New Delhi: Elon Musk’s AI chatbot Grok has attracted attention as users upload medical scans such as MRIs and X-rays for analysis. Musk, through his X platform (formerly Twitter), encouraged users to test Grok’s abilities, stating that the tool is in its early stages but shows promise. While some users report useful information, others cite inaccurate diagnoses, highlighting the risks of relying on experimental AI. The initiative has sparked debates about the balance between technological innovation, precision and user privacy.
Promise and traps AI Diagnosis
Musk urged users to “try sending X-rays, PET, MRI or other medical images to Grok for analysis,” adding that the tool “is already quite accurate and will be extremely good.” Many users responded and shared Grok’s comments about brain scans, fractures, and more. “If they checked my brain tumor, it’s not bad at all,” one user posted. However, not all experiences were positive. In one case, Grok misdiagnosed a clavicle fracture as a dislocated shoulder; in another, he mistook a benign breast cyst for testicles.
These mixed results underscore the complexities of using general-purpose AI for medical diagnoses. Medical professionals like Suchi Saria, director of the healthcare and machine learning laboratory at Johns Hopkins Universityemphasize that it is necessary AI in healthcare requires robust, diverse, high-quality data sets. “Anything less,” he warned, “is a bit like an amateur chemist mixing ingredients in the kitchen sink.”
The Privacy Dilemma: Who Owns Your Data?
A major concern is the privacy implications of uploading sensitive health information to an AI chatbot. Unlike healthcare providers that are governed by laws like the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), platforms like X operate without such safeguards. “This is very personal information and it’s not known exactly what Grok is going to do with it,” said Bradley Malin, a professor of biomedical informatics at Vanderbilt University.
X’s privacy policy states that while it does not sell user data to third parties, it does share information with “related companies.” Even xAI, the company behind Grok, discourages users from submitting personal or sensitive information in requests. However, Musk’s call to share medical scanners contrasts with these warnings. “Posting personal information on Grok is more like ‘Wow! Let’s publish this data and hope the company does what I want it to do,’” Malin added.
Matthew McCoy, assistant professor of medical ethics at the University of Pennsylvania, echoed these concerns, saying: “As an individual user, would I feel comfortable contributing health data? At all.”
AI in healthcare and Musk’s vision
Grok is part of xAI, Musk’s AI-focused company launched in 2023, which describes its mission as advancing “our collective understanding of the universe.” The platform is positioned as a conversational AI with fewer barriers than competitors like OpenAI’s ChatGPT, allowing for broader applications but also raising ethical questions.
In healthcare, AI is already transforming areas such as radiology and patient data analysis. Specialized tools are used to detect cancer on mammograms and match patients to clinical trials. However, Musk’s approach with Grok bypasses traditional data collection methods and relies on user contributions without de-identification or structured safeguards. Ryan Tarzy, CEO of health tech startup Avandra Imaging, called this approach risky, warning that “personal health information is ‘recorded’ on many images, such as CT scans, and would inevitably be disclosed in this scheme.”
Risks of faulty diagnoses
Experts warn that inaccuracies in Grok’s results could lead to unnecessary testing or missing critical conditions. One doctor who tested the chatbot noted that it failed to identify a “textbook case” of spinal tuberculosis, while another found that Grok misinterpreted breast scans and missed clear signs of cancer. “Imperfect answers may be fine for people just experimenting with the tool,” Saria said, “but getting erroneous health information could lead to expensive tests or other care they don’t really need.”
Ethical concerns: informational altruism or risk?
Some users may knowingly share their medical data, believing in the potential benefits of improving AI’s healthcare capabilities. Malin referred to this as “information altruism,” where individuals contribute data to support a greater cause. However, he added: “If you feel strongly that information should be available, even if it is unprotected, go ahead. But buyer beware.”
Despite Musk’s optimistic view, experts urge caution and emphasize the importance of secure systems and ethical implementation in medical AI. Laws like the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act offer some protections, but there are gaps. For example, certain insurance providers are exempt from these laws, leaving room for potential misuse of health data.
Grok exemplifies the growing intersection between AI and healthcare, but its current implementation raises critical questions about privacy, ethics, and trustworthiness. While the technology is promising, users must weigh the risks of sharing sensitive medical information on public platforms. Experts recommend exercising caution and prioritizing tools with clear safeguards and liability. The success of AI in healthcare depends not only on innovation but also on ensuring trust and transparency in its application.
