Global News Podcast - Artificial Intelligence used to create new viruses

Episode Date: August 7, 2026

Scientists from Stanford University call the creation of new viruses by Artificial Intelligence a "significant turning point" which could revolutionise medicine with new drugs and treatments. It is the first time whole genomes have been successfully designed by AI. Critics worry that the new technology might cause harm. Also: A US court has fined Meta more than half-a-billion dollars and deemed it a public nuisance over child safety. The White House denies the US has a shortage of some weapons because of the Iran war. A former Governor in Mexico has been arrested, accused of tampering with evidence, in connection with the disappearance of 43 students in 2014. A BBC investigation has found that animal dewormer and a drug used to treat scabies are being sold and promoted as unproven cancer treatments. The sister of Meredith Kercher criticises a comedy show by Amanda Knox, who was convicted and later acquitted of her murder. And UEFA, which governs European football, says a boycott of competitions may still go ahead despite the backing of Gianni Infantino by FIFA. The Global News Podcast brings you the breaking news you need to hear, as it happens. Listen for the latest headlines and current affairs from around the world. Politics, economics, climate, business, technology, health – we cover it all with expert analysis and insight. Get the news that matters, delivered twice a day on weekdays and daily at weekends, plus special bonus episodes reacting to urgent breaking stories. Follow or subscribe now and never miss a moment. Get in touch: [e-mail] Photo: Brian Hie and Aditi Merchant examine a protein structure generated by Evo 2, an AI tool that can suggest genome designs. Credit: Andrew Brodhead - Stanford University

This BBC podcast is supported by ads outside the UK. Your sales order says one thing. Your inventory says another. Your spreadsheet says, good luck. Odo brings your business together on a single platform, from sales and accounting to inventory and marketing. Visit Odo.com to book a demo. It's ODbolo.com. This is the Global News Podcast from the BBC World Service. I'm Charlotte Gallagher, and in the early hours of Friday, the 7th of August, these are our main stories. Scientists say they've used AI to create completely new viruses which could develop new medicines,

but there's concern the technology might cause harm. A US court has fined meta more than half a billion dollars in the largest case yet against the social media giant over child safety. And President Trump pushes back on claims that the US is running out of some weapons. Also in this podcast, a kneecap stolen from Glastonbury Abbey 70 years ago is returned. But who's is it? We've got it narrowed down to about three possibilities. But the problem is we wouldn't want to exhume all of them.

And you wouldn't want to give an abbot three kneecap either. A development in AI is being called a significant turning point. After it was used to create a genetic code of. new viruses, ones that don't already exist in nature. The hope is that the work, carried out at Stanford University in the US, could revolutionise medicine leading to new treatments and drugs, but some experts have warned the technology could be used to create new infections and cause harm. Over the past few weeks, there have been multiple reports of AI programs going rogue, engaging in hacking and even blackmail. Our health and science correspondent James

Gallagher has been looking at this new development and spoke to my colleague Valerie Sanderson. They've basically taken artificial intelligence tools and used it to design viruses completely from scratch and then they've started making those in the laboratory to see if they actually worked and they took 300 of these AI designs and 16 of them turned into viruses that were fully functional in the laboratory. They were designed to attack and feed off species of bacteria and they show that on 16 occasions the AI was successful in designing these kinds of bacteria. So let's just get in really early Valour and just make it clear that these are not viruses that are going to go around infecting people or anything like that. There are a particular

group of viruses to infect bacteria. But how much of a breakthrough is this? I think it could be a really significant one actually. So we already know that generative AI tools have done things like help design new vaccines and helped design new antibiotics for treating drug-resistant to but this really feels like quite a significant step up because now instead of just designing one single compound, one little protein, this is actually the whole genome, the entire genetic code of a virus that is being developed completely from scratch and producing something that is actually viable at the end of it. That is a big step up. Now it is worth noting that this is still a very long way from what you might want to call creating life or anything like that. So it has a very tiny genetic code.

