STAT+: Colombia wins a key court ruling over a compulsory license issued for an HIV medicine

A South American court upheld the steps taken by the Colombian government when it issued a compulsory license two years ago for an HIV medicine, a move that confirmed the legal framework for using such an approach in the future.

The Court of Justice of the Andean Community — a tribunal that settles trade, intellectual property, and labor disputes for Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, and Peru — also ruled that the Colombian government had properly justified the reasons for issuing a license and appropriately set an expiration date for its license.

“The court concluded that Colombia did not incur a breach of Andean regulations, since such measures are valid when there are reasons of public interest,” the health ministry said in a statement. “Colombia adequately complied with the obligation to determine the duration of the compulsory license” for the medicine, which is sold by ViiV Healthcare.

Continue to STAT+ to read the full story…

STAT+: Trump pivots on kratom derivative 7-OH, floating approval for some forms

President Trump on Monday suggested the federal government could move to approve some forms of 7-OH, an opioid derived from the naturally occurring kratom plant.  

“We’re looking very seriously at natural 7-OH and getting that approved,” Trump said. 

It was not clear what Trump meant by “natural 7-OH.” Small amounts of the compound, shorthand for 7-hydroxymitragynine, occur naturally in kratom, which is increasingly used as a recreational drug and an unapproved pain treatment. While kratom is significantly less dangerous than potent synthetic opioids like fentanyl or prescription pain pills, it can still cause addiction and overdose. 

Continue to STAT+ to read the full story…

The Download: the hantavirus outbreak and Musk v. Altman week 2

This is today’s edition of The Download, our weekday newsletter that provides a daily dose of what’s going on in the world of technology.

Here’s what you need to know about the cruise ship hantavirus outbreak

Last week, eight passengers aboard a Dutch-flagged cruise ship contracted a type of hantavirus transmitted by rats. Three have since died. But health experts stress that this situation is nothing like the coronavirus outbreak in 2020.

The Andes virus is known to spread between people, and there are no specific antiviral treatments or vaccines. Yet transmission appears to require a specific form of contact that the cruise ship fostered.

Here’s what you need to know about the outbreak—and why experts believe it can be contained.

—Jessica Hamzelou

This story is part of MIT Technology Review Explains, our series untangling the complex, messy world of technology to help you understand what’s coming next. You can read more from the series here

Musk v. Altman week 2: OpenAI fires back, and Shivon Zilis reveals that Musk tried to poach Sam Altman

In the second week of the landmark trial between Elon Musk and OpenAI, Musk’s motivations for bringing the suit came under intense scrutiny.

OpenAI president Greg Brockman testified that Musk had pushed for the company to create a for-profit entity, while Shivon Zilis, a former board member, revealed that the Tesla tycoon had sought to lure Sam Altman to a new AI venture.

The courtroom also heard about Brockman’s private journals, Musk’s abandoned plans for a rival AI lab, and the moment he stormed out of a pivotal meeting carrying a painting of a Tesla.

Here’s what happened in the second week of the trial—and what’s coming next

—Michelle Kim

Michelle Kim, who’s also a lawyer, has been in court on each day of the Musk v. Altman trial. To keep up with her ongoing coverage of their legal showdown, follow @techreview or @michelletomkim on X. 

How LLMs could supercharge mass surveillance in the US: 10 Things That Matter in AI Right Now

There are pieces of your life scattered all over the internet, and some of them are for sale. Data brokers collect web searches, financial records, and location data from millions of people and sell them to various clients, including the US government.

While gathering that data has become easier in the smartphone era, making use of it at scale has remained difficult. But researchers are beginning to show that LLM agents can connect anonymized data to real people quickly, cheaply, and at a massive scale.

Find out why privacy experts fear AI could remove the friction that has long protected the public from mass surveillance.

—Grace Huckin

“How LLMs could supercharge mass surveillance in the US” is a feature accompanying MIT Technology Review’s 10 Things That Matter in AI Right Now, our guide to what’s really worth your attention in the busy, buzzy world of AI. Check out the full list of the big ideas, trends, and advances in the field here.

The must-reads

I’ve combed the internet to find you today’s most fun/important/scary/fascinating stories about technology.

