A rare policy consensus emerges as AI’s impact moves beyond innovation into governance and societal risk
Updated
May 5, 2026 5:42 PM
A mechanical hand reaching for the hand of flesh. PHOTO: UNSPLASH
A new survey from Povaddo, a policy research firm, suggests that concern about artificial intelligence is no longer limited to industry or academia. It is now firmly present within the policy community.
The survey draws on responses from 301 public policy professionals across the United States and Europe, including lawmakers, staffers and analysts involved in shaping and evaluating public policy. A majority of respondents—61%—say governments are falling short in addressing the negative impacts of AI.
There is also broad agreement that regulation needs to increase. In the United States, 92% of respondents support stronger AI regulation, compared to 70% in Europe. At a time when consensus is often difficult, the findings point to a shared view across policy circles that current frameworks are not keeping pace with technological development.
Differences emerge when looking at how AI is affecting national contexts. In the U.S., 57% of policy experts believe AI is already harming the labor market. In Europe, 34% say the same. U.S. respondents are also more likely to see AI as a greater threat to jobs than immigration, with 63% holding that view compared to 47% in Europe.
On misinformation, responses are closely aligned. A large majority of policy experts in both regions expect an AI-driven misinformation crisis within the next one to two years—87% in the U.S. and 82% in Europe. Many also believe that AI-generated or AI-amplified misinformation could affect elections and public health information.
Some respondents frame the risks in more fundamental terms. In the United States, 41% of policy experts say AI poses an existential threat to humanity. In Europe, 29% share that view. U.S. respondents are also more likely to believe that advances in AI could harm global security and stability.
The findings come as policymakers begin to respond more actively. In the U.S., Senators Josh Hawley, Richard Blumenthal and Mark Warner have introduced bipartisan legislation focused on AI accountability, including measures aimed at protecting workers and children.
In Europe, the introduction of the EU AI Act marks a more advanced regulatory approach. The framework sets out rules based on levels of risk and is widely seen as the first comprehensive attempt to govern AI at scale.
William Stewart, President and Founder of Povaddo, said: "What makes these findings so significant is who is saying it. These are the practitioners who work inside the policy process every day, spanning every corner of the policy world from defense to healthcare to finance, not activists or everyday citizens. These findings foreshadow real action. The current path of governments accelerating AI deployment while falling short on governance is not sustainable, and the people who know that best are the ones in this survey. You cannot have nine-in-ten policy insiders demanding more regulation and four-in-ten calling AI an existential threat without that eventually moving the needle in Washington and Brussels in terms of legislative or regulatory action".
Taken together, the survey reflects a shift in how AI is being discussed within policymaking circles. Concern is no longer limited to future risks. It is increasingly tied to current gaps in governance and the pace of deployment.
Keep Reading
A new approach examines how individual cells respond to drugs, aiming to identify risks earlier in development.
Updated
May 1, 2026 2:25 PM
Close up of a capsule blister pack. PHOTO: UNSPLASH
DeepCyte, a startup in the drug development space, is focusing on a long-standing problem: why drugs that appear safe in early testing still fail in clinical trials or are withdrawn later due to toxicity. DeepCyte has launched with US$1.5 million in seed funding to build tools that detect and explain the harmful effects of drugs at much earlier stages.
The startup’s approach focuses on how individual cells respond to a drug. Instead of analysing cells in bulk, it studies them one by one. This helps capture differences in how cells react, which are often missed in traditional testing methods.
Drug toxicity remains one of the main reasons for failure in drug development. Methods such as animal testing and bulk cell analysis do not always reflect how human cells behave. This gap has pushed the industry to look for more reliable and human-relevant ways to test drug safety.
DeepCyte combines cell-level data with artificial intelligence. Its platform, MetaCore, studies what is happening inside individual cells by capturing detailed molecular information. This data is used to build large datasets that can train AI models.
Additionally, the company has developed an AI system called DeeImmuno. It is designed to predict whether a drug could be toxic and identify the biological reasons behind it. In internal testing on 100 drugs, the system identified different types of toxicity and their underlying mechanisms with a reported accuracy of 94 percent.
The focus on explaining why a drug is toxic, not just whether it is, reflects a broader shift in the industry. Regulators such as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency have been encouraging methods that rely more on human cell data and clearer biological evidence. The seed funding will be used to develop and scale these tools. The company aims to help drug developers make earlier decisions, which could reduce costly failures in later stages. Whether tools like this become widely used will depend on how they perform in real-world settings. For now, DeepCyte’s approach highlights a growing effort to make drug testing more precise by focusing on how drugs affect cells at the most detailed level.