AI in Healthcare Series: AI as Your Personal Health Partner

Welcome back folks to our Stanford AI healthcare podcast. We're super excited

healthcare podcast. We're super excited to be joined by Dr. Sed Mohedin who is a close friend physician by training uh

formerly at McKenzie running a lot of AI efforts at health and human services uh and is now the chief AI transformation and strategy officer at United Health Group. Uh thank you so much for joining

Group. Uh thank you so much for joining us.

>> Pleasure to be here and great to see you and Matt.

How many of those queries that used to go out to your your own personal consults to friends no longer go out to those friends? Like how much of a

those friends? Like how much of a reduction based on using the AI systems are you feeling now? And then again just you know from a personal capacity

>> to me it's like when as an internal medicine doc you are a quarterback to care. So you're constantly in this

care. So you're constantly in this dynamic with other people to keep getting better and better information and refine your hypothesis. Right? I'd

say again this is not practicing. This

is just in my personal life. Matters

impacting my daughter, my family, my friends or myself. I'd say 80. I'd say

overall volume is up five to 10x. And

I'd say uh cuz a lot of the lower hanging stuff now I can get answers to versus just they linger in the back of your mind. Overall volume I'd say is up

your mind. Overall volume I'd say is up 5 to 10x. And I'd say my outreach to specialists is 50% less. So you could

say it's a 10 to 20x productivity gain.

>> I mean that's much better quantitization. I I I think on my side

quantitization. I I I think on my side it's it's it's probably in that ballpark. I I would say that I still if

ballpark. I I would say that I still if it's super important, right? Like I

still I like to just show up like I've done some homework, I guess, in that way. And and so like I'll I'll do some

way. And and so like I'll I'll do some of the cognitive work on my side that I wouldn't have done otherwise because I'm you know, am I would I've really kind of really gone down a rabbit hole in the literature. Maybe if it's super

literature. Maybe if it's super important. But now like okay, I'm going

important. But now like okay, I'm going to have this thing do a a shotgun pass, you know, and maybe I'll do some follow-ups and then I bring that to a colleague. But but you're totally right

colleague. But but you're totally right like for the quick hey FYI I've got a neighbor that you know mentioned this and you know just I I said this just want to double check I'm right that kind

of thing. Not not often anymore and

of thing. Not not often anymore and >> not exactly it's discount is lower too right. Don't you feel like you know

right. Don't you feel like you know they're >> you get less >> using the model right? I used to have friends and family reach out to me all the time for questions like they don't reach out to me anymore which is great

but now if you do get incoming you take it like like all right I'm gonna create space for this and like this feels like borderline inappropriate but I'm I'm going to name drop here at the risk of

politics like what still happens is I had a friend reach out to me with a with an urgent geographic like a a local it was in in in the Mid-Atlanticnortheast

medical needing to get a specialist for a certain kind of cancer answer and AI is not going to nail the answer. Who's

the exact right doctor at Hopkins or MSK or whatever for this very rare and unique thing there. I picked up the phone and called who we all know I know and said, "All right, you're this was back when she was running NCI and said,

"All right, here's the situation. What

do I got to do? There's no substitute for that yet." Yeah.

>> Yeah. No, it it's it's fascinating because this trend, you know, again, we all feel it again, not in the professional sense, but in the personal sense for how we're managing care. And I

think the interesting thing is we're starting to see more and more data come out supporting this. So, you know, this was yeah, this was a Bane survey. Looks

like it was 500 people in March 2024 to September 2025. And there's a few

September 2025. And there's a few different pieces, but I'll jump to the bottom, which took >> I love how you bring the ex Mackenzie guy in. And first slide, here's a Bane

guy in. And first slide, here's a Bane survey. Thanks, man.

survey. Thanks, man.

>> I just had to I had to I had to drill in. Had to drill in. Uh

in. Had to drill in. Uh

>> but this this last one's fascinating.

