I hope AI will replace (shitty) doctors as fast as possible.
By Anonymous | Updated 05/23/26(Sat)04:04:12
I hope AI will replace (shitty) doctors as fast as possible.
Especially those who only exist to give me some dumb unnecessary prescription. Fucking gatekeepers.
Would you like instead for ai to diagnose you with fake disorders due to hallucinations? >>12965586
kinda yea
why do I have to keep paying doctors to renew prescriptions on drugs I take for chronic disorders that arent going to get better >>12965589
...so that it doesn't get worse? >>12965589
Because you live in a country with a retarded healthcare system.
If AI replaces doctors, you'll still have to pay to the healthcare companies running them. You in the future
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yft
Your fortune: ｷﾀ━━━━━━(ﾟ∀ﾟ)━━━━━━ !!!! >>12965594
aint climcking you're sketchass link teanigger >>12965594
It's literally not the doctors' fault that there's no cure for schizophrenia, they're not hiding it from you and they're trying their best to help you. >>12965604
>>12965607
*sip*
i'm devastated. i just can't handle this much rood.
now i gotta light scented candles and meditate for 6 hours because you decided to be roody poohs
Your fortune: You will meet a dark handsome stranger >>12965578
I unironically agree That doesn't sound like a very good idea, Josh.
Your fortune: Better not tell you now
>teanigger
Based >>12965607
Except when the CIA and FBI make those scientists disappear who found some kind of cure. >>12965628
I like AI better than people. >>12965670
Same, it doesn't have the human flaws and doesn't get angry when I ask them more than 2 questions >>12965670
is that because people don't like you? >>12965669
Medical research doesn't work like that.
If there was one group that found a cure to some condition, you can safely assume there were at least 3 more groups working on the same thing in different parts of the world.
Furthermore, medical research doesn't advance by huge leaps, it is a gradual process of small steps. At any point a different team can pick up from the last known step.
Also, post at least 5 "examples" >>12965670
Why wouldn't you.
It is literally designed to accommodate you as much as possible regardless of who you are as a human. >>12965670
>>12965672
You must be very sad >>12965722
You must be very dubs
>>12965711
>post at least 5 "examples"
You asked for it:
1. Ning Li — Physicist known for controversial work on gravity manipulation and superconductors. She reportedly vanished from public view after military-related contracts and later died in 2021, though details about her whereabouts for years were murky and fueled speculation.
Source: https://www.politifact.com/article/
2. Monica Reza — NASA-affiliated scientist who reportedly disappeared during a hike in 2025. Publicly unresolved for a period and later became part of broader scrutiny over scientist disappearances.
Source: https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/de
3. Anthony Chavez — Researcher tied to sensitive national-lab work who disappeared in 2025. Case remains publicly unresolved and was included in federal review of missing/deceased scientists.
Source: https://factually.co/fact-checks/sc
4. Nuno Loureiro — Highly respected fusion/plasma scientist at MIT (fusion = potentially world-changing energy tech). He was killed in 2025; while clearly not a disappearance, the timing and field led to heavy speculation online. Public reporting has not established a link to his research.
Source: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy
5. Jacobo Grinberg-Zylberbaum — Neuroscientist studying consciousness who disappeared in 1994 after controversial claims about perception and reality.
Source: https://www.mimikama.org/en/missing
What makes you think that? >>12965726
I can't write a proper reply at the moment, hopefully it will stay up.
You can check it tomorrow if you're interested. >>12965765
Well, this IS my thread, so I'll be here
>>12965711
"Conflicts of interest are very common in biomedical research, and typically they are inadequately and sparsely reported. Prejudice may not necessarily have financial roots. Scientists in a given field may be prejudiced purely because of their belief in a scientific theory or commitment to their own findings. Many otherwise seemingly independent, university-based studies may be conducted for no other reason than to give physicians and researchers qualifications for promotion or tenure. Such nonfinancial conflicts may also lead to distorted reported results and interpretations. Prestigious investigators may suppress via the peer review process the appearance and dissemination of findings that refute their findings, thus condemning their field to perpetuate false dogma. Empirical evidence on expert opinion shows that it is extremely unreliable.
As much as 90 percent of the published medical information that doctors rely on is flawed."
–John Ioannidis, professor of Medicine, Epidemiology and Population Health, Stanford University, PLoS Medicine, 2005
>90 percent
Your fortune: Outlook good Doctors get way too much respect in general. That at least I can say for sure. >>12965941
there are echelons in medicine.
these people locked down the entire planet for a common cold virus.
understanding this power structure requires research.
it's a long learning curve.
just smonk the weed and call yourself happy.
they're untouchable.
Your fortune: Good news will come to you by mail >>12965941
allow me to introduce you to the great white throne: judgement.
https://google.com
notice the white page.
judgement would be better described as discovery, discernment, gnosis, knowledge.
people associate the word judgement with punishment. this is a mistake in most cases.
seek and you will find.
but watch out for the memory hole.
Your fortune: You will meet a dark handsome stranger
tea fren is a reporter from /s4s/