Eli Lilly has reached a deal to use AI created drugs. Is this going too far?

[exitseven]

It did not say what kind of drugs they are talking about but an artificial intelligence is going to create drugs for human consumption. What could possibly go wrong?

[RandomGirl42]

Ty for inviting me to share and I asked your question to AI and got this reply:

What you’re referring to is real—but it’s slightly different from the headline vibe.

Eli Lilly didn’t “hand drug-making over to AI.”
They signed a major deal (up to ~$2.75B) with Insilico Medicine, which builds AI tools that help discover new drug candidates faster.

So what’s actually happening?
AI is being used to design and identify potential drug molecules (early-stage discovery).
The drugs are still:tested in labs
go through clinical trials
reviewed by regulators (FDA, etc.)
Lilly gets rights to develop and sell the promising ones.
Think of it like:

AI = extremely fast “idea generator”
Humans + regulators = decision-makers and safety gatekeepers

Is this “going too far”?
Short answer: No—but it is a big shift.

Why people are excited
Speed: Traditional drug discovery can take ~10 years; AI can cut early stages dramatically.
Cost: Each successful drug can cost billions—AI may reduce failures earlier.
New possibilities: AI can find patterns humans might miss (e. g., new disease targets).
Why people are cautious
“Black box” problem: AI can suggest molecules without fully explaining why.
Biology is still poorly understood: Even Lilly’s CEO has said we only understand a fraction of human biology.
Hype risk: Not all AI-designed drugs will work—many will still fail in trials.

The important reality
This isn’t AI “creating drugs and shipping them to patients.”

It’s closer to:

replacing trial-and-error chemistry with smarter predictions
helping scientists narrow down candidates faster

My grounded take
This is less “too far” and more “inevitable next step.”

Pharma already uses:

computer modeling
statistical screening
automation
AI is just a more powerful version of those tools.

The real line to watch isn’t AI discovery—it’s:

regulation standards
transparency
clinical testing rigor
If those stay strong, AI could actually make drugs safer and better, not riskier.

[exitseven]

@RandomGirl42 If I was to hazard a guess I would say that you go an AI to write this.

[RandomGirl42]

Yes. 😊

[RandomGirl42]

Ty for the MHO 😊

[sage2021]

It's just more money for BIG PHARMA!!

Now if AI could make pharmaceuticals without side effects such as:

Suicidal thoughts

Diarrhea

Vomiting

Weight gain

Irritable bowel syndrome

And...

Death

Perhaps it would be better, but highly unlikely that would ever happen.

[sage2021]

Thank you for the MHO 🙂🧡

[Massageman]

What could go wrong? - go wrong? - go wrong? - go wrong-? go

[MisterWack]

AI involved in mass surveillance , AI involved in ID collection , AI involved in war rooms , AI to depict a reality that doesn’t exist and alter perception of whats going on , AI slop networks , AI advertising and AI scams, etc.

All this is too much, we were better off without AI than we were with it.

The yahoos who claimed, “we need to win the AI race” fell into the corporations and powerful world governments’ hands. I don’t support AI and I will never support AI.

[AviatorTom]

That actually sounds like a good idea.

I know some people in the drug industry. The development of a drug is trial and error. They try things they think might work and then discover most of them don't. If AI can limit the number of failures, the cost of drug development can be reduced, with the net effect of lower drug prices for the public.

[ProbablyClueless]

It should go pretty well, I would think. At least, it shouldn’t go worse than what big pharma has done in the past.


AI has been really useful for running through experimental data and it could allow companies to synthesize new molecules more quickly.

[NathanDavis]

they will find cures... just to hide them, lmfao...

patent and buy them... just faster

business as usual

[OlderAndWiser]

These AI created drugs will be subjected to the same clinical trials, supervised and evaluated by real human beings?

[DryGermanGuy]

I think that's to pretest more variations and iterations. I see a potential benefit here.

[WindAtMyBack]

It just means they are using computers, which is what they've been doing for decades.

[katiesmuff]

You asshole why would you have to ask a question I have to totally agree with!

[CaptainSmartass]

Yeah. We need actual, real, human West German scientists to develop medicine, not some trumped up computer programme.

Simples...

[FreyaRed]

When they pass 5 years trial test, why not.