You know, when there's a Mackenzie one to show, I'll show that next. AI becomes

my doctor. Percentage of consumers comfortable with AI. And we don't know the exact question or exactly how they did it, but 11% in 2024 to 2025, almost

30% now. That's fascinating. And as we

30% now. That's fascinating. And as we talk about all the other impacts and we'll get to value based care and health systems and payers and all that soon,

this one trend again, we all feel as we just talked about in our personal lives, patients are starting to choose this too. Like what what happens to this

too. Like what what happens to this system? what happens to the system and

system? what happens to the system and you know extrapolate one more year maybe this number is 50%.

That is just so such a fast pace of change to a health care system that normally moves extremely slow and say you've seen this also you know at the at the government side as well. How are you

kind of putting these kind of trends into kind of how you run your job and what what you think is coming for healthcare?

Yeah, I mean I think it's it is like look, jokes aside, it's obviously a powerful number. You're talking about a

powerful number. You're talking about a two and a halfx increase in one year, right? One year. And um I think just to

right? One year. And um I think just to break it down a bit, this is a combination of headwinds and tailwinds where you have headwinds, people are

increasingly frustrated with the care they get because there is a there is a supply issue. There is a physician

supply issue. There is a physician shortage. There is a clinician shortage.

shortage. There is a clinician shortage.

And the amount of time you have in your patient visits, the amount of time, the the sort of availability or access issues in terms of, you know, uh time from when you want to schedule an appointment to when you actually

schedule an appointment. Also, the

personalization. Back in the day, you knew your doctor. Now, increasingly,

people don't know their doctor. So, then

the substitutability goes up. Right now,

that's the headwind. The tailwind is okay. Substitutely grows up, convenience

okay. Substitutely grows up, convenience issues, delays. Why don't I start doing

issues, delays. Why don't I start doing what Matt and Justin and say are doing uh what everyone else is doing and you guys I know the three of us know the internal numbers that OpenAI and others

have probably shared with us around uh you know the number of millions upon millions of users who are going to them and and and submitting clinical queries.

by the way, physicians and non-f physicians alike submitting clinical queries, and that's true of all these AI applications. So, increasingly, the idea

applications. So, increasingly, the idea that the information can come from a non-human has gone up. Now, the

important question is the question you asked, Justin, what then does that mean?

And what does that look like? So, I've

heard this existential, oh my god, doctors are going to be gone, blah, blah, blah. Like, calm down. What this

blah, blah. Like, calm down. What this

is saying is for that massive volume of care that isn't being done, can we introduce a layer where care is actually done? Can we manage care more

done? Can we manage care more effectively? Can we do preventive care?

effectively? Can we do preventive care?

Can we actually do prevention? Can we

actually answer uh you know people's questions when they have them, not six and 10 and 12 weeks later, right? So all

of this stuff that is not just the 15 minutes of the actual patient v vis vis vis vis vis vis vis vis vis vis visit but the 364 and 1/2 days you spend outside of the clinic that's what we're

able to get at by everyone is imagine a world where everyone has their own LLM individualized LLM their own a chatbot that knows them that knows everything about them all the data everything

that's helping them with their care increasingly that becomes the quarterback of your care so I say Muhammad Muyadin licensed internal medicine physician

trained to be a quarterback of care. Now

I have an agent who is my sidekick who's helping me do two things. One, actually

expand my panel size because that's what the population needs. And then uh and and by the way expand by managing and doing the care management, doing a lot of the administrative stuff, taking care of the lower risk questions around the

health, but then two allows me to come in and do the reason I fell in love with medicine, take on harder cases and figure out just like I had to consult, you know, the former head of the National Cancer Institute, who are who

in my friend network and who in my referral network, right, in my appropriately tiered referral network do I need to pull in to ensure that this person gets the best possible care at

the highest value, right? So, you're

actually getting into a world with AI where you can take care of people end to end the whole time, not just the couple days you see them and achieve value in a

way that we've not really seen in the 15 years uh roughly 15 years since we, you know, launched CMI and started really pushing for value based care. It's a

long answer, but those are my two cents.

Matt, what do you think?

