[Re: https://www.hifa.org/dgroups-rss/bbc-using-ai-medical-advice-dangerous-s... ]
Hi Neil,
This is a really important area for an ongoing debate, especially for those of us producing patient information. The “dangerous health information” framing raises several issues that are highly relevant to not‑for‑profit information providers. Media coverage of the Oxford study emphasises “danger” and “hazardous” use, and agree the paper itself is more nuanced about how LLMs perform when used by members of the public alongside other tools.
At present, many not‑for‑profit information suppliers are understandably concerned about LLMs. The persuasive style of AI output can make answers feel authoritative, yet the content often leans more towards satisfying how a question is asked than reflecting the underlying evidence base, and users find it hard to separate accurate from misleading elements. My impression is that current systems are optimised to *please* the reader rather than to prioritise unwelcome but accurate information that might cause someone to disengage and go in search of more agreeable answers.
I do, however, see a constructive role for AI‑generated content. The risk is that its potential advantages will be stifled by an overheated narrative that portrays it as uniformly harmful, rather than as a tool that must be improved, governed and used with care. As with other perceived “threats”, I believe we have a duty to lean in, shape its development, and embed it as an adjunct to high‑quality, human‑produced information, not as a substitute.
Perhaps a helpful analogy is satellite navigation in a car: it can be extremely useful, but the driver still has to pay attention, understand the road, and judge when to override the instructions. In the same way, AI tools can assist with navigation through complex health information, but patients and professionals still need to apply judgement, and trusted organisations must remain in the loop.
Best wishes,
David Chandler
Chief executive (and psoriatic patient)
Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis Alliance (PAPAA)
HIFA profile: David Chandler has diverse experience, being involved in the UK voluntary sector since 1993. He has held the posts of coordinator of the Skin Care Campaign at the National Eczema Society, general manager at Teaching Aids at Low Cost, an international healthcare training and education NGO, Chief Executive of the Psoriasis Support Trust and also co-founded and jointly managed the Psoriatic Arthropathy Alliance with his wife Julie. During this time David has been a patient advocate, and given presentations on the patient perspective in Europe and the US, written and published articles, developed awareness campaigns and been involved in the development of both quantitative and qualitative research. David is currently Chief Executive of PAPAA - The Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis Alliance a UK patient charity. Prior to moving into healthcare advocacy he worked in commercial business. David is also involved in other committees as expert patient and lay public representative, including the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Commission for Human Medicine (CHM)and INVOLVE at the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR). David also has a keen interest in social inclusion and equality issues. davidchandler AT btconnect.com