Biohub, the organization financially backed by Mark Zuckerberg and Priscilla Chan, has announced the launch of the $500 million “Virtual Biology Initiative.” The massive investment aims to build advanced artificial intelligence models capable of accurately simulating human cell behavior in a virtual environment, a move expected to radically accelerate drug discovery for the most severe diseases
American startup OpenEvidence has scrapped plans to enter the European Union and UK markets, citing fears over the fallout from the AI Act. However, developers of European AI systems explain why these stringent regulations – while deterring global players – are ultimately meant to build the world’s safest medical ecosystem.
Cast your mind back 15 years. Someone tells you that stepping out the door, you can take along a blood pressure monitor, a glucose meter, a pulse oximeter, and even an ECG device — and that all of these will run nonstop, mostly sitting on your wrist inside a watch. Would you have bought into that kind of science fiction back then? It turned out that not much time at all was needed for it to become reality. Wearable medical devices that we carry with us every day are evolving at a breakneck pace, surprising us year after year. Today, we’re looking back at the most landmark developments of recent years and checking in on where the industry is headed.
Medicine is one of the most promising fields where AI is already delivering remarkable results — in radiology, for instance, or during patient intake. At the same time, medicine is a quantitative science built on protocols and strict, evidence-backed rules. So the temptation to train AI to think like a doctor — and eventually replace one is understandable. But how feasible is that?
Medicine is receiving massive support in the fight against bureaucracy. OpenAI has announced the launch of “ChatGPT for Clinicians” – a specialized tool for US medics that impresses with its effectiveness in verifying data and generating documentation. While the vision of automating medical bureaucracy sounds promising, experts issue a reminder: the system is not an FDA-certified medical device, meaning that doctors still bear full responsibility for every decision made.
Instead of helping, they often mislead and legitimize dangerous pseudotherapies. A new, comprehensive study published in BMJ Open proves that nearly half of the medical advice generated by popular AI chatbots is problematic. Doctors are sounding the alarm, warning against a technology that – by giving evasive answers – could deter patients from conventional cancer treatments.
Over 66 million adults in the US have already sought physical or mental health advice from artificial intelligence. A recent study reveals that rather than replacing doctors, digital tools are becoming an everyday support system used both before and after clinic visits – a trend surging despite clear warnings from scientists about the risk of widespread machine-generated misinformation.
Record salaries and a mass exodus to teleradiology are colliding with a glaring absence of AI in job requirements. A new report on the U.S. radiology market delivers a ruthless reality check to the narrative of a tech-driven medical revolution.
Healthcare systems differ widely in financing models, access to high-end technologies and nearly every aspect of care with probably one exception. Paperwork. It is unavoidable and merciless, in the US resident physicians spend an average of 45.6 minutes on the health records per patient. While the average ambulatory encounter runs 15–18 minutes of actual face time.
Aging and death have long been topics that only philosophers, hypochondriacs, and charlatans were happy to dwell on. But in recent years, this eternal yet unwelcomed subject has drawn growing interest from scientists and business figures alike — driven, above all, by the rise of AI, which has called into question the assumption that aging, as we know it, is simply the natural order of things. Aging is now understood as a set of measurable processes: the accumulation of cellular damage, regulatory failures, and the gradual erosion of the body’s systemic resilience. And if that’s the case, it can be significantly slowed down.