>> Well, no, I I was just, you know, nodding my head. I I I think your answer is incredibly well articulated. It does

bring up an interesting point that there is this it's almost it's like the classic iceberg right we we're all thinking about the tip right all the time about the work that we're doing in our day-to-day lives and in the practice

of medicine today not re kind of knowing it's there but not really not feeling overwhelmed at even just trying to address that under the under the surface

mass of unmet needs access uh you know the quality of the care and frankly to your point the time between the visit where we have been saying forever, man,

if we could just get our, you know, patients to, you know, jump in and just be more proactive about, you know, there I think that there's a willingness to do that, but the tools, I just don't think we're there. The information asymmetry,

we're there. The information asymmetry, as we've talked about on this show, has been a barrier. Are we now in a place where that starts to again, we is there a true partnership that starts to form?

And to your point, the quarterbacking, I think the the other version of this that we see in the in sort of the the coding community is like you're you're kind of elevating into another meta level of

orchestration of different capable you whether they're agents or other services and and now that's an that's a higher cognitive plane I think for and maybe even a more

satisfactory one as a as a practitioner to say I'm really elevating working at the top of my license and orchestrating things at I guess a scale that I never could

before. Um, but also makes me feel as

before. Um, but also makes me feel as though I'm truly partnering with, you know, with my patients and their journey through their through the health system.

So, I I remain optimistic, but everyone knows I'm a I'm a glass, you know, threequarters full guy on a lot of this stuff and and there will be detractors from some of this, I'm sure, but on the road there, it feels like it's a push

pull. to your point about the headwinds

pull. to your point about the headwinds and tailwinds.

>> You know, the amazing thing is in a traditional world where you don't have AI agents and you don't have this level of orchestration, you unfortunately end up doing what f

folks often refer to as sick care because that's what you can build for, right? In this future world, if you do

right? In this future world, if you do have uh AI agents able to engage individuals on so many things beyond just the quoteunquote sick care, how I'm

getting nutrition counseling. Okay, yes,

I have diabetes, but I have, you know, at my fingertips help navigating what I put in my body that is, you know, responsive to my metabolic demands and my individualized metabolic state,

right? Um, I'm able to go far beyond in

right? Um, I'm able to go far beyond in my activities beyond like my doctor just saying, "Hey, the American Heart Association says work out x number of minutes y times per week." Uh, you know,

based on your risk factors now, okay, I like biking or I hate biking. I like

swim like I can get individualized plans and I can get someone to help me manage my life in a way that man, life is hard for most people and it's hard to do all of this on your own to get a little bit

of help. uh not just for people who can

of help. uh not just for people who can afford all the coaches and the trainers and all that but just in the form of smart board certified help at my

fingertips. That's pretty great.

fingertips. That's pretty great.

So I'm curious like say you made this amazing future vision you said a few things amazing future vision about what's possible you know

let's move from sick care proactive care health all these things typically when those things come up policy is you know the next question well the incentives aren't there we don't have the right

system to pay for that which you brought up and all these things my question is do we think we need policy changes is to start seeing some of the benefits from

these tools that you talk about. Can we

leave the status quo the same from a policy perspective and are there enough right circles where the incentives are lined up where you think this adoption will happen naturally?

>> Um it's a good question. I will say this. Um,

this. Um, you can always accelerate priorities uh and manage risk through policy.

I think the position we took in the last administration and the position this administration is continuing to take um building on kind of what we did is

there's still so much we have to learn so that we don't over regulate this space right you because that is a risk.