these viruses and are not technically deemed as being alive, you'd have to produce something like it was like a hundred times bigger in terms of the amount of genetic code before you were getting to those most basic single-celled organisms in the natural world. But this is still doing something that so far nature has not done. This is creating viruses that don't exist in the natural world. It is quite a breakthrough. What could this be used for? Well, if you think about the big picture, first of all, not necessarily just the viruses, but what this really shows you is the power of using generative AI to harness the power of biology that goes above and beyond what's actually available in the natural world. So that could be designing new

immunotherapies, antibodies that can go into the body to treat immune diseases. It could be new ways of targeting genetic diseases in the body. It could be, like in this example, developing viruses that eat bacteria, so maybe you could design ones that could attack bacterial infection. And there is a huge amount of work going on to find those viruses naturally in the wild, but maybe you could just design them in the laboratory in the first place. So there is hope and optimism that if these tools are used and harnessed responsibly, they could actually deliver significant benefits in medicine. James Gallagher. There have been increasing reports in the US that the military stockpile of weapons is dangerously low as the war with Iran continues. Posting on social media, President

Trump warned that those leaking what he called treasonous statements could face long prison sentences. Iran's defense minister has already seized on the reports as evidence of what he calls the enemy's declining capabilities. Here's what President Trump had to say. I rebuilt the military and also loaded it up with a lot of stuff. We have certain types of munitions that are very powerful, that we have unlimited, virtual unlimited supply. We have others where it's a little bit tighter, and we're getting them in on a daily basis. Mr. Trump also denied reports he confronted his defense secretary Pete Hegsef over the alleged shortages. Darren Selnick is a former advisor to Mr. Hegseth.

The fact that there's media reports, the fact that there are leaks from the Pentagon would show that we cannot afford to give to anybody else because these take tons can take a year, two year to replenish. And I know the Pentagon is working hard and doing contracts replenishing, but I would say our stocks are low, probably dangerously low, a way below that they should be. Our Washington correspondent, Burt de Booseman, has been telling me more. The actual stockpiles are classified in the U.S., but researchers here in Washington have taken a pretty good look at what's been used in the conflict and what was available beforehand.

And for the U.S. government and the White House, the most pressing ones are air defense systems. There's the Patriot Interceptor and a, missile called the THAAD, which intercepts at a higher altitude, those were extremely heavily used in the first month or so of the conflict in Iran, and those are weapons that can't easily be replaced. There's also a long-range strike weapons, such as the Tomahawk cruise missile, which can hit targets at precision at more than a thousand miles away, and those have been used very heavily in the conflict and in this kind of tit for tat strikes that have taken place since

the original ceasefire was announced. And these leaks, I think it would be fair to say that Donald Trump is not happy about them? No, he's certainly not. And the Trump administration has taken a very aggressive stance against leakers in government, predating the war with Iran. But what they really don't want is information to get out, not through what they deem as the proper channels. For example, the press office at the White House or at the Pentagon. But so far, there's been really very little actual consequences for these leakers,

and very few of them have been identified. There was recently a case in the New York Times. Journalists were subpoenaed to find leakers, but that case was dropped. And this will really raise questions about the cost of this war, especially because it is so unpopular with voters. It is. The Pentagon had announced a $1.5 or so trillion dollar defense budget at the expense of domestic programs, and that combined with people's concerns, particularly about petrol, but also farmers have had to pay much more for fertilizer since the war. Iran began, that all has combined into something of a perfect storm of public opinion against

the war. But the White House and President Trump have brushed that off entirely and said that any sort of short-term pain is worth Iran not having a nuclear weapon. And this is also presumably having a knock-on effect with other conflicts, particularly Ukraine. And we know that President Zelensky has been repeatedly asking the U.S. for more of these Patriot missile interceptors. It has. When they met recently, President Zelensky said that he had asked for 300 interceptors to get Ukraine through the winter. And Ukraine also wants a license to be able to produce them domestically. President Trump was initially receptive to the idea, but just given the vast expenditures, he's since kind of walked that back. Many here in Washington are also concerned about what it could mean for hypothetical future conflicts.