1 Meta’s embrace of AI is making employees miserable
Workers feel pressured to use the tech while fearing AI-driven layoffs. (NYT $)
+ They’re also unhappy about Meta tracking them to train AI. (The Verge)
+ AI’s rise has been described as “the most joyless tech revolution ever.” (WSJ $)
+ Gen-Z is particularly fed up with it. (NYT $)
+ We’ve entered the era of AI malaise. (MIT Technology Review)
 
2 South Korea’s military wants robots to fill gaps in troop numbers
It’s in talks with Hyundai to bring robotics to the front lines. (Bloomberg $)
+ They could include Boston Dynamics’ Spot and a new exoskeleton. (SCMP)
+ South Korea’s military has shrunk by 20% over six years. (BBC)
 
3 OpenAI is being sued over ChatGPT’s alleged role in guiding a mass shooter
A lawsuit claims the bot said targeting children would bring more attention. (NBC)
+ Florida’s AG has opened a criminal investigation into the case. (NPR)
+ Does AI cause or amplify delusions? (MIT Technology Review)

4 The Canvas hack was the biggest-ever student data privacy disaster
It exposes the risks of centralizing the data of millions of students. (404 Media)
+ While the platform is back online, the hack disrupted university exams. (NPR)
+ The breach is part of a trend of edtech vulnerabilities. (WP $)
 
5 Alibaba has joined China’s “chat to buy” shopping craze
By integrating AI assistant Qwen into its e-commerce platforms. (Reuters $)
+ Companies are betting that chat is the future of online shopping. (SCMP)
+ OpenClaw is a driving force behind the trend. (MIT Technology Review)
 
6 Cybercrime increasingly comes with threats of physical violence
In the US, the physical threats rose more than twofold last year. (BBC)
 
7 AI’s next phase plays into TSMC’s hands
Taiwan’s chip-making giant stands to gain from the supply squeeze. (WSJ $)

8 Europe is confronting life without American tech
Dependence on Silicon Valley is a growing geopolitical concern. (FT $)
 
9 The US, UK, and China top new rankings for AI in life sciences
Switzerland and Germany follow in the AI Competitiveness Index. (SCMP)

10 The Pentagon has released a massive trove of declassified UFO files
Including newly declassified documents, images and footage. (New Scientist)
+ The files contain reports of “orbs,” “saucers,” and lunar “flashes.”  (Wired $)
+ Here’s how to spot an alien. (MIT Technology Review)

Quote of the day

“There’s a real sense where ‘safety’ isn’t a bad word anymore.”

—Nathan Calvin, general counsel at Encode, a nonprofit AI advocacy group, tells the Washington Post that Anthropic’s Mythos has forced a White House reset on AI safety.

One More Thing

detail from an image of Mars' surface
This computer-generated image of Mars was built with laser altimeter data from NASA’s Mars Global Surveyor, which operated for nine years in orbit around the planet.
NASA/JPL-CALTECH


Inside NASA’s bid to make spacecraft as small as possible

As NASA’s InSight lander descended to Mars in November 2018, two tiny spacecraft tracked its progress. InSight had touched down, they reported, and survived its treacherous journey.

The mission offered a pathway to cheaper space exploration, with small, low-cost probes launching far more often than multibillion-dollar flagship missions. But there’s a catch: miniaturization can only go so far before it collides with the hard limits of physics.

NASA still hopes small sats could transform planetary exploration. But first, scientists and engineers have to figure out what these tiny spacecraft can realistically do.

Discover how small spacecraft could pave the way for giant leaps into the cosmos.

—David W. Brown

We can still have nice things

A place for comfort, fun, and distraction to brighten up your day. (Got any ideas? Drop me a line.)
+ In a grand tribute to a four-legged hero, Cambodia has erected a statue to honor a rat.
+ A 1957 comedy accidentally made a seriously prescient prediction about office automation.
+ Explore the physics of the train that wouldn’t fall over—a monorail that promised to revolutionize travel.
+ Are you a true cinephile? Prove it with these daily movie quote challenges.

STAT+: Provider, insurer groups rush to shape No Surprises Act arbitration rules

Any day now, the federal government is supposed to unveil a suite of changes to the No Surprises Act’s controversial arbitration process. Health care providers and insurers are racing to have the final word before the new rules are published, but one side is getting a lot more face time with officials. 

The four agencies crafting the Independent Dispute Resolution Operations final rule have held 20 meetings — mostly virtual — with industry groups so far this year. Just four of those were with health insurers or their trade groups. Thirteen were with providers or their trade groups, and another three were with other sectors. Stakeholders can request to meet with agency officials to highlight their priorities and submit relevant materials. 