Um we want to make sure that we're spurring innovation at the same time we want to make sure that we're continue continuing to learn and we're actually talking to each other. um what the

administration where they've really built on what we started doing with you know things like our voluntary AI commitments and whatnot is they've really tried to say you know what let's

align on a few priorities create a coalition of the willing and um you know the CMS pledges for instance and try to drive adoption in responsible ways by

bringing people together and having them talk to each other that can only be a start and we're not going to go where we need to go you're not going have AIdriven primary care without meaningful

FDA involvement. So the way it needs to

FDA involvement. So the way it needs to happen, the FDA doesn't know how to do this. They still don't have mechanisms

this. They still don't have mechanisms in place for you know post-appoint surveillance and monitoring for instance which is obviously essential for genai based applications. Um especially that

based applications. Um especially that you know say you have something in a pacemaker or something like something that's in your body. So in that world they know just as we did that there are

mechanisms not yet established to fully vet how you're going to do this. I think

this notion of of you know experimental sandboxes where you have uh data sharing and partnership between government and these entities and you sort of work together on the right regulatory mech

mechanisms is the right way to go. how

exactly that plays out and what exactly the polic policies are. There's lots of debates being had on that and you know I left that game uh over a year ago. So uh

it's not my problem anymore.

>> Well well se separate one one more separate from the policy side.

>> It's all of our problems but anyways sorry go ahead.

>> No but but se separate from the policy side like let's say there aren't more changes. So there's you know it's more

changes. So there's you know it's more or less status quo. Yes there's lots of good things going on to learn share data you know but nothing's sweeping. you

can't wage your lawn and say, "Hey, you know, single pair, you know, anything like that." Is there enough incentive

like that." Is there enough incentive today anyway to see these things start to move? And and I'll like my my like I

to move? And and I'll like my my like I think the answer is I think the answer is I think the answer is yes.

>> You know, as you look at previously when you talked about digital therapeutics or other areas, you really needed a push and a payment mechanism because there wasn't that natural pull. There wasn't a

natural pull. And I'll share a little

natural pull. And I'll share a little bit more data that we can look at. Now

what's happening there is a pull there is a pull towards these AI tools because people believe health systems believe that there's a real value and ROI

separate from any new payment mechanism carrot source sticks that may come down the road. And so again where I'm less

the road. And so again where I'm less certain is how far does that take us?

Does that take us to kind of the, you know, medical utopia you talked about or kind of do we do we get somewhere separate? And so just to talk through a

separate? And so just to talk through a little bit of the data we're looking at here, there was a release recent report by Menllo Ventures that talked about the state of healthcare AI, both funding and where adoption is happening by buyers.

Uh, and there's a few interesting things they called out which I'm not sure all of us agree with from what we're seeing on the day-to-day, but a ton of scribe adoption, a ton of coding and billing

adoption, mostly by health systems, and a lot more than what they found on the payer side of this. And so, one thing that's interesting versus before is we're seeing technology adoption without

kind of any policy changes happening naturally. And so, the question is how

naturally. And so, the question is how far does that take us? And then also, you know, want to get this understanding of do we think these numbers are right?

Does this payer versus provider spend kind of match, you know, what what we're seeing in in the real world.

>> All fair questions. Uh, two or three kind of quick reactions to the page. Um,

and just this idea. What's clear is folks on the payer and provider side, I'd say led by payers, but we're seeing increasing activity especially in the

RCM space among providers are um really focused on administrative areas of opportunity, right? So that could be

opportunity, right? So that could be SGNA opportunities uh or opex opportunities. Um you know, you see some

opportunities. Um you know, you see some on on operations there on the right, but I think that's more universal than just that little $50 million narrow sliver.

But then you also see um uh you know um revenue opportunities. So think coding

revenue opportunities. So think coding optimization as a good example, right?

So that I think in a world that relies on administrative efficiency or or where administrative efficiency is the a priority and you're not directly impacting patients, i.e. you're kind of

free from a regulatory standpoint or more free from a regulatory standpoint as you get AI agents uh doing you know replacing the task of humans and able to coordinate with one another to execute

more and more complex tasks. I think

we're frankly at the tip of the tip of the iceberg of where that administrative efficiency space can go without any additional regulation. I think on the

additional regulation. I think on the clinical side and by the way even your ambient number that ties to a lot of administrative applications as you know uh in terms of how you can get revenue

and what you can enable uh what what really actually even beyond just kind of coding optimization you can enable by having ambient scribes including care management including a whole bunch of other stuff uh that benefit from higher

fidelity higher integrity document clinical documentation so that is the administrative on the clinical side that's where you know, even engagement is not necessarily directly a clinical

play. That's like, do you have coverage

play. That's like, do you have coverage of benefits clear? Uh, are you showing up to your appointment, etc. But the

real clinical side, I think that's um revenue models that will actually serve people effectively, um, that will have the right incentives

to do the right thing and then and makes make systems better at delivering care.