If China were to invade Taiwan, for example, and the U.S. were to come to Taiwan's defense, what is a much more. more a sophisticated and large air and missile force in China than compared to what Iran has. It also calls into question the future readiness of the U.S. military because none of these weapons can be replaced quickly. It often takes two years or more between when they're funded and ordered to when they're actually delivered and ready for use. Burnt to Booseman in Washington. A U.S. judge has ordered META to pay another $567 million for its failure to warn the public about the dangers its platforms posed to children, marking the largest ruling against the company over child safety.

The judge in New Mexico called META, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, a public nuisance. The ruling is an addition to $375 million in fines. Meta was already ordered to pay in the case, taking the total to almost a billion. Stephanie Prentice is following the story and told me more. This is being seen as a landmark ruling in the tech space. It's the second phase of a lawsuit over child protection failings from Meta.

And while that first part resulted in a massive fine because it found Meta's platforms had allowed children to be exposed to harmful content, this phase goes much further. For a start, this fine is bigger, another $567 million. The total now, $942 million. And a judge ruled, as you mentioned, the company's impact on children amounts to a public nuisance, something that's affecting society as a whole. So if we look at that, public nuisance, it's a legal turn that you usually see associated with things like environmental pollution, public health risks. So legally and symbolically, a really significant shift. We're seeing a social media company essentially being characterized not just as a platform that's having safety problems, but a source of wider. public harm. Now, the judge also ordered some mandatory concrete changes to how Meta's

platforms operate for young people, so things like stopping adults from being able to message minors, imposing really strict monthly usage limits, and getting rid of light counts, those indicators of popularity of content for under 18's accounts. As for the money raised from those fines, it's set to be used to reduce the damage cause, the judge said. So hundreds of millions you mark for things like mental health treatment, support programs and related training for people like teachers and healthcare workers. And what's meta saying? Some matters come out strong.

It says it will appeal the ruling as well as the earlier verdict. It issued a statement saying it's been working to identify and to remove harmful content. It also argued it's invested very heavily in protecting teenagers online. What impact could this have on how social media companies operate? Because this, of course, isn't the only case of this kind. You're absolutely right, Charlotte. The company is facing thousands of lawsuits currently over claims its platforms can harm young users. In March, we saw a case in Los Angeles, Mehta lost. That was brought by a young woman. She sued Mehta and YouTube over her childhood addiction to social media. And next week we'll see a major multi-state trial starting in California. That's dozens of US states and the District of Columbia, jointly seeing Mehta, and that's primarily over things like addictive product design.

so infinite scrolling, push notifications. But this latest phase in New Mexico, it's just particularly interesting because really it's suggestive of an attitude shift when it comes to accountability for those big tech companies. It's being seen as similar to how governments in the past might have tackled a tobacco manufacturer or environmental polluter. Really, the result of that appeal will be very interesting. Stephanie Prentice.

The world's greatest platform for creative freedom. That's how the Edinburgh Frist, is described by its organizers. The annual festival brings together performers from 60 countries across more than 4,000 productions throughout August. But can creative freedom go too far? One show this summer is drawing some anger. The sister of the British student Meredith Kircher,

who was murdered in Italy nearly 20 years ago, has criticised a stand-up comedy show, being performed by the woman who was convicted but later acquitted of Meredith's murder. Amanda Knox was Meredith Kircher's flatmate when she was killed in Perugia in 2007. Now 39 and married with children, Amanda Knox is performing a show she says is about motherhood and wrongful imprisonment. But speaking to the BBC, Stephanie Kircher, who's Meredith Kircher's sister, called for Knox to think again. I think the problem with this particular project is that it is comedy.

