared to protocol, and can find it's way through distorted anatomy. Combined with the CO2 sniffer, it just plugs the tube in. If it is attached to a circuit, it starts ventilating immediately. I have predicted this to happen sooner than later. The technology already exists.

Originally Posted by Tiger26

First: bastards! If they are on SDN, they stole my idea! Then again, I am at fault for laches (a legal - ick - term for "sleeping on" an idea).

Second, it looks like it is driven by a ThrustMaster T-Flight Hotas. It doesn't look completely automated/hands off/operator independent.

I've heard that they know of a computer program that has 100% diagnostic accuracy, and can identify MIs, PEs, & fibromyalgia with 100% sensivity and specificity. It doesn't cost the hospital too much either. The only reason I still have a job is because our group gets better press ganey scores than the machine.

Originally Posted by Apollyon

First: bastards! If they are on SDN, they stole my idea! Then again, I am at fault for laches (a legal - ick - term for "sleeping on" an idea).

Second, it looks like it is driven by a ThrustMaster T-Flight Hotas. It doesn't look completely automated/hands off/operator independent.

It also looks real fast. Except not that.

I assume this intubating control mechanism is designed to allow a remote operator to intubate. I don't know that that is such a great idea. The skill set for doing easy intubations can be easily, quickly and cheaply taught to personnel that could be on scene (i.e. paramedics, corpsmen) much more cheaply than this apparatus. Difficult airways are problematic but this device does not appear that it would be able to handle those either.

I certainly appreciate that this might be a step on an evolutionary path to something useful but it looks like that is a long time off.

OP I dont think robots will be replacing anyone in our generation.

As soon as computer hardware can be integrated with our brain I dont think there will really be a need for any physicians. Its called the singularity and its coming in the next few hundred years.

The rate processors and hardware increases...eventually every word, ever video, ever picture, and computer program will be stored in the size of a watch battery implantable into your brain and the processors will be able to outpace the human brain by millions of time.

Of course far before that inject-able nanotechnology will control everything in our body...so most physicians will not be needed.

If you had nanobots to deliver oxygen, kill cancer, and regulate every chemical concentration throughout the body what are physicians going to be needed for?

Although its doubtful anyone posting on this thread will see this in their lifetime.....maybe my grandchildren.

Originally Posted by link2swim06

OP I dont think robots will be replacing anyone in our generation.

As soon as computer hardware can be integrated with our brain I dont think there will really be a need for any physicians. Its called the singularity and its coming in the next few hundred years.

The rate processors and hardware increases...eventually every word, ever video, ever picture, and computer program will be stored in the size of a watch battery implantable into your brain and the processors will be able to outpace the human brain by millions of time.

Of course far before that inject-able nanotechnology will control everything in our body...so most physicians will not be needed.

If you had nanobots to deliver oxygen, kill cancer, and regulate every chemical concentration throughout the body what are physicians going to be needed for?

Although its doubtful anyone posting on this thread will see this in their lifetime.....maybe my grandchildren.

, M.D.?

Hey guys! Some day, like in the year 2000, there are going to be flying cars! .... oh wait. Crap.

I would place money that none of these predictions ever come true. Either the technical implication will be physically impossible or the finances will never pan out. We're heading for an energy, metals, and fiscal crisis.

As for nanobots: If you thought estbestos was bad for the lungs - just wait...

Originally Posted by yappy

Hey guys! Some day, like in the year 2000, there are going to be flying cars! .... oh wait. Crap.

I would place money that none of these predictions ever come true. Either the technical implication will be physically impossible or the finances will never pan out. We're heading for an energy, metals, and fiscal crisis.

As for nanobots: If you thought estbestos was bad for the lungs - just wait...

Strong word, my friend. Leonardo's drawings seemed totally outrageous at the time, but we now have things that can fly us anywhere in the world

I've read up on the futurists that are making these predictions you will see that they are pretty out of touch with science. They're making money off of outragous claims when they dont even understand where we're at. How is it they can predict with any accuracy that they know where we're going?

But yeah, I would argue that the finances will not be their in the future for alot of this stuff for the whole population. We cannot even deliver the health-care-services-to-standard we have to every person. With looming debt crisis in most 1st world countries, ever growing populations, and scarce physical materials needed I find it hard to buy into - the writing is on the wall.