The final rule has been a long time coming. The departments of Health and Human Services, Labor, Treasury, and the Office of Personnel Management released an initial version of the rule in November 2023. The proposed changes include tweaks to how claims can be grouped together, more transparency into pre-arbitration negotiations, and changes to fees.

Continue to STAT+ to read the full story…

Experts wonder ‘Where is the CDC?’ as hantavirus outbreak unfolds

NEW YORK — No quick dispatching of disease investigators. No televised news conference to inform the public. No timely health alerts to doctors.

In the midst of a hantavirus outbreak that involves Americans and is making headlines around the world, the U.S. government’s top public health agency, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, has been uncharacteristically missing in action, according to a number of experts.

Read the rest…

Here’s what you need to know about the cruise ship hantavirus outbreak

MIT Technology Review Explains: Let our writers untangle the complex, messy world of technology to help you understand what’s coming next. You can read more from the series here.

Eight passengers aboard a Dutch-flagged cruise ship have contracted a type of hantavirus, a rare virus transmitted by rats. Three of them have died. As the ship prepares to dock in the Canary Islands, plans are being finalized to let the remaining passengers and crew disembark safely.

The virus in question appears to have a high fatality rate. Read on for answers to the big questions surrounding the outbreak—and to hear why health experts don’t expect a rerun of the covid-19 pandemic.

What is hantavirus?

Hantaviruses are a group of viruses that typically infect rodents but can be transmitted to humans through exposure to the animals or their droppings, urine, or saliva. The viruses don’t seem to cause illness in rodents, but they can make people very unwell. The symptoms can depend on the type of hantavirus a person has been exposed to. Varieties found in the Americas can cause hantavirus cardiopulmonary syndrome, which affects the lungs and heart and has a fatality rate of up to 50%.

That condition made headlines last year when it caused the death of pianist Betsy Arakawa, the wife of actor Gene Hackman

How many cases have there been so far?

On April 6, a man aboard the MV Hondius developed respiratory symptoms. He became very unwell and died just five days later. His wife, who left the ship at the island of Saint Helena, also developed symptoms. Her health deteriorated during a flight to Johannesburg, South Africa, and she died the following day, on April 26. South Africa’s National Institute of Communicable Diseases tested samples taken from the woman and confirmed that she had hantavirus.

A third person aboard the ship, who developed symptoms on April 28, died on May 2. Four other passengers who became ill were evacuated—one to South Africa and three to the Netherlands.

An eighth person had disembarked in Saint Helena and reported similar symptoms once he was in Zurich, Switzerland. A team at Geneva University Hospitals confirmed that he had become ill from the Andes virus—a form of hantavirus that can be spread between people.

Could this be the start of the next pandemic?

Health experts don’t believe so. They stress that the situation is nothing like the one the coronavirus that causes covid-19 presented in 2020. For a start, the Andes virus is not a mysterious new virus—scientists already have an understanding of it, and Argentina is sharing diagnostic kits it has already developed.

The virus also doesn’t spread in the same way. Officials at the World Health Organization emphasized that the spread of hantavirus requires close contact—the kind a person might have with a partner, household member, or medical caregiver.

The cruise ship outbreak represents “a specific confined setting where people are interacting in a prolonged close contact,” Abdirahman Mahamud, the alert and response director for the WHO’s health emergency program, said at a press event on Thursday. “With the experience our member states have, and the actions they have taken, we believe that this will not lead to a subsequent chain of transmission.”

What about the rest of the people onboard the ship?

All the remaining passengers have been asked to stay in their cabins, which the WHO says are being disinfected. Doctors and health professionals from the WHO and the European Center for Disease Prevention and Control have boarded the ship and are assessing everyone on board.

So far, no one else on board has developed symptoms, Maria Van Kerkhove, WHO acting director for epidemic and pandemic management, said at the press event. That’s “a good sign,” she said, but she added that the Andes virus has a long incubation period (around six weeks). Passengers are being advised to wear a medical mask when they leave their rooms.

At the same event, WHO director general Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said he was in regular contact with the ship’s captain, who was reporting that “morale had increased significantly” since the ship started its journey to the Canary Islands.

What do we know about the Andes virus?

The Andes virus is the only hantavirus that is known to be transmitted between people. That transmission seems to rely on prolonged, intimate contact.

