I got sent this post by a friend yesterday and I read it with my wife (physician). It was interesting although the selective inclusion of details as part of writing a compelling narrative made it difficult to interpret the experience of using AI.

The post seems to portray the fibroid as objectively the cause of the symptoms, although there is no actual evidence of that. My wife tells me that fibroids grow and shrink in size over time, and that larger studies trying to quantify fibroids as a cause of infertility have been inconclusive. A point in time MRI seems to be correlation rather than causation.

It seems the common theme using AI for personal health issues is that post writers (partly due to privacy and length concerns) leave out the gory details like a full timeline of what tests were suggested, what they showed, how many providers were visited, and what treatments were trialled. The timeline is not really clear in this case, but clearly a lot of expensive tests, treatments, and providers happened in the almost four (!) years since they started using AI. Some of those interventions might have happened due to AI advice, and there are clues to this like the mention of possible endometriosis in the biopsy result. Unfortunately, there is just not enough info in the post to know.

That being said, it's clear that AI is helpful for explaining and assisting in advocating for health and luckily there was a positive outcome. Hopefully we can work out the optimal way to incorporate it into the health system.