On Second Thought: The Use of AI for Second Opinions

Not all doctors are “created equal.”  Some outshine others in diagnosis, experience, treatment strategies and overall expertise.  So, when one physician tells you that you have a debilitating disease or a life-threatening ailment, it might not be a bad idea to get confirmation from a different practitioner.  In medical parlance, this is commonly referred to as “a second opinion.”   

 And there are occasions when a second doctor will, in fact, provide a diagnosis that differs from that of the original clinician.  That means that one of those physicians is wrong.  Now, that’s a sobering and even scary thought.  A doctor can be wrong?  But science is science!  Yeah, but science is ever-changing, and there are always those who have different interpretations relative to what the science actually reveals.   

 And, now, those different interpretations might be coming from a machine. 

 Enter artificial intelligence, or AI.  Our readers will already be aware that this relatively new technology—which is currently taking the world by storm—has already found applications within the healthcare industry, to include a direct pertinence in patient care.  But what was recently asserted by a high federal official concerning AI may be raising a few eyebrows and turning a few heads within the clinical class. 

 The Soundbite That Stunned 

On September 29, the secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., was present at a meeting of like-minded officials and guests meant to promote the department’s healthcare goals.  Known as the “Make America Healthy Again” (MAHA) Summit, the group was treated to remarks by both Secretary Kennedy, as well as Vice President J. D. Vance.   

 According to multiple sources, such as The New York Times and Forbes Magazine, Mr. Kennedy—in expounding upon the relevance, usage and potential of AI in the healthcare space—described AI as being able to provide “a second opinion that is much better informed than any doctor in the country.”  He went on to argue that AI offers the capacity to solve the “most daunting public health problems that are otherwise existential.” 

 According to MSN, the HHS secretary said that during a recent meeting, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman told him that two years ago he wouldn’t have told anyone to take medical advice from AI, but now it would be “malpractice” to make a diagnosis or issue a prescription without checking with the technology. 

 The glowing praise for AI and its potential to advance patient care is not altogether unreasonable.  As pointed out by the HHS secretary, the technology has the ability right now to digest a thousand-page medical record and spit out key data points and conclusions.  His point was that doctors would find it difficult to do a better job with such voluminous data given their time restraints. 

 According to Becker’s Hospital Review, Mr. Kennedy’s remarks come as some consumers express confidence in AI-assisted health decisions, pointing to a 2026 Edelman Trust Barometer/Yale School of Public Health poll that indicated nearly half of all respondents put significant trust in the use of AI to address their healthcare needs. 

 Among the more controversial statements made by the health secretary had to do with the ability of consumers to use AI to either corroborate or challenge a doctor’s advice.  That is, AI is a tool that patients could use to check the validity of the guidance coming from public officials and medical experts.  It has the capacity to “free us from medical tyranny,” to use Kennedy’s words. 

Not So Fast 

Needless to say, some in the medical community bristled at the secretary’s remarks and offered their own pushback to many of his statements.  Among them was the American Medical Association (AMA).  The nation’s premier medical advocacy group, along with five other physician organizations, issued a joint statement rebutting Kennedy’s claims.  Here is an excerpt from that statement: 

Statements suggesting AI is inherently better informed than physicians, or that physicians cannot be trusted to make clinical decisions without first consulting this technology, diminish physician expertise and risk undermining patients’ trust.  Physicians evaluate patients in context, drawing on years of training and experience.  They ask questions, understand each patient’s unique needs and circumstances, exercise professional judgment and take responsibility for the care they provide.

Jason Goldman, MD, immediate past president of the American College of Physicians, noted in a video posted on Instagram that Kennedy’s remarks “show his ignorance of and contempt for the medical profession.”  He noted that “artificial intelligence is a tool, and it is only as good as the information being fed into it, and it can make mistakes and come to faulty conclusions. It’s not a second opinion, it’s not a replacement for a physician, and to make such a statement is extremely dangerous and irresponsible.” 

So, clearly, lines have been drawn.  We’re told AI is a tool; but, as the technology is improved over the coming years, one can only wonder whether the use of AI in the diagnosing of patient conditions will substantially increase—especially in light of the projected shortage of medical providers.