The drug dichotomy creating the inevitable climb of biocrimes
But anti-venoms, vaccines and AI creates a unique opportunity for pharmaceutical companies - and how it could be a gamechanger for big pharma's corporate social responsibility and profitability.
It’s been 5 years since peak-COVID, and the dust has largely settled for most. Throughout and following the global pandemic, there was always hints of speculation that the virus was synthesized - and it’s release was even planned.
I couldn’t possibly even begin to comment on the efficacy of that, or suggest the likely truths - ultimately, I don’t think any of us will either know. But if we humour the premise that it was, then it could suggest as a more stark indicator of a new global threat - bioterrorism.
It’s a concept featured in plenty of films over the years. Mission Impossible 2 (released in 2000) had a plot which centered around the attempted distribution of ‘Chimera’ - a biological viral agent design to infect populations en masse. Before that, Outbreak (1995) was loosely based on a similar premise.
But it’s never seems to have escaped from the screen into reality. And if the COVID virus was fabricated, then it’s probably the first example of a widespread use of a biological weapon on the world at large.
Whilst there were many remarkable aspects about the pandemic, one worth highlighting was the incredible application of virologists, chemists, biologists and medical engineers to develop, test and release a vaccine in a record time; and swift implementation saved many from any further harm being caused.
If we flip to another related domain in 2020, Deepmind released its findings on the development of utilizing AI to model protein folding in Amino Acids; which, broadly speaking, will enable the development of medications at a far more rapid degree. Such findings continue to be built upon with newer models, enabling pharmaceutical developments to occur at a rate that could have only been dreamed of only a few years ago.
There’s a dark dichotomy to such advancements however - where the implementation of one side of this technology can serve to mitigate humanity’s biggest threats; the other side could be used to create it.
Criminality increasingly has lesser requirement for physical presence - braun was once the staple tactic of intimidation to manipulate; now the brain, and psychological mechanisms appear to persevere in the modern age. Cybercrime is a perfect example of this - with ransomware attacks (where data is encrypted by hackers; and it’s decryption and release is dependent on the payment of a ransom) suggested to have increased by 126% in the past year alone. Cybercrime overall typically continues to rise by approximately 47% per year on current estimates, expecting to cost the global economy around $10.5 trillion in 2025.
If criminality is able to remain faceless; and technological advancements now enable threats detrimental to the health of the entire global population, it is entirely plausible that sooner or later, the next ransomware won’t be for a decryption key, but for a chemical formula of what a populus has been infected with.
Herein lies the opportunity for pharmaceutical companies - one of triumph, redemption and profit.
Refinement of spectroscopy and other analytical methods should be prioritised in order to identify such threats instantaneously; and building and safeguarding AI models that are capable of synthesizing vaccines, anti-venoms and cures as rapidly as the criminals can produce them.
It enables the opportunity for pharmaceutical companies to be able to monetise the development of such drugs and compounds; monetise the production and manufacture of them, and finally the distribution of them. This unique skillset safeguards their role and position in society - as no longer a desirable entity, but a necessary one.
It would be true that this does place a societal dependence on privatised corporations, but a capitalist economy does help to mitigate some of such risk - as competing corporations will assist in keeping the economic factoring to a fair degree, ensuring market value is preserved for the benefit being delivered.
It may even be argued the power this is thought to potenitally enable already exists within the pharmaceutical companies; and is cited as a critical reason for much of their unpopularity throughout some demographics. By virtue of the sector they operate in, they are largely seen as a necessary evil by many who disagree with their pricing structures and fiscal models.
The above opportunity facilitates some of their revenue to be generated as a subsidized commodity by global governments - enabling the entire global population and economies to effectively assist in contributing to ensuring the health of the population as a whole is retained and managed. The subsidization would permit lower market prices to be offered for desirable medications for lifestyle conditions and comfort.
Although I would suspect we are some time off bioterrorism become a hugely tangible threat, the potential does exist. Fortunately, there remains a large imbalance in the skillset of the two sides - whereby the top medical scientists and pharmaceutical experts are typically representing the vaccine and solution-based side, and those attempting to synthesize new viral weapons are more likely to have a significantly more rudimentary understanding of the mechanisms.
I believe that a proactive approach in this sector would be the wisest course of action - completed and refined in private, and ready to deploy instantaneously should a threat arise. There should be no distribution or publication of the extent of resources that have been developed or gathered in preparation for vaccine and anti-venom production - adhering to similar safety and clearance protocols typically reserved for military and intelligence projects. The reality is that any publicised mechanisms used to develop vaccines could easily be reverse-engineered to produce more deadly biological agents.
There will always remain some skepticism amongst the wider population when assessing the morality of pharmaceutical companies, as they will naturally be for anyone appearing to profit from others ill-health. However, these profits enables the wealth of drug synthetization, manufacture and distribution to grow and support the entire populus. So perhaps this could be the time where these companies are no longer seen as the necessary evil; but just necessary.
Of all the challenges big pharma faces, I’d argue that Corporate Social Responsibility remains one that little progress has been made on. There’s an opportunity for redemption in the eyes of the public perception; reinforcing that although profits may be generated, they are just the byproduct of being an instrumental component of all global communities.
TH