So many programs and devices are used where someone would be liable if they malfunctioned. In a production line for example, if something goes wrong and it has to be turned off, every hour costs $$$ to the production plant owner. Similarly for robots: there have been cases where industrial robots have killed people. Accidents with machines can happen in so many industries. If the machine is wrong in 0.2% of cases, that's a risk that can be calculated. If its rate of misdiagnoses is equal to the rate of a human expert, then replacing non-experts with it will improve patient experience. Of course, there might be super experts whose patients would be worse off if they were treated by an AI.
The Luddites are back! We'll see how this prediction holds up in 30 years.
However, a pragmatic approach would suggest that any form of AI and it's derivatives, would be assistive in the medical field and play a hybrid role, rather than being a panacea[2].
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17667375
[2] https://towardsdatascience.com/why-ai-will-not-replace-radio...