Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

What HBO’s The Pitt Gets Wrong About AI — and What Medicine Misses

Opinion

What HBO’s The Pitt Gets Wrong About AI — and What Medicine Misses

Actor Noah Wyle plays Dr. Michael "Robby" Robinavitch in the HBO drama: The Pitt

Generative artificial intelligence has already reshaped industries such as computer programming, retail, and manufacturing. In medicine, however, fears of clinical error have slowed adoption.

At present, two-thirds of doctors report using GenAI tools in practice, though half insist that stronger safeguards are needed.


This split — between physicians eager to adopt AI and those wary of its risks — took center stage in a recent episode of HBO’s The Pitt, set in a fictional Pittsburgh emergency department.

In the episode (titled “8:00 A.M.”), protagonist Dr. Michael “Robby” Rabinovitch is a veteran emergency physician wary of new technology. Dr. Baran Al-Hashimi, his temporary replacement, is more enthusiastic.

She introduces an AI documentation tool called Ambient Listening to streamline charting. The application saves time and impresses residents. Then it misidentifies a medication, an error that could have had serious consequences had another physician not caught it.

I’ve written extensively about generative AI’s impact on medicine and found the episode riveting. While the show accurately captured the tension between AI’s advocates and skeptics in medicine, what it left out was even more significant than what it portrayed.

What The Pitt gets right about AI in medicine

The Pitt correctly depicts that many clinicians remain fearful of this powerful, new technology.

In addition to fears that AI will make a mistake that injures a patient, doctors also worry that it will grow too powerful, eventually overriding clinical judgment and diminishing the physician’s role. Both anxieties are reasonable, and together they’ve slowed the adoption of generative AI.

In most hospitals, generative AI has been limited to administrative work: listening to patient encounters, drafting notes for the electronic medical record, summarizing charts, and assisting with billing and coding tasks. Despite the hype, only the most advanced health systems are deploying AI to help doctors and patients diagnose and develop treatment plans.

In that sense, the show gets the central dynamic right. Generative AI in medicine is neither universally embraced as perfect nor completely dismissed as useless. Instead, it has been adopted cautiously in areas unlikely to affect clinical outcomes.

What The Pitt gets wrong about AI in medicine

In one scene, Dr. Al-Hashimi assures her colleagues that the AI system is “98% accurate.” But without context, that figure is deeply misleading.

Accuracy depends on what’s being measured. If Al-Hashimi meant that AI avoids 98% of minor documentation errors, then that figure grossly overstates its performance. But if that statistic means AI makes dangerous errors 2% of the time, there’s no evidence to support that assertion either.

The episode’s biggest error is overstating human performance compared to technological outcomes. When Al-Hashimi tells her colleagues the technology is “excellent, but not perfect” and therefore must always be overseen by a human, she implies clinicians rarely make mistakes. That assumption is grossly inaccurate.

Misdiagnoses contribute to nearly 400,000 American deaths annually, with another 250,000 fatalities linked to preventable medical errors. Studies show that at least half of electronic health records contain at least one mistake, and many are perpetuated when busy physicians copy and paste prior patient notes.

The key question isn’t whether generative AI is flawless. It’s whether it outperforms clinicians working alone. Even a modest drop in misdiagnoses and preventable harm would save tens of thousands of lives each year.

What The Pitt leaves out entirely

The episode focuses on current tensions with GenAI. What it omits is where this technology is headed.

Already, in head-to-head diagnostic comparisons, generative AI performs at levels comparable to human clinicians.

And as tools improve rapidly, the debate will soon shift. The question will no longer be whether GenAI belongs in medicine, but how to deploy it most effectively.

Its greatest impact is unlikely to be in emergency rooms and hospitals. It will be in helping to manage tens of millions of Americans living with chronic disease.

CDC data show that better control of hypertension and diabetes could prevent up to half of heart attacks, strokes, and kidney failure. Today, patients with these illnesses are seen only a few times a year, which helps explain why hypertension is effectively controlled in only half of Americans. Diabetes control rates are even lower.

GenAI can analyze data from home blood pressure cuffs, glucose monitors, and wearables, enabling earlier medication adjustments and timelier treatments. Instead of waiting for a patient’s next office appointment or crisis, clinicians will be able to intervene when warning signs appear. More continuous monitoring has allowed some U.S. health systems to achieve control rates near 90%.

