That's their argument, that the barriers to entry are too high. Obviously people who've successfully navigated those barriers will be inteligent and capable, but perhaps we could lower the average skill and knowledge level of doctors by 10% but reduce costs by 50% (by having more people into the profession) and therefore being able to provide appropriate care to more people and detect conditions earlier. This could make for a net-positive result in terms of overall health in society. Similarly, if you use technology to supplement a human doctor, you should likely be able to train doctors less and achieve similar outcomes.