One thing that all of us are concerned about is our personal health and well-being. But when we are stricken with pain or discomfort, our first thought may not be to make an appointment with a physician to determine the issue. We may turn to the internet and use search engines such as Google to self-diagnose. Is this really a good idea?
The amount of information available on the internet is seemingly unlimited. If you want to know how to do something, a Google search will likely provide you with several videos of people giving step-by-step instructions on how to do it. For example, replacing a cabin filter on your vehicle may seem daunting, even if you know where it is located. Yet with a YouTube video, you will likely have it done in 10 minutes or less, saving you as much as $100.
Not all such information online is correct. We must assess the source of the information and its veracity, which can be difficult.
With health care information, this can be particularly problematic. Fortunately, there are many reliable websites, including the National Institutes of Health, Medline Plus, WebMD, Mayo Clinic and Harvard Health, to name just a few. These can be found by searching the term “health information.” Such websites provide invaluable, high-level information on numerous medical conditions.
Yet physicians spend years learning their profession. For example, after a four-year college degree, internal medicine doctors spend four years in medical school and three years in residency. If they choose to take on additional training to become a subspecialist in cardiology or oncology, their total medical education and training can easily surpass a decade.
The information that they absorb during this period is immeasurable. Yet being a physician is more than just absorbing information. It is about using medical information to recognize patterns, make diagnoses and identify treatment plans that provide the greatest likelihood for disease cure, control and comfort. And then it is sharing this information with each individual patient and working with them for the most optimal outcome.
Moreover, as new information becomes available and evidence-based medicine guidelines change, physicians must adapt their practices to such updates. Keeping up with all such changes can be a daunting task, demanding attendance at professional meetings and absorption of the latest literature.
All these issues explain why artificial intelligence has successfully become a part of the practice of medicine and will play an ever-growing role in the future. AI systems can absorb information far more efficiently than any human. Large language models (LLM) such as ChatGPT can exploit such comprehensive repositories of information to seemingly replicate (or even enhance) the insights and recommendations of the most experienced and capable physicians.
To further complicate the matter, physicians interact with hundreds of patients every month, each with their own unique symptoms, conditions and needs. Today’s medical environment demands that physicians see an ever-growing number of patients each day, squeezing every last dollar out of their time. This creates an environment in which medical conditions can be overlooked, leaving patients vulnerable to misdiagnosis and improper treatment plans.
Sheldon H. Jacobson and Dr. Janet A. Jokela: What should we fear with AI in medicine?
So wouldn’t searching the internet about your symptoms make sense?
There is nothing wrong with taking ownership of one’s health and using the internet to explore possible conditions that match the symptoms that you may be experiencing. However, such online searches should not be the endpoint for your self-diagnosis. It may, however, provide additional information that may complement what a trained physician can provide.
Pharmaceutical companies are exploiting people’s interest in self-diagnosis and self-treatment by advertising directly to people. Images of diabetics enjoying life while taking Ozempic or happy lung cancer patients taking Keytruda motivate people to ask their physicians about such pharmaceuticals. Part of the challenge is that many of these products are very expensive and may not be covered by a person’s health insurance, or they may not be options for people with certain medical conditions. In some cases, these products may be high-end cash cows for the pharmaceutical companies, which is why they invest in direct-to-consumer marketing.
In some cases, alternative, less expensive products may be available that are not advertised and are appropriate, which only a physician could discern.
Moreover, using valuable office visit time discussing direct-to-consumer marketed products that physicians are most certain to already know about may leave physicians less time to focus on patient conditions and appropriate treatment plans.
The best aspect of the online searching of medical conditions is that it empowers each of us to participate in our own health and well-being. Much like how many of us do much of our banking online, self-service has become the norm. Though this has many advantages, when it comes to health, nothing can replace the years of education and training required to become a skilled physician.
So even when Dr. Google is in, it is always best to get a second opinion from a human physician.
Sheldon H. Jacobson, Ph.D., is a professor of computer science at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. A data scientist, he applies his expertise in data-driven risk-based decision-making to evaluate and inform public policy and public health. Dr. Janet A. Jokela, MPH, is the senior associate dean of engagement in the Carle Illinois College of Medicine at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. She is an infectious disease and public health physician.
Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email letters@chicagotribune.com.
