Recent media reports on scientific achievements and controversies have evoked excitement and apprehension. At a time of great concern about anti-microbial resistance, artificial intelligence (AI) has helped to identify a new antibiotic that is very effective. At the same time, the runaway success of Chat GPT and its doppelgängers has led to several scientists voicing fears about AI’s unregulated development posing a real threat of human extinction. Even as Covid-19 appears to have become less fierce in its onslaught on humanity, a senior Chinese scientist has been quoted as saying that a ‘lab leak’ cannot be ruled out as the origin of the pandemic.
Science has been a powerful propellant for humanity’s progress. It has become the instrument of human follies and also the remedial tool that rescues us from their consequences. Anti-microbial resistance has become a major threat to human survival and well-being, as several multi-drug resistant microbes have emerged through antibiotic misuse. The prospect of finding potent novel antibiotics appeared dim till it was announced recently that artificial intelligence (AI) helped to identify a new antibiotic (again) that is highly effective against the pathogenic bacterium acitenobacterbaumanii. AI can greatly assist drug discovery and novel drug design to advance the treatment of many diseases. AI is enhancing the efficiency and quality of diagnostic and management algorithms for clinical care, apart from capturing data from across the world to create more widely generalisable applications.
Yet, AI can also become a menace if its runaway development escapes from human control and, worse still, if it can manipulate humans and lead them to conflict and self-harm. Dozens of scientists, including the creators of AI, have warned of potential perils in a statement posted on the web page of the Centre for AI Safety. “Mitigating the risk of extinction from AI should be a global priority alongside other societal-scale risks such as pandemics and nuclear war”, they wrote. These, indeed, are three threats to the safety and survival of humanity.
Even the Covid-19 pandemic presented two faces of science. On the one hand, there was a remarkable strength of science on display -- in the identification and genomic characterisation of the novel pathogenic microbe, mapping the modes of transmission, development and testing of vaccines and identification of effective drugs. However, there was also the revelation that ‘gain of function studies’ were being conducted on the SARS CoV-2 virus in the Wuhan laboratory, with international funding. The ostensible purpose was to induce mutations in a naturally occurring coronavirus and to study the potential for increased infectivity, enhanced virulence and greater prowess for immune escape. This was purportedly for the purpose of anticipating possible mutations and preparing new vaccines and drugs to counter them. Even a slight lapse in biosecurity could have triggered a ‘lab leak’ to trigger a pandemic. Did it happen in Wuhan?
We do not know. Can it happen? Alarmingly, yes.
Besides running the risk of causing an unintended leak, scientists are also powerless to prevent such artificially engineered microbes from being accessed and misused by autocratic despots, military dictators and dangerous terrorists. Biological warfare and bioterrorism pose existential threats to humanity. Scientists should not stray into terrains laden with such landmines, which they can neither spot nor diffuse before they explode.
The analogy of nuclear weapons is apt. Leo Szilard was a Hungarian emigre scientist in the United States. A highly accomplished physicist, he developed the technique of nuclear chain reaction, which became the basis for atomic weapons. He persuaded Albert Einstein to lead the effort to develop nuclear weapons during the Second World War. Later, however, he insisted that they only demonstrate their destructive potential through tests to frighten the Japanese into ending World War II, but never use it against civilians in cities. He organised a petition, signed by 70 scientists, to caution President Truman against such mass destruction.
The petition, dated July 17, 1945, warned: “The development of atomic power will provide the nation with new means of destruction. The atomic bombs at our disposal represent only the first step in this direction, and there is almost no limit to the destructive power which will become available in the course of their future development.”. The government of the US did not pay heed. Hiroshima was devastated by an atomic bomb on August 6, 1945.
While technologies greatly aid in advancing human civilisation, they can be treacherous if they spell danger to humans or the environment. Sometimes, this is not foreseen. Thomas Midgley was a famous American chemist who invented two things that were hailed at that time as great technological breakthroughs -- leaded petrol for automobiles and chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) as a refrigerant. Both proved to be disastrous over time. Fumes from leaded petrol damaged human brains, blood, bones and kidneys. CFCs created big holes in the ozone layer of the Earth’s atmosphere. Midgley was later denounced as one who maximally harmed the environment. Little did Midgley anticipate these harms when he initially wore a hero’s halo.
Unlike Midgley, today’s scientists are aware of the dangers that unbridled technologies pose - be it AI, genetic manipulation of microbes or the creation of weapons of mass destruction. Scientific breakthroughs must not result in the breakdown of human security. Science must gift harmony to society, not harm. Apart from intelligence and enterprise, scientists must be guided by a moral compass. Society must collectively set the codes for that GPS so that scientists and techno-entrepreneurs are not blinded by arrogance or ambition to drive human civilisation over the cliff and into an abyss.
K Srinath Reddy
Cardiologist, epidemiologist and Distinguished Professor of Public Health, PHFI
ksrinath.reddy@phfi.org