Posted on 11/16/2018 6:14:05 AM PST by deandg99
That’s progress.
I see it as if they had used their brains and hands and knowledge instead of a robot there would have been no need to try to control the robot and this patient may be alive and recovering instead of dead.
“Stupid” and “off hand” is for science and people to think they can replace human beings with robots in many situations that it’s just not ethically or morally appropriate or wise.
These surgeons and doctors get paid big bucks and yet they treat people like guineapigs and numbers more often than as living human beings with just as much purpose and various abilities that are were much needed on this earth as their abilities as “medical/healthcare providers”.
“it worked in rehearsal”
_John Cameron Swayze for timex watches
The robot was probably making French fries the next day.
Just wait for the headlines when a sex robot kills someone
The conversation probably went something like this: Remember Alfie Evans? You can opt to end up like him or be a guinea pig for our new robtic surgery. Which will it be?
No way to unplug or reboot?
In the UK there may not have been much choice....remember Charlie Gard?
Humans have always had a neurotic tendency to put too much faith in their own creations, whether they are called “artificial intelligence” or “robots”.
Sorry, but the work of man cannot be more intelligent than man.
Surgical robots in the long run will be a lot safer than doctors. One or even a dozen incidents blown out of proportion will not make the current rate of medical malpractice seem safer.
More than 250,000 people in the United States die every year because of medical mistakes, making it the third leading cause of death after heart disease and cancer. So, you think your drunken, tired, doped up disgruntled physician is safer? They are not all either a drunk or drug addicted or disgruntled, but plenty are.
Surgical “Robots” have been around a long time and work very well. Patients have less blood loss, shorter hospital stays and better out comes. I provided anesthesia care for a lot of robotic cases. The problem wasn’t the robot but the surgeon operating it. It is like blame ng car wrecks on cars when it is really the loose nut behind the wheel.
I doubt it. It appears that the patient willingly volunteered to be "guinea pig" for this operation and if so, the hospital likely has all their paperwork in order including signed waivers of liability and so forth.
A civil case could be made by the patient's family if indeed the doctors were not adequately trained and what not as the article implies.
If however, the patient did not realize he would be operated on by a robot, all bets are off and jail time could result for those involved. But I have a hard time believing that a hospital would be that stupid. My wife had an operation recently and I had to sign about a dozen forms for that so I know hospitals are extra careful about exposing themselves to liability.
To me, if there is a physician at the controls then it is not a robot - just a tool.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.