Home/ mohdanas/Questions

Qaskme Latest Questions

mohdanasMost Helpful
Asked: 03/09/2025In: , ,

diagnostics outperform doctors, or sh ...

  1. mohdanas
    mohdanas Most Helpful

    The Wild, Weird Future of AI in Medicine Alright, let’s cut to the chase—AI’s been storming into medicine like it owns the place lately. These code-wizards? They chew through scans and spit out stuff even the sharpest docs would miss. Tumors, oddball patterns, “hey, your heart’s acting up”—all thatRead more

    The Wild, Weird Future of AI in Medicine

    Alright, let’s cut to the chase—AI’s been storming into medicine like it owns the place lately. These code-wizards? They chew through scans and spit out stuff even the sharpest docs would miss. Tumors, oddball patterns, “hey, your heart’s acting up”—all that jazz. It’s wild. Seriously, no human’s chugging through data at this pace. For patients, it’s a complete level-up: fewer twiddling-your-thumbs-in-waiting-rooms, answers before you even knew you had a question, the whole shebang.

    Doctors vs. Robots: Not the Showdown You Think

    Here’s the thing, though. Just because a computer can detect a lump in a nanosecond, that does not mean you’re going to be getting your next diagnosis from a talking toaster. Docs possess that sixth sense—you know, intuition, gut instincts, the things you can’t program. AI says “hey, this blob is weird,” but your doc puts the pieces together: your cough, your past traumas, the breakdown about your cat last Tuesday. It has nothing to do with being the robot who’s always right; it has everything to do with being the human being who understands.

    Where AI Absolutely Crushes

    Scanning pictures, day in and day out—radiology, pathology, whatever. AI never gets distracted or misses a pixel.
    Acting as alarm system—cancer, diabetes, eye disease, name it. Sometimes before you even feel off at all.
    Repetitive, dull tasks—AI thrive on the stuff that makes people want to scream.

    It’s not that the robots are so smart, they just never get tired or have a hissy fit during shift time.

     Where Humans Still Rule

    – The dirty stuff—actual patients don’t read from the script, believe me.
    – Delivering the bad news, soothing freak-outs, figuring out when to shut your mouth and listen. Luck with teaching an algorithm bedside manner.
    – Ethics. Do we attack full bore with treatment, or is comfort care the way? AI regurgitates numbers, but human beings understand what counts.

     Dream Team, Not Mortal Enemies

    Seriously, it’s not a war. AI is not going to swipe your doctor’s white coat—it’s the world’s most compulsive intern, checking twice, flagging suspicious activity, but the doc’s still in charge. Team, baby. Fewer caught errors, less human mistake, better outcomes for you.

    Don’t Bow Down to the Algorithm

    But seriously, let’s not make AI some robot messiah. Bad data? The AI simply amplifies the screw-ups. Doctors questioning their own judgment? That’s a trainwreck. And when the tech fails—whose fault is it? Yeah, that becomes awkward.

    Medicine Requires Actual Humans

    Bottom line: AI’s not booting doctors out, it’s giving them superpowers (well, almost). People want a human talking to them, not just a screen spitting out diagnoses. But if a bot can spot something your doc missed? Use both, why not?

     

    See less
mohdanasMost Helpful
Asked: 03/09/2025In: , ,

permanent fixture in healthcare, or f ...

digital healthhealth
  1. mohdanas
    mohdanas Most Helpful

    The Pandemic As a Catalyst, Not a Trend There was no telemedicine prior to the pandemic, but overnight, COVID-19 turned it mainstream. What had previously been employed as a Plan B suddenly became the default mode of connection for millions with their doctors. From those with chronic illnesses intoRead more

    The Pandemic As a Catalyst, Not a Trend

    There was no telemedicine prior to the pandemic, but overnight, COVID-19 turned it mainstream. What had previously been employed as a Plan B suddenly became the default mode of connection for millions with their doctors. From those with chronic illnesses into their elder years to anxious parents wanting a speedy pediatrician’s opinion, individuals found the ease of in-home medical care. Now the question is whether telemedicine becomes part of the care fabric, or melts away as patients find themselves in waiting rooms again.

    Convenience Accommodates Human Needs

    The one benefit that has to be admitted is convenience. No hours of driving, no hours of sitting in a packed waiting room, no risk of getting sick. For people with mobility issues, for people who live in the rural areas, or working individuals who cannot afford to lose half a day of work, telemedicine is a lifeline. It brings care close, and very close, to individuals where they are. For follow-ups, routine check-ups, filling prescriptions, and mental health counseling, most patients would actually prefer a video visit over an in-person one.

     The Limits of the Digital Doctor

    Regardless, medicine remains quite human. A screen will never substitute the comforting presence of a doctor, the nuanced body language observed in a face-to-face exam, or the intimacy of immediate touch. Telemedicine finds it difficult with touch-based conditions—examining lungs via a stethoscope, observing signs of edema, or performing lab work. There’s even the risk of misdiagnosis when physicians can’t observe those physical signs. Medicine still feels more “real” to many when it comes in person.

