Healthcare measures human performance constantly, through error rates, quality metrics, peer review, and morbidity and mortality statistics, yet it judges artificial intelligence against perfection instead of against those same numbers. Corrected, that comparison changes what responsible adoption looks like, and it changes it in favor of moving deliberately rather than waiting.

• The right comparison is AI-assisted workflows versus today's human-only, software-limited, error-prone workflows.

• Healthcare already runs on imperfect clinicians, imperfect data, imperfect workflows, and imperfect electronic health records.

• AI carries real risks, including bias, fabrication, opacity, and overreliance, and each of them has a known control.

• The choice is no longer whether to adopt AI. It is governed adoption or unmanaged adoption.

The evidence base has matured. AI now matches or exceeds clinicians on specific, bounded tasks, from retinal screening to breast imaging to clinical documentation, and its failures are documented and, just as importantly, controllable. What remains is the discipline to adopt it under governance rather than around it.