Indeed, bits are getting cheaper but atoms becoming more and more expensive.

Originally Posted by Tiger26

wow thats slow as hell, you can see the attending getting increasingly nervous

Looks like they were working on an obese patient, not sure why anyone would consent to this sort of shinnanigans

Originally Posted by Braves123

wow thats slow as hell, you can see the attending getting increasingly nervous

Looks like they were working on an obese patient, not sure why anyone would consent to this sort of shinnanigans

I like the way he's gripping his hands behind his back for the whole thing. You definitely get a sense that he'd just like to dive in and get it done (as would I in his situation), and that he's really having to work hard not to get involved.

Originally Posted by docB

Our EKG machines are particularly weird. There's one that reads everything as "Junctional Rhythm." That thing can't find a P wave to save its life. We pay no attention to it but it makes for good learning for the students. "What rhythm is this?" Pimp Pointer: Whenever an attending hands you an EKG and asks what the rhythm is it isn't what the machine read it as.

I've started running into that also. My old hospital was absolutely baffled by paced rhythms, but the EKG machines here read almost any lower than average P-wave voltage as a junctional rhythm.

Originally Posted by yappy

I've read up on the futurists that are making these predictions you will see that they are pretty out of touch with science. They're making money off of outragous claims when they dont even understand where we're at. How is it they can predict with any accuracy that they know where we're going?

But yeah, I would argue that the finances will not be their in the future for alot of this stuff for the whole population. We cannot even deliver the health-care-services-to-standard we have to every person. With looming debt crisis in most 1st world countries, ever growing populations, and scarce physical materials needed I find it hard to buy into - the writing is on the wall.

Indeed, bits are getting cheaper but atoms becoming more and more expensive.

I dont think they are out of touch with science just terribly inaccurate about timelines becuase they dont consider the economic forces.

If you went back 500 years ago and told someone we could go to the moon they would say you are making outrageous claims. There is no way nanobots will be widespread in your lifetime, but if the civilized world doesnt self destruct by year 3000 I would bet computers and humans will be one. Of course its no fun to talk about stuff that will not happen within our generation but that is closer to reality.

I think cancer "cure" rates will approach 100% within the next 100 years for most types with gene therapies. Also I would imagine organ will be grow not harvested for transplant by the end of our generation.

As pertaining to "flying cars by 2000" it all comes down to economic forces. I dont know many people who would put up 100K for a flying car. Yet I know alot of people who would give up their life savings to have their cancer cured. You have to consider economic forces in the development of all this technology.

The market for medical "cures" is there 1000X greater than for a flying car...just sayin.

The reason I thought they didn't have a firm grasp on science was because he mentioned that biological evolution always makes organisms more and more perfect/better. Because of this I felt that the author of the book that talks about nano, AI, etc. may not have his facts straight in other areas. To be honest the book seemed like a science fiction novel more than a accurate description of the future. But who knows - I guess that's kinda the point.

I agree that it's very hard to predict what the future will be like. Had I lived 500 years ago and told me about the moon landing I would be blown away. However, I would most likely make all sorts of assumptions about other advances that we have not made yet.

I agree with your view on economics. We live in a finite universe.

Originally Posted by stooges287

Strong word, my friend. Leonardo's drawings seemed totally outrageous at the time, but we now have things that can fly us anywhere in the world

That look nothing like those drawings. Especially the corkscrew one.

Originally Posted by Dr.McNinja

That look nothing like those drawings. Especially the corkscrew one.

Ok, so he didn't draw a 747. Use a little imagination. They had to start with something.

Originally Posted by stooges287

Ok, so he didn't draw a 747. Use a little imagination. They had to start with something.

He drew a bird. I'm not ridiculing the fact that he had foresight, but you all are comparing this to the myriads of people who drew other flying machines that didn't pan out. Just as today, there are multiple competing science fiction ideas about the future. One will likely be right. But we can't know which one it is.

This is what I was trying to get at. Thanks for saying it better than I.

Originally Posted by Dr.McNinja

He drew a bird. I'm not ridiculing the fact that he had foresight, but you all are comparing this to the myriads of people who drew other flying machines that didn't pan out. Just as today, there are multiple competing science fiction ideas about the future. One will likely be right. But we can't know which one it is.