When it comes to medicine, if computers CAN outperform the average person, we should probably be using computers anyway.
Hey, if you want to get doctors to step out of the way on the grounds that a computer really can trounce their expert judgment, even in just a few domains ... well, you're going up against a lot of resistance.
Well, yeah. That will definitely be an issue, if not now then in a few years. But I also wouldn't be surprised if this was a genuinely difficult task, and I don't know that statements like "a computer can probably outperform you" are justifiable to throw around, unless you actually know that computers DO have a better track record at the task in question.
A feature in Scientific American magazine casts some light on the troubled state of modern medicine.
Health Care Myth Busters: Is There a High Degree of Scientific Certainty in Modern Medicine?
Short excerpt:
Scientific American often gates its online articles after some time has passed, so I don't know how long it will be available.