Post

In the context of so-called AI cancer screenings — yes, some stooges suggest apps as actual solutions — these and many other related findings, indicate that people singing the praises of such apps forgot basic stats: > the balance of benefits and harms including overdiagnosis should be reconsidered

Many who push AI solutionism here (and elsewhere) propose that cancer screenings using AI can be "fixed" by collecting more "diverse” (whatever that means) data. This implies datafication is good or even always good maybe and that these models are actually useful so long as we remove the racism...

The problem is not just that a model is racist it's also that there is no reason to assume that we should extract that data, from vulnerable groups, think of HeLa, Tuskegee, these things do not end well, from e.g. Black people (patients!) and put their data into what? An app owned by a company?

so were those false positives or positives in elderly where the progress was slow enough to not matter?

It's a common thing across the board...

i know it is. sorry if my question was imprecise, its morning & i have to travel today x_x has korea had more false positives or is this true positives that nonetheless wont improve life quality bc the cancer grows slow and the patient is old, or bc of another terminal dx. or other reasons ?