     A Hybrid Future: Blending the Best of Two Worlds

    The future is going to be hybrid. Picture this: initial visits, minor ailments, and follow-ups done online; while life-critical tests, surgery, and complicated diagnoses done in person. This segregation provides choice to patients without a compromise on quality. Clinics and hospitals are already testing this “digital-physical” mix, where telemedicine is the first contact, lightening the burden on emergency departments and allowing doctors to only handle the serious ones.

     Telemedicine Obstacles That Will Bring It to a Halt

    • Digital divide: Reliable internet and up-to-date hardware aren’t in all homes.
    • Regulation & reimbursement: For the most part, insurers and governments still don’t fairly reimburse virtual visits.
    • Trust & familiarity: Older patients are particularly reluctant to technology or simply prefer to talk to humans.
    • These challenges ensure telemedicine won’t totally kill old-fashioned care anytime soon.

     The Human Touch: Why It Won’t Disappear

    Telemedicine is not going away because it’s already redefine expectations. Once patients get used to the ease of a click of a button to get care, they don’t necessarily want to go back to the good old days on a regular basis. It’s not the new normal for care, maybe, but it’s become the adjunct, long-term piece of care. Healthcare is getting more patient-focused, and telemedicine is part of the whole deal.

     In short: Telemedicine serves to stay, but not as replacement, but as indispensable addition to customary care. The stethoscope shall never be replaced by the webcam, but the webcam has won its place at the doctor’s desk.

    See less
mohdanasMost Helpful
Asked: 02/09/2025In: , ,

the future of climate policy

company
  1. mohdanas
    mohdanas Most Helpful

    The new climate frontier Climate policy has always been about domestic action: clean energy subsidies, carbon prices, emissions controls and regulations. But there's increasing worry: what if a country covers its own industry by making it cleaner, then cheaper, dirtier imports come flooding in fromRead more

    The new climate frontier

    Climate policy has always been about domestic action: clean energy subsidies, carbon prices, emissions controls and regulations. But there’s increasing worry: what if a country covers its own industry by making it cleaner, then cheaper, dirtier imports come flooding in from abroad?

    That’s carbon leakage — when tight climate regulations at home simply shift emissions elsewhere. Enter in the idea of green tariffs, or carbon border adjustment mechanisms (CBAMs). These are essentially tariffs on heavy-carbon foreign goods (like steel, cement, or fertilizer), to implement those and make the playing field fairer for cleaner domestic producers and foreign manufacturers that don’t have comparable climate rules.

    Why green tariffs are gaining traction

    1. Fairness to domestic industries

    If you have one steel factory in Europe that spends a lot of money on costly clean tech and your competitor based overseas does not, the home factory is open to being undercut. Green tariffs are really saying: “If you want to sell here, you’ll have to play by similar climate rules.”

    2. Climate integrity

    Without border adjustments, benefits of domestic country climate can be offset by imported emissions. Green tariffs ensure reducing carbon at home doesn’t just ship pollution abroad.

    3. Political sellability

    Climate policy hurts workers and industries. Framing tariffs as saving local jobs from soiled imports makes climate policy politically sellable.

    4. Pressure on other countries

    By taxing carbon-intensive imports, wealthy nations can incentivize other nations’ exporters to green their supply chains. In theory, this supports climate standards around the globe.

    The risks and controversies

    1. Protectionism in disguise?

    Green tariffs worry that they will be a new disguise for protectionism — hiding behind the language of climate to shield domestic industry. This will indulge WTO grievances and retaliation by trading partners.

    2. Damage to developing countries

    Poor nations can export high-carbon products because they cannot afford green technology. Green tariffs can be used to sanction them for poverty, inducing inequality at the global level unless in tandem with aid and technology transfer.

    3. Price effect on consumers

    As with other tariffs, the cost is passed on. Steel, cement, aluminum — these are the materials of which homes, automobiles, and highways are made. Green tariffs could mean higher cost to customers and taxpayers footing the bill for public infrastructure.

    4. Measuring carbon’s complexity

    How precisely do you actually measure the true carbon footprint of a product? A ton of Chinese coal-based steel is very different from Swedish renewable-energy-based steel. Tracking, verifying, and auditing emissions on international supply chains is a colossal technical challenge.

    Early action: Europe leads the way

    • The European Union is piloting the world’s first large carbon border adjustment mechanism, starting with sectors like steel, aluminium, and fertiliser.
    • The U.S. is also considering the same, partly to keep up with the EU and partly to protect its own interests.
    • Canada, Japan, and the UK are also considering their own green tariffs.
    • That is to say, green tariffs are no longer hypothetical — they’re already making their way into trade policy.

    Who gains, who loses?

    Winners

    • Cleaner industries at home no longer threatened with undercutting.
    • Governments that will be in a position to invest in climate action from the new tariff revenues.
    • Green tech businesspeople, who expect expanding markets for low-carbon goods.

