Humans meet the sinister side of CAD

Article

It is a fact of capitalism that vendors tend to sell their products to whoever wants to buy them. Seldom in diagnostic imaging has there been a moral imperative to do otherwise. Ultrasound equipment is sold to radiologists as well as to cardiologists,

It is a fact of capitalism that vendors tend to sell their products to whoever wants to buy them. Seldom in diagnostic imaging has there been a moral imperative to do otherwise. Ultrasound equipment is sold to radiologists as well as to cardiologists, vascular surgeons, ob/gyns, and ophthalmologists. Gamma and PET cameras go to radiologists, cardiologists, oncologists, and neurologists. Radiologists might want to control the technology, but that argument has not been sufficient to restrict the rights of other people.

The possibility that CAD systems such as R2’s ImageChecker might be sold to malpractice lawyers, however, is a much different situation. In this instance, the equipment would not be used for its intended purpose: to identify disease so as to improve the health of patients. Rather it would be used against physicians and to line the pockets of those who would professionally injure medical practitioners.

I am appalled but not surprised by this prospect. It is almost inevitable that the darker side of technology arises to counterbalance the good, often in unpredictable ways. Who would have guessed a century ago that the discovery of processes for nitrogen fixation, the crucial step in the manufacture of plant fertilizer, would also pave the way for the discovery of TNT? Mass-produced fertilizers helped avert the worldwide famine that would almost certainly have occurred at the turn of the last century, but the technology also laid the foundation for two world wars and horrific acts of terrorism.

While the damage that might result from lawyers’ misuse of CAD would be far subtler and less egregious than the misuse of some other technologies, it may be more sinister, because it would pit human against machine. Conclusions reached by algorithms would be compared to interpretations made by people. Such an adversarial circumstance taps a deep-seated fear going back to the Luddites of the early 1800s, who rallied against the burgeoning textile industry in England and later against threshing machines used by farm workers. Technology threatened their livelihood and way of life. Luddites fought back, but the economic benefits of the machines they fought against were judged by society as more valuable-and the Luddites lost.

How CAD is used in the future is unlikely to be based on morality or ethics. Now, as two centuries ago, fear may militate against certain uses of technology, but ultimately the applications to which technologies are put will be determined by society-and the economic viability of the services being rendered.

Recent Videos
Improving Access to Nuclear Imaging: An Interview with SNMMI President Jean-Luc C. Urbain, MD, PhD
SNMMI: 18F-Piflufolastat PSMA PET/CT Offers High PPV for Local PCa Recurrence Regardless of PSA Level
SNMMI: NIH Researcher Discusses Potential of 18F-Fluciclovine for Multiple Myeloma Detection
SNMMI: What Tau PET Findings May Reveal About Modifiable Factors for Alzheimer’s Disease
Emerging Insights on the Use of FES PET for Women with Lobular Breast Cancer
Can Generative AI Reinvent Radiology Reporting?: An Interview with Samir Abboud, MD
Mammography Study Reveals Over Sixfold Higher Risk of Advanced Cancer Presentation with Symptom-Detected Cancers
Combining Advances in Computed Tomography Angiography with AI to Enhance Preventive Care
Study: MRI-Based AI Enhances Detection of Seminal Vesicle Invasion in Prostate Cancer
What New Research Reveals About the Impact of AI and DBT Screening: An Interview with Manisha Bahl, MD
Related Content
© 2025 MJH Life Sciences

All rights reserved.