There was an Andes virus outbreak in Argentina around eight years ago. Between November 2018 and February 2019, there were 34 confirmed cases of infection, and 11 deaths. That outbreak was triggered when a person with symptoms attended a social gathering, said Tedros. “We are in a similar situation right now,” he said. “A cluster in a confined space with close contact.”

The fact that the 2018 outbreak was limited to 34 cases should be somewhat reassuring, he implied. “We believe this will be a limited outbreak if the public health measures are implemented and solidarity is shown across all countries,” he said.

How is hantavirus treated?

Unfortunately, we don’t have any specific antiviral treatments or vaccines for hantavirus. The WHO recommends early intensive care for people who develop symptoms. “This can save lives,” Anaïs Legand, WHO technical lead on viral hemorrhagic fevers, said on Thursday.

How did people get infected in the first place?

We don’t yet have an answer to that. But we do know that the couple who died had traveled through Argentina, Chile, and Uruguay on a birdwatching trip before they boarded the ship. That trip included visits to areas where species of rats that carry the Andes virus are known to live. The WHO is working with authorities in Argentina to try to retrace the couple’s movements on that trip.

Has the virus spread beyond the ship?

We don’t yet know for sure. The WHO is receiving reports of “potential suspect cases,” Van Kerkhove said at the Thursday briefing. Some of them have links to the ship or its passengers. Each “alert” will be followed up by health authorities in the relevant country, she said.

Has the US withdrawal from WHO affected anything?

Five US states have said they are monitoring US nationals who have disembarked from the ship. WHO officials are stressing that they are still sharing technical information with the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. “Things are … as they used to be,” Tedros said. “WHO’s mission is to help the world to be safe … and we want the American people to be safe as well.”

But it’s worth noting that cuts made by the Trump administration aren’t exactly putting the US in a good position for events like these. Last year, all full-time employees in the CDC’s Vessel Sanitation Program—which helps prevent and control illness outbreaks on cruise ships—were laid off. Further cuts to the CDC have left public health experts worried about how ill prepared the US is to deal with future disease outbreaks.

What will happen next?

Any suspected cases will be monitored by health authorities. Passengers are due to disembark in Tenerife in the Canary Islands on Sunday, May 10, and the WHO has said it will work with the Spanish government to ensure that the risk to residents remains low and that the passengers are treated with dignity and respect.

In the meantime, scientists are working to fully sequence the genome of the virus from patient samples. They want to find out if it is different from the viruses involved in the previous cases. “So far, we haven’t seen anything unusual,” said Van Kerkhove.

Why we left the FDA: Six former officials share their stories

A year after U.S. DOGE Service cuts shook up the federal government, STAT’s FDA reporter Lizzy Lawrence has been speaking with former officials about their time at the agency. Two weeks ago, I hit the road with Lizzy to interview six of them about what drew them to the agency, the important work they did during their career there, and, ultimately, why they decided to leave during the second Trump administration. 

In a special road-trip edition of STATus Report, Lizzy and I travel around the leafy suburbs of Washington to bring you first-person testimonies, including the former director of the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Richard Pazdur; Sheryl Lard-Whiteford, a leader in the FDA’s biologics center; and Julie Tierney, who worked on Operation Warp Speed.

A blueprint for using AI to strengthen democracy

Every few centuries, changes in how information moves reshape how societies govern themselves. The printing press spread vernacular literacy, helping give rise to the Reformation and, eventually, representative government. The telegraph made it possible to administer vast nations like the US, accelerating the growth of the modern bureaucratic state. Broadcast media created shared national audiences, which in turn fueled mass democracy.

We are now in the early stages of another such shift. Faster than many realize, AI is becoming the primary interface through which we form beliefs and participate in democratic self-governance. If left unchecked, this shift could further strain America’s already fragile institutions. But it could also help address long-standing problems, like lagging civic engagement and deepening polarization. What happens next depends on design choices that are already being made, whether we know it or not.

Start with what might be called the epistemic layer—how we come to know things. People are increasingly relying on AI to know what is true, what is happening, and whom to trust. Search is already substantially AI-mediated. The next generation of AI assistants will synthesize information, frame it, and present it with authority. For a growing number of people, asking an AI will become the default way to form views on a candidate, a policy, or a public figure. Whoever controls what these models say therefore has increasing influence over what people believe. 