Superior quality at lower costs is the desired future that The Pitt does not explore. The central debate going forward will not be doctors versus machines. It will be how doctors and technology partner for the benefit of patients. Ultimately, the combination of dedicated clinicians, empowered patients, and generative AI will yield clinical outcomes exponentially better than any one of the three alone.

Robert Pearl, the author of “ChatGPT, MD,” teaches at both the Stanford University School of Medicine and the Stanford Graduate School of Business. He is a former CEO of The Permanente Medical Group.


Read More

Amid Trump’s Immigration Crackdown, Immigrant Mothers Carry a Weight

Pregnant asylum-seeker Yaoska, 32, comforts her two-year-old son who was not feeling well, inside a motel room where she and her children are living after her husband was deported to Nicaragua.

(AP Photo/Rebecca Blackwell)

Amid Trump’s Immigration Crackdown, Immigrant Mothers Carry a Weight

For Kimberly Alvarez, memories of federal agents whisking her husband away at 26 Federal Plaza last fall come back in jarring flashes.

The couple had just finished their first court appearance as asylum seekers from Venezuela when immigration agents arrested him, then turned to her and simply said, “you can leave.” She remembers the chaos, the confusion, how no one would answer where her husband was being taken.

Keep ReadingShow less
This 3D rendered image shows a central AI processing chip sitting atop a glowing blue printed circuit board.

Can AI profit-sharing help workers? Examining public wealth funds, AI taxes, economic transition policies, and the future of work.

Jason marz / Getty Images

There’s No Easy Path Through the AI Transition

“Trending” policy ideas tend to garner attention for all the wrong reasons: they seem like silver bullet solutions that will save us from taking on much harder reforms. Proposals to share profits from leading AI companies with the public are the latest example. It’s the rare policy scheme that seems to have united President Donald Trump, Senator Bernie Sanders, and CEOs at the leading AI labs. While the proposals for AI profit sharing vary in their precise details, a quick review of their likely outcomes should quickly deflate the popular excitement that has formed in response to calls for new taxes, public wealth funds, and the like. It’s important to reveal such limitations so that the AI policy discourse can move on to mechanisms more likely to address the real concerns of the American people.

In our first hypothetical world, the two leading AI labs—Anthropic and OpenAI—give away 3% of their equity. That’s not nothing! Based on current figures, such a contribution could kickstart a public wealth fund of about $55 billion. Let’s then imagine that fund earns 10% a year (a big “if” but let’s run with it). Per The Economist, this AI would reach a staggering $140 billion within ten years. How much would that benefit Americans? If annual payouts were 4% — what the publication reports is a proper amount to keep the fund going and growing — Americans would have an extra $20 in their pocket.

Keep ReadingShow less
A Hollow Song for a Hollow Patriotism: Reclaiming the Real Patriotic Ballads
Imagine a democracy concert followed by a yearlong democracy call to action roadshow—designed to build a new civic movement
Getty Images, gilaxia

A Hollow Song for a Hollow Patriotism: Reclaiming the Real Patriotic Ballads

After musician after musician pulled out from Trump’s June 24 “Freedom 250” concert, we’re left with Lee Greenwood and an opera tenor. The anthem that made Greenwood a star, “God Bless the USA,” was written in 1985 during the height of the Cold War. It begins with the specter of loss—“If tomorrow—all the things were gone, I’d worked for all my life / And I had to start all over with my children and my wife.” Then the wounds disappear before they’re felt: “I’d thank my lucky stars to be living here today / Because the flag still stands for freedom and they can’t take that away.”

Ronald Reagan made the song his campaign theme while launching a new age of American inequality by systematically busting unions and cutting taxes for the wealthiest. Greenwood treats layoffs and the resulting toll on ordinary lives as a mere inconvenience. As the refrain shifts from violins and a church organ to a military march, he repeats, “I’m proud to be an American, where at least I know I’m free / And I won’t forget the men who died who gave that right to me.”

Keep ReadingShow less
A Night at Chase Field Revealed a Different America

Mexican Heritage Night, June 4, 2026

A Night at Chase Field Revealed a Different America

I didn’t love seeing the charge for the baseball tickets hit my credit card. Like Americans, I’ve watched expenses and discretionary costs rise. A night at the ballpark felt like a luxury rather than a routine outing. Still, I wanted time with my two grandsons—one a devoted Los Angeles Dodgers fan, the other a loyal Arizona Diamondbacks fan.

That alone promised an interesting evening.

Keep ReadingShow less