That I think is where it's going to At a minimum, you're going to need some guidance from the federal government in terms of how far you can lean in. Uh

because you start touching humans and patients. That's where I think the

patients. That's where I think the rubber meets the road and regulation will be required. What do you guys think?

>> I mean my comment on the slide. So I I agree with your points and I think directionally this and this makes sense I think to look at it by spend and buyer but I think there's a there's something else there too which is you know as we

increasingly hear from you know again those that are leading in this space in various ways the the rapid you know reduction in cost or the quote unquote

you know asmmptoically heading to free intelligence kind of vision like I do think that this is going to be a poor way to to track the the outcomes or the

or the impact of AI in in in a variety of areas. In particular, you brought up

of areas. In particular, you brought up the administrative side which at some level a lot of those tasks we all know which occupy a lot of humans time today

are probably achievable with where the technology is now without requiring a great deal of spend. And and we at least I believe that will increasingly be the

case. And so like I I I guess if you if

case. And so like I I I guess if you if you look at some of these spending charts, what what would you predict, how would you predict they would change over time? My guess would be that the

over time? My guess would be that the ambient spend so to speak would go down.

Uh right and and and you're the spend is going to shift towards in my view things that are much more uh challenging for the technology. In other words, some

the technology. In other words, some difficult precision medicine efforts, some you know clinical trial-based matching, some some other, you know, more sophisticated aspects and a lot of

the spend is going to kind of I think I I don't want to call it totally deflationary because there are services and things, but at some level I I just don't know how this will ultimately be

the best way we track the impact of AI and healthcare.

>> Yeah, it's not. You're totally right. uh

there there's like entire categories missing from from this. No offense to Menllo Ventures and I think it's good in terms of saying hey what are some of the main use cases and directionally where are players putting their resources but

even if you go back to the page before I mean to not have green for payers in some of these buckets even if you were to

confine yourself to these kind of core six use cases is a is an intellectual um miss. And then if you go to the next

miss. And then if you go to the next slide and you say, okay, where is the puck going? I couldn't agree more with

puck going? I couldn't agree more with that in terms of categories that are just not represented, right? Like I

think clinical AI is going to be massive in three to five years. I think, you know, and it's not just uh what you're seeing today even from like some of the EHR vendors and some of the others is,

you know, uh how do we improve provider productivity? Ambient doesn't really do

productivity? Ambient doesn't really do that. It might do that a little bit a

that. It might do that a little bit a few percent but the the inbasket management and some of the you know uh simplifying back office operations and stuff like that which is different than

payer operations I think that's going to be tons of activity and investment in those spaces but then the whole space of clinical innovation is fundamentally missing here and that's what

increasingly becomes possible when you have more data better data and you're able to connect these sources and and have folks working on each individual case to mass precision medicine point in

in in a in a scalable way.

>> Yeah. And it's it's clear and good and all the conversations we have is it is right to start on the administrative side first. How that spending happens

side first. How that spending happens and what comes with clinical AI is going to change what medicine looks and feels like. Um and and just to show one more

like. Um and and just to show one more piece of data. This was a >> Justin even before you do that sorry like even the spend and administrative is going to collapse in interesting ways

right like payment integrity revenue cycle management higher authorization you know as these systems are increasingly able to talk to each other and you've got APIs connecting

everything uh you've got high fidelity on your data and whether with because in part enabled by ambient um you're connecting you have better interoperability you have more longitudinal data you have deeper data

Like now you could do transactions in real time. Now you have transparency in

real time. Now you have transparency in a way you've never had transparency before, right? That's an entire

before, right? That's an entire different category of, you know, it's not just spend going up, but you're in some ways you're shrinking value pools.