Technology has always shaped the way citizens interact with information. But a new problem will soon arise in the form of personal AI agents, which can change not only how people receive information but how they act on it. These systems will conduct research, draft communications, highlight causes, and lobby on a user’s behalf. They will inform decisions such as how to vote on a ballot measure, which organizations are worth supporting, or how to respond to a government notice. They will, in a meaningful sense, begin to mediate the relationship between individuals and the institutions that govern them.

We’ve already seen with social media what happens when algorithms optimize for engagement over understanding. Platforms do not need to have an explicit political agenda to produce polarization and radicalization. An agent that knows your preferences and your anxieties—one shaped to keep you engaged—poses the same risks. And in this case the risks may be even more difficult to detect, because an agent presents itself as your advocate. It speaks for you, acts on your behalf, and may earn trust precisely through that intimacy.

Now zoom out to the collective. AI agents and humans could soon participate in the same forums, where it may be impossible to tell them apart. Even if every individual AI agent were well-designed and aligned with its user’s interests, the interactions of millions of agents could produce outcomes that no individual wanted or chose. For example, research shows that agents displaying no individual bias can still generate collective biases at scale. And setting aside what agents do to each other, there is what they do for their users. A public sphere in which everyone has a personalized agent attuned to their existing views is not, in aggregate, a public sphere at all. It is a collection of private worlds, each internally coherent but collectively inhospitable to the kind of shared deliberation that democracy requires.

Taken together, these three transformations—in how we know, how we act, and how we engage in collective governance—amount to a fundamental change in the texture of citizenship. In the near future, people will form their political views through AI filters, exercise their civic agency through AI agents, and participate in institutions and public discussions that are themselves shaped by the interactions of millions of such agents.

Today’s democracy is not ready for this. Our institutions were designed for a world in which power was exercised visibly, information traveled slowly enough to be contested, and reality felt more shared, if imperfectly. All of this was already fraying long before generative AI arrived. And yet this need not be a story of decline. Avoiding that outcome requires us to design for something better.

On the informational layer, AI companies must ramp up existing efforts to ensure that models’ outputs are truthful. They should also explore some promising early findings that AI models can help reduce polarization. A recent field evaluation of AI-generated fact checks on X found that people with a variety of political viewpoints deemed AI-written notes more helpful than human-written ones. The paper is yet to be peer-reviewed, but that is a potentially revolutionary finding: AI-assisted fact-checking may be able to achieve the kind of cross-partisan credibility that has eluded most manual human efforts. Greater understanding of and transparency about how models make these assertions and prioritize sources in the process could help build further public trust.

On the agentic layer, we need ways to evaluate whether AI agents faithfully represent their users. An agent must never have an agenda of its own or misrepresent its user’s views—a technically daunting requirement in domains where users may have not explicitly stated any preferences. But faithful representation also cannot become an accessory to motivated reasoning. An agent that refuses to present uncomfortable information, that shields its user from ever questioning prior beliefs or fails to adjust to a change of heart, is not acting in the person’s best interest.

Finally, on the institutional level, policymakers should hurry to harness AI’s potential to make governance more responsive and legitimate. Several states and localities are already using AI-mediated platforms to conduct democratic deliberation at scale, building on research showing that AI mediators can help citizens find common ground. As agents become increasingly common participants in public input processes—and there is already evidence that bots are skewing those processes—identity verification for both humans and their agentic proxies must be built in from the start.

What is needed is a new generation of democratic infrastructure, technological and institutional, built for the world that is actually here. Failing to design for democratic outcomes, in a domain this consequential, means designing for something else. And the history of unaccountable power does not leave much room for optimism about what that something else tends to be.

Andrew Sorota and Josh Hendler lead work on AI and democracy at the Office of Eric Schmidt.

STAT+: Pump the brakes on AI, buddy; and deposition deadlock

This is the online version of STAT’s weekly email newsletter Health Care Inc. Sign up here.

Hey! Are you going to be in Washington, D.C. on May 19? I’ll be moderating a Georgetown University panel discussion on vertical integration in health care. Jonathan Kanter, the former top antitrust official at the Department of Justice, also will make remarks. It’s gonna be lit. Reserve a spot here. And as always, a penny for your thoughts: bob.herman@statnews.com.

The Elevance exec you need to know

Lawsuits alleging health insurers defrauded Medicare and other government programs take forever to litigate. Maybe they’re more about the friends you make along the way.

Continue to STAT+ to read the full story…