    Losers:

    • Emerging economies that export, with the exception of rich countries pair tariffs with tech transfer and climate financing.
    • Consumers, who will see their products sold at a slightly higher cost from dependence on high-carbon industries.
    • Global trade stability, if tariffs become disputes and retaliations.
    • Human perspective: what this will mean for ordinary folks
    • If you’re a European building contractor, green tariffs can sustain your local cement factory.
    • If you’re an African exporter of fertilizer, overnight new, irreversible costs can appear.
    • If you’re a consumer buying a car or driving through tolls, indirectly you may pay more.
    • So while the ideal of halting climate change is honorable, in the real world the consequence is highly uncertain based on where you are in the global economy.

    Bottom line

    Yes — green tariffs are becoming one of the strongest next-wave instruments of climate policy. They vow fairness, integrity, and global pressure to get carbon-cutting done. They also threaten protectionism, inequity, and more expensive consumer goods.

    • If they’re going to really be the future of climate policy, they’ll have to be combined with:
    • International cooperation (so they’re not trade wars in green wrapping).
    • Economic aid to the Third World (so they can make their industries green without being shut out of markets).
    • Clean carbon accounting (so tariffs actually consider real emissions, not politics).

    Short: green tariffs can help bend world trade into a lower-carbon path — if they are designed and sold as climate initiatives first, and as trade initiatives second.

    See less
mohdanasMost Helpful
Asked: 02/09/2025In: ,

the next wave of trade barriers

companynews
  1. mohdanas
    mohdanas Most Helpful

    The promise: why tariffs are sold as job savers Tariffs have long been justified as a way to shield home workers from unfair foreign competition. The logic runs as follows: Low-cost imports flood the market and local factories shut. By placing tariffs on such imports, governments raise them in priceRead more

    The promise: why tariffs are sold as job savers

    • Tariffs have long been justified as a way to shield home workers from unfair foreign competition. The logic runs as follows:
    • Low-cost imports flood the market and local factories shut.
    • By placing tariffs on such imports, governments raise them in price.
    • This should give local industries a chance to keep going — and keeping paying wages.
    • Politically, tariffs are typically framed as “protecting our workers” from low-wage undercutting by foreign workers.

    The reality: varied job outcomes

    1. Temporary job protection

    Tariffs can slow down layoffs in specific industries (steel, textiles, or ag). Workers in those sectors do typically see temporary job protection.

    As an example, American steel tariffs in the 2000s did protect some steel jobs in the short run.

    2. But jobs relocate, not just save

    When tariffs raise the price of imports, industries that use the imports as inputs are negatively affected. Automakers or construction firms that rely on steel are more costly to make.

    That can lead to employment decreases in downstream industries — typically of greater size than jobs saved. A classic analysis of American steel tariffs found that greater numbers of jobs were lost in steel-using industries than jobs saved in steel production.

    3. Long-term competitiveness

    If tariffs become permanent, domestic businesses lose the incentive to innovate or become modernized. That can lock in inefficiency and end up costing jobs anyway, as the international market continues to move forward.

    The hidden sticker shock: shoppers cover the cost

    • That’s where the human story becomes a big part: tariffs don’t just affect business — they show up in everyday prices.
    • An import tariff on washing machines? Consumers pay more at the store.
    • An import tax on fertilizer? Consumers pay more at the farm gate, which subsequently means higher grocery bills.
    • A tax on appliances and computers? Small retailers attempting to modernize equipment are slapped with bigger bills.
    • The ripple effect spreads throughout the economy. Even if only a few jobs are preserved, millions of customers pay a little bit more each day. For poorer households, those extra pennies on staples feel like an oppressive burden.

    The paradox

    • And tariffs stand at the middle of a paradox:
    • Virtually visible gain: Preserving a few thousand jobs in a factory town — easy to see, compelling in politics.
    • Hidden cost: Millions of consumers quietly paying more, and small businesses growing less competitive — less obvious, but ubiquitous.
    • Economists prefer to point out that the cost per job saved with tariffs is extremely high if you include the price increases spread out through the population.

    The bigger picture: security vs. efficiency

    • It’s worth noting that tariffs aren’t always just about jobs or prices. Sometimes they’re about:
    • National security (i.e., protecting domestic semiconductor production).
    • Strategic resilience (i.e., making a country able to produce its own food or medical supplies).
    • Bargaining leverage in trade negotiations.
    • In those cases, governments would gleefully pay increased consumer prices as the cost of protecting “strategic” employment and industries.

    Human impact — who gains, who loses?

    • Winners: Workers in directly protected industries (at least in the short run). Politicians who can stand and deliver preserved jobs.

    Losers:

    • Higher-priced consumers for common goods.
    • Workers in industries that use the tariffed products as inputs (e.g., auto industry workers hit by steel tariffs).
    • Small businesses that have thin margins and cannot absorb new costs.

    Bottom line

    Tariffs generate some jobs at home, but they tend to do so at a collective expense to consumers and the economy in general. They’re akin to putting a bandage on one part of the economy while quietly sapping the strength of the rest of the body.

    If the intention is actually to protect workers, tariffs alone are not enough. They would need to be followed by retraining programs, innovation policy, and competitiveness investment — or otherwise, they are expensive band-aids that shift suffering around rather than curing it.

    See less