Date Time
Constitutionally permitted – and even required
Conferring benefits on vaccinated persons by means of a vaccine passport is a controversial issue. Alexander Stremitzer argues that governments are not only legally permitted to lift restrictions for those vaccinated, but may even be obligated to do so.
We are witnessing a fierce political and social debate about whether those who have had their Covid vaccine shots should be allowed to move more freely than unvaccinated people. Opponents of a vaccine passport or “green pass” system, which would ease restrictions on those vaccinated, for example, by allowing them to travel more freely, make two main arguments: First, for legal and ethical reasons, vaccinated people should not be given preferential treatment as this would violate principles of equality and be unethical; it would drive a wedge through society. Second, it’s not yet scientifically proven that vaccinated people are less infectious, and so the “precaution
Date Time
General public supports use of AI in medicine
ETH researchers have performed an experiment to find out how the liability of physicians is viewed by a jury trial when the physicians concerned have made use of artificial intelligence.
Artificial intelligence (AI) is already being used to help physicians make decisions, and, especially in personalised medicine, this development is likely to increase. The future use of such technologies to directly obtain treatment recommendations will also raise legal questions, however. How will the use of AI affect the liability of physicians if errors are made and patients experience harm as a result?
Loading video.
VIDEO: Alexander Stremitzer discusses the legal implications for physicians of following artificial intelligence advice in this new video from The Journal of Nuclear Medicine. view more
Credit: Video created by Alexander Stremitzer and Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zürich Center for Law and Economics.
Reston, Virginia Physicians who follow artificial intelligence (AI) advice may be considered less liable for medical malpractice than is commonly thought, according to a new study of potential jury candidates in the U.S. Published in the January issue of
The Journal of Nuclear Medicine (JNM). The study provides the first data related to physicians potential liability for using AI in personalized medicine, which can often deviate from standard care.