Whilst I appreciate comedy is there to push the boundaries, It very much normalises and trivialises violence against women, and Meredith in particular. It's not a generic topic. It's targeting an individual traumatic case and an individual person and family. And I feel very strongly that Meredith wouldn't agree with that. And obviously, I have read certain comments that she's made,

that Meredith would have found it funny, and Meredith absolutely wouldn't find these topics of, you know, at any comedy value. Arts correspondent Pauline McLean has interviewed Amanda Knox and told Jane Hill what she said. Amanda Knox has done so much before. She's done TV drama, documentaries, podcasts and books. But this foray into stand-up comedy is completely new.

She said today that it's partly a return to her student theatre roots and partly because of her husband, who is a comedy writer and who introduced her to various people in the world of comedy. and cartwheel is the show. It's a reference to the fact that the media said she was doing cartwheels in her cell at the time. But she says it's actually a show about motherhood and it's about explaining what happened

to her very young children. Now, obviously the Edinburgh Festival Fringe is a place where, as well as being absolutely huge, is where anything goes. And every year there just feels like there's a call to cancel someone because of their show, but it's allowed to go ahead. And I think she could see all of that would happen too.

But I think this one, this particular show, was always going to be sensitive for the Kircher family who live in the UK, and they are backing a petition to have the show cancelled. So I put some of those criticisms that it is an unsuitable topic for comedy to her. I'm not the first person to invent using comedy to talk about traumatic and difficult material. And I think that, again, I would hope that people will,

honestly engage with my work and recognize, like, the deep heart and sensitivity that I bring to it as I tell a very personal story through a comedic lens. Yeah, she also says, like, what if it was your sister or your daughter that you were talking about? Well, the interesting irony of that is, like, a huge motivation for me doing this show is my daughter. Like, this is what that show is about, is about how the world is unsafe and unfair towards women, and what does it mean to raise a daughter in that world knowing how bad it can be. Like I've seen how bad, I've lived how bad it can be. And therefore, like if anything, like I think that, again, if they saw my show, they would recognize that. And Jane, I asked her if she might change the show, not necessarily cancel it, but they consider

the way that it's done if the character family asked her to. And she said that she would absolutely welcome a chance to talk to them. She says that she has asked them, many times apparently and says she feels that they would understand the show more if they actually saw it but I think it's pretty unlikely that they're going to come to the fringe for that. And so it is due to start tomorrow. I mean, is there anything, Pauline, that might stop that going ahead? I think it's unlikely.

The fringe is completely uncurated. Anything goes. That's the whole point of it. You choose to bring anything within reason to the festival and perform it. I think she's very aware of that. So it's only Amanda Knox herself who could cancel. And I think since she's sold out for at least the first part of the 11-day run, I suspect she's not going to.

That was Pauline McLean. Still to come in this podcast. We know that anecdotes and testimonials are now the strongest form of evidence. My aunt on Facebook did this, therefore it must be true. I see the other side. I see the people where it doesn't work. I think we've now got to the stage where your trustworthiness has based on how many followers you have?

How misinformation online is causing a surge in popularity of unproven cancer treatments. This is the Global News Podcast. It was a case that shocked Mexico. In 2014, 43 students disappeared while traveling from Guerrero State to a protest. All of the students are presumed dead. There have been several investigations, but no one's ever been convicted. The victim's families have come convicted. accused public institutions of a cover-up.

Now a former politician, who was a governor of Goera State at the time of the disappearances, has been arrested, accused of tampering with evidence. I've been hearing more from Luis Fajado from BBC monitoring. The Ayotzinapa case, as it's known in Mexico, has been a shocking and profoundly disturbing story for more than a decade. It happened in 2014, when 43 teacher college students from an area in rural Mexico disappeared. Only three human remains have been discovered. And after many twists and turns, the accepted version of events is that students ran into some kind of crime organization,

some local drug cartel with cooperation from government security forces. It's not clear if local or state or federal. And since then, there has been a very, very long quest. by the relatives of the disappeared to obtain justice, to obtain information, to obtain transparency about this case, which has been a very big scandal again for more than a decade in Mexican society. As you said, more than 10 years on now, but someone has been charged. Can you tell us a bit more about him? Yes, the former governor of Guerrero State, the place where the students disappeared. He was the governor there, and he has been arrested, and he has been accused of a consulate. sealing evidence, apparently, of CCTV recordings,

