Medicine

Who Would You Trust More: AI or Doctors?

For as long as the profession existed, doctors have been working diligently to perfect their craft and refine any rough edges, diagnosing, treating, and eventually curing their patients in the most efficient way possible in their eyes. However, mistakes are frequently made: medical malpractice is the third leading cause of death in the United States, with over 250,000 deaths occurring yearly. Despite the rigorous education doctors undergo to officially practice their craft, they too still make mistakes. It’s human nature to err sometimes, even in life-or-death scenarios. For the majority of time, it appeared as if this was just a sacrifice that had to be made to keep one of the world’s oldest, and most vital, professions stable. 

But what if the risk of human error was eliminated by having humans removed from the equation when it came to distributing medical care?  This would dynamically pivot the medical industry and the person-to-person interaction we all know today, in a completely different direction. Some speculate that this is possible, through the utilization of artificial intelligence (AI). 

Artificial intelligence has permeated throughout the medical field briefly, but it’s been shut down due to a variety of complications, whether it’d be availability, cost, unreliability, or a combination of these factors (among others). This was especially true of Mycin, an expert system designed by Stanford University researchers to assist physicians in detecting and curing bacterial diseases. Despite its superb accuracy, being even as reliable as human experts on the matter, it was far too rigid and costly to be maintained. Despite not being medically affiliated, Google image software is another example of just how unreliable AI is: it assessed, with 100% certainty, that a slightly changed image of a cat is guacamole, a completely incorrect observation.

However, as modern technology rapidly advances, with special emphasis on machine learning (the ability of a machine to function and improve upon itself without human intervention), some believe that AI can now pick up the slack of physicians. 

This claim isn’t entirely unsubstantiated: artificial intelligence can already assess whether or not infants have certain conditions (of which there are thousands of) by facial markers, something doctors struggle with due to the massive variety of illnesses. MGene, an app that has Ai examine a photo taken of a child by its user, has over a 90% success rate at accurately detecting four serious, potentially life-threatening syndromes (Down, DiGeorge, Williams, and Noonan). AI even detected COVID-19, or SARS-CoV-2, within Wuhan, China (the origin of this virus) a week before the World Health Organization (WHO) announced it as a new virus.

With every passing day, it appears that more and more boxes that are needing to be checked, enabling the possibility of artificial intelligence becoming a dominating presence within the medical field to become one step closer to turning into a reality.

That isn’t to say that there are issues with having artificial intelligence enter the medical industry: beyond the previous problems (of cost and unreliability) being possible, Ai being ever-changing also opens up the doors to bias, ranging from socioeconomic status to race to gender and everything in between. In addition, the usage of AI also is uncomfortable to many due to the removal of the person-to-person interaction that is commonly known to people, another big issue that needs to be addressed to ensure the successful implementation of artificial intelligence into the healthcare sector. 

Regardless of what side you are on, there is a common ground: artificial intelligence will continue to get more and more advanced. While it is uncertain as to whether the general public will want AI to replace doctors, have them serve as back-end helpers, or not exist whatsoever in the office, it is clear that artificial intelligence is a tool that has both a lot of benefits and drawbacks. Whether AI is implemented or not is a question that is left to the future. 

AI can now use the help of CRISPR to precisely control gene expressions in RNA

Almost all infectious and deadly viruses are caused due to their RNA coding. Researchers from established research universities, such as NYU and Columbia, alongside the New York Genome Center, have researched and discovered a new type of CRISPR technology that targets this RNA and might just prevent the spread of deadly diseases and infections.

A new study from Nature Biotechnology has shown that the development of major gene editing tools like CRISPR will serve to be beneficial at an even larger scale. CRISPR, in a nutshell, is a gene editing piece of technology that can be used to switch gene expression on and off. Up until now, it was only known that CRISPR, with the help of the enzyme Cas9, could only edit DNA. With the recent discovery of Cas13, RNA editing might just become possible as well.

https://theconversation.com/three-ways-rna-is-being-used-in-the-next-generation-of-medical-treatment-158190

RNA is a second type of genetic material present within our cells and body, which plays an essential role in various biological roles such as regulation, expression, coding, and even decoding genes. It plays a significant role in biological processes such as protein synthesis, and these proteins are necessary to carry out various processes. 

RNA viruses

RNA viruses usually exist in 2 types – single-stranded RNA (ssRNA), and double-stranded RNA (dsRNA). RNA viruses are notoriously famous for causing the most common and the most well-known infections – examples being the common cold, influenza, Dengue, hepatitis, Ebola, and even COVID-19. These dangerous and possibly life-threatening viruses only have RNA as their genetic material. So, how can/might AI and CRISPR technology, using the enzyme Cas13 help fight against these nuisances?

