Will AI Replace GPs? The Wrong Question

Every few months, another headline proclaims that AI will soon replace doctors. The stories follow a familiar pattern: an AI system beats clinicians on some diagnostic task, leading to breathless speculation about the obsolescence of medical professionals. As someone building AI for healthcare, I find these predictions not just wrong, but actively unhelpful.

The Replacement Fallacy

The "AI will replace doctors" narrative fundamentally misunderstands what doctors do. Yes, a significant portion of clinical work involves pattern recognition - looking at symptoms, test results, and history to reach a diagnosis. AI can help with this, sometimes dramatically.

But medicine is far more than pattern recognition. It's about building trust with patients who are scared and vulnerable. It's about navigating uncertainty when the textbook answer doesn't fit the patient in front of you. It's about having difficult conversations about prognosis and treatment options. It's about the therapeutic value of being seen and heard by another human being.

These aren't incidental to medical care - they're central to it. And they're precisely the areas where AI has no prospect of replacing human clinicians.

The Current Reality

Here's what's actually happening in general practice today: GPs are drowning in administrative work. They're spending more time on documentation, referrals, and bureaucratic processes than on patient care. The average GP consultation has shortened to around 10 minutes, barely enough to address one problem, let alone the multiple issues many patients present with.

Meanwhile, demand keeps rising. An ageing population, more chronic disease, rising mental health needs, and increasing patient expectations all put pressure on a system that's fundamentally capacity-constrained. The NHS is short of thousands of GPs, and the pipeline isn't filling the gap.

In this context, the question isn't "Can AI replace GPs?" but "Can AI help GPs do more of what matters?"

"I didn't spend five years at medical school and another decade in training to spend my time on paperwork and phone queues. I want to practice medicine - to be there for my patients when they really need me. AI that helps me do that isn't a threat; it's a lifeline."

A Different Vision

What if AI could handle the initial patient contact - gathering information, asking appropriate clinical questions, identifying red flags - so that by the time a clinician gets involved, they have a clear picture of the situation and can focus on decision-making and patient care?

What if AI could draft referral letters, summarise consultations, and code records - the administrative tasks that currently consume hours of clinician time - freeing that time for direct patient care?

What if AI could provide decision support that catches potential drug interactions, flags relevant guidelines, and surfaces pertinent information from the patient record - augmenting clinical judgement rather than replacing it?

This is the future we're building towards at Medelic. Not AI that replaces the doctor, but AI that removes the barriers preventing doctors from being fully present with their patients.

The Human Touch

There's an irony in the replacement narrative: the more AI can handle routine tasks, the more valuable human clinicians become for what they uniquely provide. If AI can triage effectively, GPs can spend more time with complex patients who need their expertise and empathy. If AI can handle admin, clinicians can have longer, more meaningful consultations.

In this view, AI doesn't make medicine less human - it makes it more human by removing the dehumanising aspects of modern practice. The rushed consultations, the constant interruptions, the feeling of being a cog in an overwhelmed machine - these are what AI can help address.

Legitimate Concerns

None of this means AI in healthcare is without risks. There are legitimate concerns about:

• Safety - AI systems can make mistakes, and in healthcare, mistakes can harm patients
• Bias - AI trained on historical data can perpetuate or amplify existing healthcare inequalities
• Deskilling - Over-reliance on AI could erode clinical skills over time
• Trust - Patients need to trust that their care is thoughtful and personalised
• Accountability - When things go wrong, the lines of responsibility must be clear

These concerns deserve serious attention, not dismissal. At Medelic, we address them through rigorous clinical governance, continuous safety monitoring, transparent AI (where clinicians can see why the system reached its conclusions), and a firm commitment that AI assists but never replaces clinical judgement.

The Right Question

So, will AI replace GPs? No - and the question is a distraction from the real opportunity.

The right question is: How can we use AI to help GPs practice the medicine they trained for - the medicine of listening, thinking, caring, and healing? How can we use technology to restore the humanity in a healthcare system that's slowly having it squeezed out?

That's the question that motivates us at Medelic. That's the future we're working to build.