A system stretched to breaking
point. Perhaps the solution lies not
with more doctors, but with machines
powered by artificial intelligence.
We are very quickly going to reach a
tipping point where AI can transform
health care.
This is a research
project at the moment. But the
potential is enormous.
For the NHS,
AI could mean better care and lower
costs as machines take on some of
the jobs done by doctors their power
comes from not just analysing images
in milliseconds but learning from
the data they collect. Deepmind Is
leading the way in AI not just in
the UK but in the world. It was set
up by three partners in 2010. Four
read years later it was bought by
Google for £400 million. -- four
years later. This gives us a sneak
preview into a new type of health
care that patients laugh. But it
also unnerves people worried about
medicine slipping into corporate
control. One of the founders talked
to us exclusively about the
company's project with the NHS.
What
I am really worried about is that
the fear and the reactionary
paranoia is going to limit the
access to what is clearly going to
be an incredibly valuable technology
which will change people's lives.
In
the UK the total cost of blindness
is £28 billion every year. Equal to
a fifth of the health Budget. Every
220 people go blind because of
macular degeneration, a completely
treatable condition when caught in
time. The Royal College of
ophthalmologists says patients with
and acute version of the condition
should be seen within two weeks. At
Deepmind the technology they are
pioneering is getting machines to
teach itself. Last year, in a
ground-breaking moment, a computer
out smarter the best human brain in
the ancient Chinese game of Go, the
holy grail of artificial
intelligence. This game is special
because there are more possible
moves than they are atoms in the
universe so there is no way of
calculating every option on the
board. Instead, the machine have to
mimic, learned from experience, a
little bit like the human brain.
Every time it did this it got better
and eventually it beat the Grand
Master. Now the same technology is
being used to save people's site. LA
knows all about the trauma that can
bring. 15 years ago she started to
go blind in her left eye. -- Elaine
knows all about the trauma.
I
remember it. I was walking along a
path in the woods. The shadows were
getting darker and darker.
Everything was getting dimmer and
dimmer. And I felt less than a
person. I felt... I felt alienated
from everybody else.
Then just three
years ago Elaine faced the prospect
of losing the site and have the eye,
as well.
I waited maybe six to eight
weeks for an appointment, worrying
all the time that something dreadful
was going to happen to this I. Just
thinking about what the consequences
would be if you Bartholdi while
blind you are vulnerable. And life
for me, then, would not have been
worth living, it really wouldn't.
Thanks to AI it has turned out to be
a very different story for her. She
was one of the first AI patients at
Moorfield. And instead of living in
the shadows she spends her time in
the clouds. She is raising money for
other patients facing blindness.
How
was it?
Absolutely fantastic.
This
is AI in action. It looks like a
normal scanner but inside there is a
machine learning a tool that can
analyse thousands of complex images
almost instantly. They show not just
the back of your eye but the
cross-section of the retina at a
higher magnification than an MRI
machine.
This is part of your
central nervous system...
Hours of
work for a person, just a few
seconds for a machine.
A common
cause for blindness is AMD. The
thing about it is that 200 people
every single day, just in the UK,
get the blinding forms of it. The
Royal College of ophthalmologists
suggest these patients should be
seen and treated within two weeks of
the onset of their symptoms. The
reality is that on the NHS that
target isn't being met. AI would
allow us to identify those patients
and get them treated not just within
the two weeks, but potentially
within two days.
Artificial
intelligence is a remarkable
achievement. You can see that in a
place like this, but with it comes
some very serious dilemmas. Will
people ever accept mistakes made by
machines because there will be some?
And when those mistakes take place
in who is responsible, the machines,
or the people behind them?
There was
a problem over lack of clarity and
liability issues when you get into
things like machine learning. If you
take something like health care,
within a short space of time it may
become negligent for a doctor not to
use and AI aid. But in that
situation who is to say who is
liable? Is it the machine 's fault,
or visit the doctor who hasn't
really assessed that the outcome of
the tool is valid? These are
difficult issues. It always has to
become in my view, the doctor Who
remains liable. We've already seen
it in an interesting experiment in
Sweden where some sort of machine
learning bot was let loose on the
dark web. It was given 100 euros per
week to go and spend on the dark
web. It went off and bought illegal
drugs, firearms, and surveillance
equipment. The authorities found out
about this thing and came in and
arrested it. Of course, you cannot
arrest a machine, but we hear these
things, and ascribe liability to
machines, when, of course, the
things being done really the
responsibility of the people who set
spot free.
AI is now being used in
specialities beyond ophthalmology
despite the doubt. At this hospital
it is being trialled in both heart
surgery and pioneering feat all
scans.
What artificial intelligence
allows us to do is to capture the
training and experience of thousands
of people very quickly. -- and
pioneering foetus scans. We captured
a lot more than any single person
could capture in a lifetime.
For
Rebecca Hooper and many other
mothers, these scans show details
never seen before.
A lot of the
systems we have are overwhelmed. We
are talking about millions of
pictures being created at each
centre where the scanning is being
carried out. It'll help you to see
if there is anything wrong with the
baby.
If AI can do all that is this
the end for doctors?
You have to
think about the systems as being
tools. Just like scanners and
scalpels. They are assistants which
help humans to do better.
As a
creator of the technology he is a
believer, of course, but despite the
progress at Moorfields Deepmind has
been brought into controversy after
a hospital was given access to the
information of patients and doctors.
But it raised doubts about whether
such a big project should be awarded
to a commercial organisation,
despite it having nothing to do with
AI. It leads to some questions about
privacy for Deepmind.
We can protect
and store this data. In addition, we
subject ourselves to the highest
level of oversight. We have a panel
of independent reviewers who we have
invited proactively to scrutinise us
in the public interest. We've given
them a Budget to check out what we
are doing, interview our staff, and
hopefully they will publish a report
at the end of the year.
You accept
that there is a concern that the
information could be used
commercially?
We've always invited
that the information could be used
commercially? We've always invited
that's gravity. But there are
enormous benefits. -- we've always
invited that scrutiny.
Those
organisations stand to make a
fortune. Economists now describe
data as the new oil. A 21st-century
commodity which will be the driver
for wealth of companies. The
question is will this be at the
expense of individuals? Do you think
machines will help humanity, or will
it entrench inequality?
We have to
think sensitively about any new
technology that is introduced. If we
don't introduce it wisely able
entrench the existing order, put it
that way. If we care about equality
we should definitely start to think
now, which I think is early, and
that's the right time, who benefits
from that technology and how you can
ensure those benefits are as widely
available as possible.
AI technology
can seem like it has been borrowed
from a sci-fi script, but this type
of medicine is coming faster than
you think. There are huge gains to
be made by patients and taxpayers
alike, but there are risks, too,
because those gains depend on us
giving up some of the secrets of our
medical history to corporations we
may not be able to control.