which apparently showed the moment in which the students were taken, course of events that led to their disappearance. It's seen as a big move in the sense that a high-ranking former official is now being investigated and potentially has to respond for this. The biggest similar case was a few years ago when the Prosecutor General of Mexico, Jesus Murillo-Karam was also charged in relation with this incident. He's still awaiting trial. Do you think then this is a bit of a watershed moment in terms of combating alleged corruption in Mexico?

Well, people have certainly been demanding for years, transparency and accountability. And there's still a great deal of skepticism across Mexican society about how the state has reacted in this particular case. taken so long. Again, the very visible plight of the relatives of the Ajotinapa. Students have left a very big impression in public opinion. There have been many different false leads that at one moment or another gave families hope that they would learn more about the fate of the students, of their loved ones. There have been international experts trying to help with the investigation around that. But I would say that overall the feeling is of frustration from the students' families and from the public opinion in general that has seen in some cases some members of these public

institutions apparently were acting in cooperation with these criminal groups and this led to this very long saga of the Adjotinapa students. Luis Fahade. A BBC investigation has found that animal dewormer and a drug used to treat scabies are being sold and promoted as unproven cancer treatment. online. Their popularity surged in the United States last year. After the actor Mel Gibson claimed on the influential Joe Rogan podcast that three friends were cured of cancer by taking the drugs. Paul Heaney reports on the situation in the UK.

Selling an undercover journalist two medicines as cancer treatment. That's the stuff there works best on. lung cancer, but it does work on other cancers as well. Meet Jason Sarva, a stairlift salesman from South Wales. He admits he's not a doctor, yet sold us Finn Bendazole, which he previously told us was a deworming medicine for animals, and ivermectin, which should only be available on prescription for stuff like scabies, not cancer.

Because that's my job as well. I see a lot of ill people, and I can't up myself. I've got to tell him about it. He's not the only one making these claims. We've seen videos and social posts with thousands, sometimes millions of views, talking about these medicines treating cancer. We're seeing an increasing number of people asking about these two products. Professor Richard Simcock is from Macmillan Cancer Support.

People are interested in if it can help them when they're affected by cancer, and we're worried that they're not getting up-to-date and effective and accurate information about what these drugs are capable of. Because we have literally no clinical evidence. evidence in people affected by cancer of high standard that shows that they are effective. As soon as she told me that she was diagnosed with cancer, she told me she wanted to take ivermectin and fenbendazole. Jared Wright, from Wisconsin in the USA, says his mum read about the unproven claims online and put her faith in them instead of conventional treatment.

My mother was scared, for one, but she was a victim of misinformation about cancer. It was a horrible death. She just was like shaking and she couldn't see. She had this like glaze over her eyes. She couldn't speak. Well, despite restrictions on their use in the UK and these packages we've had both drugs delivered from the Amazon website. This bottle of fenbendazole tablets listed under sports supplements

and the prescription-only ivermectin with no checks. The medicine regulator, told us it can take action, including criminal investigation if prescription-only drugs were sold by someone without a prescription. Amazon removed the products after we contacted them. It says it has measures in place to prevent prohibited products being listed by third-party sellers and they continuously monitor their store. Hi, I'm Dr Lizza Reardon. I'm the breast surgeon who's had breast cancer. A three-times cancer survivor, Dr O'Reardon now runs a YouTube channel challenging unproven health

claims. We know that anecdotes and testimonials are now the strongest form of evidence. My aunt on Facebook did this, therefore it must be true. I see the other side. I see the people where it doesn't work, where they got sick, where they died. I think we've now got to the stage where your trustworthiness is based on how many followers you have. Jared agrees. It's an enormous problem, the misinformation online, but I hope I can help at least a little bit by speaking to you and hopefully there are fewer people who die the way that my mother died. We asked Jason Sarver, the stairlift salesman, why he sold us the drugs, he didn't want to comment.

