Dr. Søren Dinesen Østergaard

But, you know, you can't have that without other people having correspondences where they really do not need that level of sycophancy.

So I think in this case, you really can't have your cake and eat it too, because it is really the fact that it's probably the sycophancy that are driving these quite severe side effects of the technology, while also being really at the heart of the business model.

I think this is a really, really tricky case.

No, I don't think that this technology by default is bad.

It depends on how it's used.

And I am hopeful that this technology can also be helpful for some individuals with mental health problems.

I do think that some of the large players here, the big companies, they do maybe not have this as the top priority.

And maybe we need from a central point of view, from governments and nation states to actually regulate these businesses more and to require that the products are properly safety tested before they are put on the market.

Right now, they are deciding that themselves.

And I think we have to change that.

I share that hope, but I think it's very, very important that the tools are being tested very, very rigorously in the exact same way as we test other tools for treatment within the psychiatric system in formalized, randomized control settings.

That is absolutely critical.