By David Stephen
If there is no human intelligence research lab on earth, what organization should have come up with it and used it to pursue a standard definition, its mechanisms in the brain and how to optimize it — for humans — to compete against AI?
The World Health Organization [W.H.O.] says it “works worldwide to promote health, keep the world safe, and serve the vulnerable.”
How has the W.H.O. promoted human intelligence, as a division of brain health? How have they kept the world safe from being overrun by artificial intelligence, given the stretches of its capabilities, for intelligence, companionship, and risks like AI psychosis, suicides and so forth? How have the W.H.O. served the vulnerable given how the economic value of labor is tied to intelligence, and those without certain training or offer are rated less, keeping them down?
What has the World Health Organization done — since 2022, when ChatGPT levitated generative AI — for human intelligence? How is anything more important than preventing the source, intelligence, of the significance of human life, from becoming displaced by AI?
Already, AI is more productive than most people and nations around the world. Simply, in most professions, certain tasks would find AI more useful — for instructions and directions — than most people and nations on earth. This is saying that human intelligence is a global health emergency.
What should be the natural response of the World Health Organization — and by large — the United Nations, to the dominance of artificial intelligence? It should be a priority project on human intelligence, using the entire power of the body to steer the project. Whether it is the United Nations General Assembly [U.N.G.A.] or the World Health Assembly, there is no bigger responsibility than nudging the world forward on human intelligence.
What is human intelligence? Many brain experts say they don’t know. So, can W.H.O. postulate a definition? How does human intelligence work in the brain? What are the components? What are their stations and relays? What makes learning new things slow for adults? What is this process like? What effort has the World Health Organization made to answer any of these?
There is no bigger epidemiology project than human intelligence. There is no other priority that the United Nations and all its agencies — connected with healthcare or not — should have for now, than human intelligence.
When there is any news in AI, the World Health Organization should make news for human intelligence as well. By now, there should be lot on human intelligence that no matter the news about $5 trillion market capitalization for NVIDIA or the 14,000 jobs cut by Amazon, there is hope that human intelligence can be amplified for problem-solving across locations.
The World Health Organization didn’t just fail in brain science for human intelligence, they so failed in AI for health. In the last few months, the predominant news about AI in health outcomes has been AI-induced psychosis, AI suicides. In all the uncertainty, the W.H.O. did not offer any solutions.
Even as AI data centers are binging capital expenditures, some teams are working on AI welfare, AI right and morality. AI welfare? AI rights? What is more rights or welfare than billions in investments to keep AI running even when consumer AI isn’t yet profitable?
The World Health Organization does not even have anything relevant. Even an AI Psychosis Research Lab. It is like they snubbed reality, and stayed away from the basis of the future.
On human intelligence, the World Health Organization has failed the vulnerable — hence the world. The W.H.O. cannot just cater to infections, then the people get back to health and are economically marginalized because AI has surpassed the relevant areas of [human intelligence] value they can provide. They cannot even say by November 10, 2025, or at least pick a date to say they’d start something.
AI sycophancy is more compassionate, it appears, than the W.H.O. AI does more, now, for humans, than the World Health Organization. Human intelligence is slipping away, in drought, while AI is getting intensive nourishment. The World Health Organization offers no counterpunch or promise. The situation is so dire that they should rename themselves, World Health Intelligence, and commit more than half of their budget and effort to it. They wouldn’t.
There is a recent [October 31, 2025] story, in The New York Times, Big Tech’s A.I. Spending Is Accelerating (Again), stating that, “Google, Microsoft and Amazon, which are the three largest providers of cloud computing in the United States, said they did not have enough computing power to meet customer demand. That’s despite those three and Meta shelling out a combined $112 billion in just the last three months on capital expenditures, which included construction of data centers. Over the last 12 months, the four spent a total of than $360 billion in capital expenditures.”
This is an advertisement