But doctors and charities are concerned that his unproven claims are echoed by others online across the world. That was Paul Heaney. World football remains deeply divided with the English Football Association withdrawing its support for the embattled Gianni Infantino. even after FIFA backed him to stay on as president. UEFA, which governs European football, wants him gone, and has warned European teams could still boycott competitions,

including the World Cup, despite the controversial plan to sell it off to private investors being abandoned. The former FA chairman, David Bernstein, says UEFA's threat is its best chance of removing Infantino. UEFA is key to this because without the European nations, the World Cup will be very, very little. If UEFA remains united and these big countries there are included there in Spain, ourselves, Germany, Italy and so on, stick together.

I believe that they can reach a positive conclusion, by which I mean Infantino will go. But the Confederation of African Football and the Football Associations of Argentina and Mexico have all issued statements voicing their support for Infantino. Our sports editor, Dan Rowan, has been telling us more about the development. Clearly he's digging in and believes he can ride this crisis out, but Infantino is under pressure now from multiple angles, and his future remains uncertain, I think.

If he thought yesterday's attempted reset in Rabat and his apology would help draw a line under this saga, his mistake and UEFA are not backing down. In fact, they've doubled down, reasserting a threat to boycott FIFA competitions. Now, that's tough talk. Will they go through with such a move? We'll find out soon,

because the women's under 20 World Cup. It takes place next month. England are among six European countries due to take part. A boycott's not without risk for UEFA. If young players are denied the chance to participate in such an event over this feud, it could alienate some allies in this fight. But I think UEFA are now desperate to maintain the pressure on Infantino. The issue is that he retains support elsewhere.

This evening, the African Confederation said it was fully behind him, in a reminder of the loyalty that FIFA's record development funds has earned the president. And while the South American region made clear its opposition to the sell-off scheme, it seemed to say Infantino should be allowed to stand for a re-election for a fourth term next year. Now, UEFA will hope he's long gone by then. If not, a unifying challenger candidate will have to be found. But in the meantime, world football's unprecedented civil war could drag on for months. Dan Rowan, finally, an Abbott's kneecap has been returned to an abbey in Somerset in South West England.

After being taken by a schoolboy on a trip there, more than 70 years ago. George Box was just 11 years old when he ducked under the ropes at Glastonbury Abbey in 1956 and took the medieval bone from an open tomb. It's finally been brought back by his widow. Navtage Johal reports. Call it a case of joint enterprise. After George Box died last year, his widow got in touch with Glastonbury Abbey to confess to her late husband's childhood pilfering. The Abbey says she described him as a scallywag who had not only taken the bone, but a fragment of medieval floor tile too. In 1970, George emigrated to Australia, where the abbot's kneecap and tile were on display in a glass cabinet in his hallway. But it was only after he admitted the theft to his wife that he finally agreed that both artefacts should be returned,

though not until he had joined the abbot with one kneecap in the afterlife. Although it's not known exactly which Abbott the kneecap belonged to, Lucy Newman, the Abbey's collections manager, told BBC Radio Somerset that they have a good idea. We've got it narrowed down to about three possibilities, but the problem is we wouldn't want to assume all of them. That would cause more damage to the archaeology than is probably the benefits.

And you wouldn't want to give an Abbott three kneecap either. Although the Abbey does not condone such thievery, Lucy says that given 70 years had passed since the incident, there was a bit of an amnesty. Both the kneecap and tile fragment are now on display in the Abbeys Museum. Navtage, Joe Hal. And that's all from us for now, if you want to get in touch. You can email us at globalpodcast at bbc.com.com. You can also find us on X at BBC World Service.

Use the hashtag Global NewsPod. Don't forget our sister podcast, The Global Story. This edition of the Global News Podcast was mixed by Joe McCartney and the producer was Rebecca Wood. The editor is Karen Martin and I'm Charlotte Gallagher. Until next time, goodbye.