Role of CRISPR-Cas13

RNA targeting CRISPRs have various applications – from editing and blocking genes to finding out possible drugs to cure said pathogenic disease/infection. As a report from NYU states, “Researchers at NYU and the New York Genome Center created a platform for RNA-targeting CRISPR screens using Cas13 to better understand RNA regulation and to identify the function of non-coding RNAs. Because RNA is the main genetic material in viruses including SARS-CoV-2 and flu,” the applications of CRISPR-Cas13 can promise us cures and newer ways to treat severe viral infections.

“Similar to DNA-targeting CRISPRs such as Cas9, we anticipate that RNA-targeting CRISPRs such as Cas13 will have an outsized impact in molecular biology and biomedical applications in the coming years,” said Neville Sanjana, associate professor of biology at NYU, associate professor of neuroscience and physiology at NYU Grossman School of Medicine. Learn more about CRISPR, Cas9, and Cas13 here

Role of AI

Artificial intelligence is becoming more and more reliant as days pass by. So much so, that it can be used to precisely target RNA coding, especially in the given case scenario. TIGER (Targeted Inhibition of Gene Expression via guide RNA design), was trained on the data from the CRISPR screens. Comparing the predictions generated by the model and laboratory tests in human cells, TIGER was able to predict both on-target and off-target activity, outperforming previous models developed for Cas13 

With the assistance of AI with an RNA-targeting CRISPR screen, TIGER’s predictions might just initiate new and more developed methods of RNA-targeting therapies. In a nutshell, AI will be able to “sieve” out undesired off-target CRISPR activity, making it a more precise and reliable method. 

A solution to the Ails of Chemotherapy?

600,000 deaths. That’s how many casualties were estimated in 2021 by a foe we can’t so much as see with the naked eye: cancer. The dreaded illness that, since the foundation of modern medicine, humanity seems unable to tackle and extinguish permanently. Despite the advancement of technology (specifically in the medical sector), it seems as if we are a ways off from adequately dealing with it on a global scale. 

That isn’t to say that there aren’t methods to deal with this disease. Chemotherapy for instance is one such remedy. It decimates cancerous cells, but does so with a massive risk to the body it’s done to, through also killing the necessary (good) cells humans need in the process. This treatment results in patients becoming immunocompromised. This label not only increases the risk of people contracting diseases, but it also increases the potential for these common ailments (such as the common cold or the flu for instance) to quickly turn to a hospital visit because of a life-threatening concern. 

Described by those who administer chemotherapy as a double-edged sword, it appeared doubtful that the negative effects of chemotherapy could ever be reduced. After all, it took so long for this treatment to even be discovered according to modern medicine, reinforcing the notion that humanity’s war against cancer seems to have arrived at a stalemate.

Then came a new discovery: stem cell transplants. This method seemed to solve the problems that chemotherapy generated by administering stem cells to the vein. This enables the cells to travel to the bone marrow and then become new cells that are necessary for human health, such as platelets (which help out with blood clots), to white blood cells (which assists the immune system and helps the body fight infection) to even red blood cells (which helps facilitate oxygen throughout the body). 

Proponents of this method claim that this is an instrumental tool for humanity in its battle against cancer due to its ability to assist cancer patients after chemotherapy, which is widely considered to be the most prevalent form of cancer treatment. Although it may not be the final product, it does certainly pose questions that may pave the way toward achieving even more technological advancements in this war. 

That’s not to say that there aren’t those who are against this method however. Some argue their stance as one where this treatment excludes the common man: stem cell transplants are incredibly expensive due to their highly advanced technological nature. This high price tag prevents the vast majority of cancer patients from being able to access this potentially life-saving treatment, pushing the ethical dilemma concerning both wealth and the ability to save a life (if not multiple). Others who are against this cite that it too comes with some drawbacks much like chemotherapy in the form of side effects. From bleeding to increased risk of infection (which is what it’s partially designed to combat), it too poses a set of risks that cannot be ignored in the eyes of some. 

Image credit: bioinformant.com, depiction of stem cells.

Regardless of your stance on this matter, there is a middle ground: this innovation, despite all of its shortcomings, has advanced the battle against cancer in many ways beyond just one. Beyond helping people achieve some sense of normalcy in their lives through alleviating the impacts of chemotherapy, it also grants hope to those who have (or can obtain) access to this treatment. Modern medicine, just like how it conquered measles and rubella and countless other diseases, will hopefully beat this one too.

  1. https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/treatment/types/stem-cell-transplant
  2. https://www.cancer.org/research/cancer-facts-statistics/all-cancer-facts-figures/cancer-facts-figures-2021.html