Vinay Prasad's first paragraph in his Substack article calling for de-emphasis of science in medical education:
"Medical education has got it backward. We're front-loading biology and anatomy, then backfilling with the principles of evidence-based medicine. We need to flip this equation, placing evidence-based medicine at the fore, right from the get-go. Patients don't care about the biological mechanisms; they care about what helps them get better, regardless of the underlying science. That's the crux of our argument today."
Whether he used ChatGPT to develop this text or not is, ultimately, immaterial.
Vinay Prasad presented this text as his material in his Substack. And should Vinay Prasad feel tempted to remove this article as a "mistake", he should understand that the Internet never forgets, and that his article has already been committed to at least one Internet archive.
Whether the text is the product of ChatGPT or Vinay Prasad's own creative energies is immaterial. Vinay Prasad presented the text and the ideas therein as his. The moment he published that article he by definition gave his full and unequivocal endorsement to those ideas, embracing those ideas as his own.
He cannot now declaim ownership of them.
Whether the text was composed by Vinay Prasad or ChatGPT, my criticism of that text and the ideas therein stands.
Vinay Prasad either approves of science being foundational to medical education or he does not. ChatGPT assembling the particular text advocating the anti-science position is, ultimately, irrelevant.
I am utterly against relying on RCT and EBM as the only guiding principle but some of our basic sciences are also corrupt eg virology. Ultimately I think medicine is a personal doctor - patient relationship and discussion which must be sacrosanct and never controlled by protocols and governments and pharma.
> Given that the prompt provided by Prasad was AI-generated
Unless I misread, I think the prompt was from Timothee Olivier and it was almost an essay by itself with careful instructions on how to construct the essay.
In fact I'm not sure if calling it totally AI generated is accurate since the long prompt explicitly instructs to basically summarize and emulate Vinay Prasad older work
Vinay Prasad's first paragraph in his Substack article calling for de-emphasis of science in medical education:
"Medical education has got it backward. We're front-loading biology and anatomy, then backfilling with the principles of evidence-based medicine. We need to flip this equation, placing evidence-based medicine at the fore, right from the get-go. Patients don't care about the biological mechanisms; they care about what helps them get better, regardless of the underlying science. That's the crux of our argument today."
https://vinayprasadmdmph.substack.com/p/rethinking-medical-education-evidence
Whether he used ChatGPT to develop this text or not is, ultimately, immaterial.
Vinay Prasad presented this text as his material in his Substack. And should Vinay Prasad feel tempted to remove this article as a "mistake", he should understand that the Internet never forgets, and that his article has already been committed to at least one Internet archive.
https://archive.md/yIQ2V
Whether the text is the product of ChatGPT or Vinay Prasad's own creative energies is immaterial. Vinay Prasad presented the text and the ideas therein as his. The moment he published that article he by definition gave his full and unequivocal endorsement to those ideas, embracing those ideas as his own.
He cannot now declaim ownership of them.
Whether the text was composed by Vinay Prasad or ChatGPT, my criticism of that text and the ideas therein stands.
https://substack.com/profile/42691921-peter-nayland-kust/note/c-16354330
Vinay Prasad either approves of science being foundational to medical education or he does not. ChatGPT assembling the particular text advocating the anti-science position is, ultimately, irrelevant.
I am utterly against relying on RCT and EBM as the only guiding principle but some of our basic sciences are also corrupt eg virology. Ultimately I think medicine is a personal doctor - patient relationship and discussion which must be sacrosanct and never controlled by protocols and governments and pharma.
.
Doctors Are Obedient By Nature.
Therein Lies The Problem.
.
> Given that the prompt provided by Prasad was AI-generated
Unless I misread, I think the prompt was from Timothee Olivier and it was almost an essay by itself with careful instructions on how to construct the essay.
In fact I'm not sure if calling it totally AI generated is accurate since the long prompt explicitly instructs to basically summarize and emulate Vinay Prasad older work
When we test an hypothesis in a trial, we inevitably only end up testing how a subject performs in that test.
While it may help formulate a plan, we all know what happens to a plan at its first encounter with reality.
Chat GPT creating a simulacrum is the part that will destroy us. Disconnect people from their creativity, control the narrative.
People will interact with AI for that medical care and doctors will be outta work like everyone else. Move along, nothing to see here.