In other ways, you're creating new value pools that we also need to think about.

So it's fine to take snapshots and those are snapshots that I would argue aren't entirely accurate. But what really is

entirely accurate. But what really is the interesting work is what does tomorrow look like? And so you are squarely because it it's come up on a number of panels I've been on. People

talking about right now there's this you know AI arms race. You have you know UHG talking about a thousand AI systems providers at least in Menllo's report talking about more spend on AI coding

and billing. So there's the worry and

and billing. So there's the worry and I've even talked with some on the administration of do these AI fighting AI just increase net healthcare costs.

But it sounds like you're very much on the opposite side of maybe that's a short-term blip piece, but where we're going is no is no way.

>> The honest truth is different players in the ecosystem structurally have different incentives on what

happens to healthare costs, right? And

I'm not going to go and and name them.

You can look at trend analyses and make those conclusions for yourself. Um,

where I sit right and this is not intended to be an infomercial for United Health Group, but where where I sit is actually I feel privileged and frankly the reason I came to this company, it

felt almost like an extension uh of being in the government. It was the goals were identical which was how do you serve the maximum amount of this

United States health population um to the best of your ability achieve the health goals health outcomes that you want to achieve while controlling price

right if you think about the function of a payer or in the case of optim health fully delegated model or the case of optim insight in terms of what they're bringing to the industry it's it's all

centered around doing it in a way that brings price down. That is I will comment on us. Our incentives are to bring price down while maximizing the footprint uh and depth of impact on care

delivery. Right? No matter where you sit

delivery. Right? No matter where you sit in the organization, philosophically that is our focus. Um I think there are counterveailing forces in the industry that want to see it go to the other

side. Who wins will be a multiffactorial

side. Who wins will be a multiffactorial play and what that looks like a few years from now. Also, the collaboration model between payers and providers will be a multiffactorial play. At some

point, you know, it can't just be about punching each other in the face and seeing who blinks last or blinks first, whatever the analogy is. At some point, it's got to be sitting together and saying, "Hey, let's bring data together.

Let's be transparent about what rules engines we're applying uh and and and and and make sure that based on that transparent understanding of what's there and what's possible and what we're

trying to do that we execute a plan together, right?" And then that show

together, right?" And then that show starts showing up in contracts and and so on and so forth. And we're we're a ways away from there. I think there's probably going to be in a way increasing tension between payers and providers

before it gets to the other side. And

regulators are going to have to decide if, where, and how they want to step in.

I won't step on their toes. I've lost

that baton. Um and uh and uh we'll we'll see how it plays out. But I am very committed for the role of United Health Group and my role in it to be a

deflationary force.

>> Yeah. And I I think as as you're as you're talking about this and again I I feel the same way in terms of like there there is there's always been this kind of you know uh yin andyang you know fox and rabbit kind of moments uh that just

based on the way the incentives are structured. I but I guess like I wonder

structured. I but I guess like I wonder if there's like a third or maybe even a fourth trend that we started with that also starts to play a role here. And I'm

thinking about again the the patient who let's be honest we we definitely think of them. We sent we all of our mission

of them. We sent we all of our mission statements talk about them in all of our different organizations. But but

different organizations. But but ultimately the the true empowerment really wasn't there until I think recently. Now I'm starting to see this

recently. Now I'm starting to see this kind of new empowered patient voice leveraging this technology. Uh, and I wonder how that starts to play a role in

some of these traditional incentives and and frankly even to the point where I would also throw physicians in who yes, we've had a voice in various ways, but not maybe at the level that really

impacted some of these broader tensions in the in in the market and, you know, more physicians than ever are, you know, choosing to work at places that have

things like ambient like there the technology is kind of actually helping physicians make decisions and potentially even strike out on their own, for example, more than I've seen before. I I don't know if there's a if

before. I I don't know if there's a if there's a way to put a finger on the pulse of this trend at this point, but I I guess it it seems like it's another player on the field that before now

hasn't really impacted the game.

>> Here, I'll Here's your hot take for the day because I know we're nearing the end. Um,

end. Um, this industry is going to look drastically different in five years.

drastically.

The role of the incumbent, obviously as a member of an incumbent, as an employee of an incumbent, the role of the incumbent um is for the incumbent to decide. But if

the incumbent keeps just doing what they've historically done, they're they will have a significantly diminished role for one reason. the most important

people in this entire ecosystem, our patients, the citizens of the United States and increasingly it'll be citizens of the world as all these systems get more connected. Uh but the citizens scope it to the 330 million

here. Um they will make that decision

here. Um they will make that decision and they will have the options to make that decision. So if we're going to be

that decision. So if we're going to be in service of them, then we got to step into the lead in in disrupting the industry. First disrupt ourselves, then

industry. First disrupt ourselves, then ultimately disrupt the industry. Uh

that's a choice for all of us to make and it's hard because then you're saying uh no to legacy business models and legacy practices. Uh but you're saying

legacy practices. Uh but you're saying yes to the future and you're saying yes to your you're the most important uh people in the ecosystem, your patients, your members.

>> I I totally love that and I I couldn't agree more. I think what's fascinating

agree more. I think what's fascinating right now is everyone who has said for their careers in healthcare, healthcare will look so different in five years.

Everyone who has made that statement or that hot take it mentioned has been wrong in pretty big ways you know for the past decades. I completely agree

with you. But I mention that because the

with you. But I mention that because the historical context for most leaders now whether it's a big health system payer government organization across the

country it has been the wrong answer to lean into the new technology. They got

to that point in their career because they didn't jump too early at AI in a different iteration. They didn't jump to

different iteration. They didn't jump to it but it is coming and I agree with that force of the consumer who will force this upon the industry and with

where we started that 3x almost increase now and AI I feel comfortable with as my doctor that is what's going to drive change

>> you let's let's just be you know a couple factors right when you had high-tech and meaningful use in the decades prior you know,

basically spanning over the last couple of decades, that was a multi-billion dollar central investment to drive a change in an industry that ultimately made physicians less satisfied and

patients less satisfied. Now, you get a print out of a discharge summary and you have no idea what the hell it says, excuse me, what it says. Um

now forward-looking you have a technology that you just showed the stat the 11 to 28% where patients are increasingly using it and increasingly getting

comfortable. doctors look at the look at

comfortable. doctors look at the look at the trae the trend in ambient doctors are using it they are demanding to to Matt's point if you don't have this and I'm not going to practice here right so

at the end of the day if you want technological if you want to to transform an industry and it's an overused term but if you really do want to transform anything you have to show the end user how what you're offering

them is meaningfully better. You can't

just throw money at them. You can't just dangle rules at them. to show them how it's meaningfully better. If you do that, change will happen super fast. And

I do believe, especially with what's coming, we've only talked about what's been, but what's coming with the ability to execute intelligent, highly intelligent tasks in a coordinated and

orchestrated way. um you know if and and

orchestrated way. um you know if and and essentially being a boots on the ground workforce that is not human I I think that's going to materially change what

we can do how it does how it's done and potentially TBD who does it >> I I >> I don't think I'm going to be wrong

>> you're putting your bet on the same place we are and again this this goes back again to the beginning where I do I just feel it It it's I know they always say this, it feels different this time.

And the reason I say that is that it's coming from the bottoms up and not the top down. And and I just feel like that

top down. And and I just feel like that is the way that we've seen the true change happen in sort of legacy industries or businesses, etc. And so I

I'm here for it and I'm and this is why we do this show because we get to keep uh keep tabs on what's happening.

>> So are all the major institutional investors in this country. So fingers

crossed bigger issues if we can't crack this.

>> Well well well on on on that happy note side thank you so much for for joining us. Uh

us. Uh >> great to see you guys. Let's let's make this change happen responsibly. Um it's

going to be awesome for humans for patients and that is I know what the three of us live for. It is why we're friends other than hopefully having decent personalities and the like.

>> See you guys. Thank you.