Journal of Biochemistry and Biotechnology

All submissions of the EM system will be redirected to Online Manuscript Submission System. Authors are requested to submit articles directly to Online Manuscript Submission System of respective journal.

Case Report - Journal of Biochemistry and Biotechnology (2025) Volume 8, Issue 1

Ethics and AI in Biotech: Navigating Data Privacy and Algorithmic Bias

Anjali Desai*

Department of Bioethics, Tata Institute of Social Sciences, India

*Corresponding Author:
Anjali Desai
Department of Bioethics
Tata Institute of Social Sciences, India
E-mail: anjali.desai@email.com

Received: 09-Feb-2025, Manuscript No. AABB-25-161087 Editor assigned: 10-Feb-2025, Pre QC No. AABB-25-161087 (PQ); Reviewed: 22-Feb-2025, QC No. AABB-25-161087; Revised: 24-Feb-2025, Manuscript No. AABB-25-161087 (R); Published: 28-Feb-2025, DOI:10.35841/aabb-8.1.243

Citation: Desai A. Ethics and AI in Biotech: Navigating Data Privacy and Algorithmic Bias. J Biochem Biotech 2025; 8(1):243.

Visit for more related articles at Journal of Biochemistry and Biotechnology

Introduction

Artificial intelligence (AI) is revolutionizing biotechnology, offering immense potential to advance healthcare, agriculture, drug development, and more. However, the widespread adoption of AI in biotech raises significant ethical concerns, particularly regarding data privacy and algorithmic bias. The sensitive nature of biological and genetic data means that issues surrounding how this information is collected, processed, and protected are paramount. Furthermore, the potential for biased AI systems to perpetuate inequality in healthcare and research outcomes calls for careful consideration. This article delves into these ethical challenges, highlighting the importance of addressing them to ensure responsible AI integration in biotech [1].

AI is playing a transformative role in biotech by enabling the analysis of massive datasets, identifying patterns, and making predictions with unprecedented accuracy. From gene sequencing to personalized medicine, AI helps scientists and researchers understand complex biological systems and make discoveries that were previously unattainable. AI models are being used to predict protein structures, develop new therapies, and even optimize agricultural biotechnology. However, with these advancements comes the responsibility to ensure that the use of AI is ethical, transparent, and fair [2].

Biotechnology frequently involves the collection and analysis of sensitive personal data, including genetic information, medical records, and biometric data. AI algorithms require large datasets to train and perform accurately, but the use of this data presents significant privacy risks. In the context of biotech, breaches of data privacy could expose individuals to discrimination, exploitation, or even misuse of their genetic information. For example, unauthorized access to genetic data could lead to the denial of health insurance or employment based on an individual's predisposition to certain diseases [3].

One of the key ethical concerns in AI-powered biotech is ensuring that individuals provide informed consent before their data is used. In many cases, people may not fully understand the implications of sharing their genetic or medical information, especially when it is used for AI research and development. The complexity of AI algorithms and the potential for future uses of data make it difficult for individuals to grasp how their data might be used. Ensuring that people are adequately informed and that their consent is meaningful is crucial to protecting their autonomy and rights [4].

Algorithmic bias occurs when AI systems produce skewed results that disproportionately affect certain groups of people. In biotech, this could mean that certain populations are underrepresented in AI-driven research or that AI models make predictions that are less accurate for specific demographic groups. For example, many AI systems used in healthcare have been found to be less effective for non-white patients, as the training data often lacks diversity. If AI tools are built on biased data, they can exacerbate existing health disparities and lead to unequal access to treatment and healthcare [5].

To address algorithmic bias, it is essential to ensure that AI models used in biotech are trained on diverse and representative datasets. This requires collecting data from a wide range of populations and demographics, including those that are often marginalized in healthcare research. Additionally, continuous monitoring and auditing of AI systems are necessary to identify and mitigate any biases that arise. Fairness in AI models is not just a technical issue; it also requires a commitment to social justice and equity in healthcare and biotechnology [6].

Biased AI systems can have serious consequences for healthcare outcomes. If AI algorithms are more accurate for certain populations than others, they could lead to misdiagnoses or ineffective treatments for those who are underrepresented in the data. For instance, AI models used to detect diseases based on medical images may perform better for people with lighter skin tones because of a lack of diverse training data. This can result in delayed diagnoses or suboptimal treatment for people of color, contributing to broader health inequalities [7].

As AI becomes more integrated into biotech, the need to protect genetic data becomes even more critical. Genetic data is highly personal and can reveal a wealth of information about an individual's health, ancestry, and susceptibility to diseases. There is a growing concern that AI-driven biotech companies could misuse or commercialize genetic data without individuals' knowledge or consent. To address this, strong data protection regulations, such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in Europe, must be enforced to ensure that individuals' genetic information is handled ethically and securely [8].

Transparency is a key principle in the ethical use of AI in biotech. Individuals and stakeholders must have a clear understanding of how AI systems are developed, how they make decisions, and how data is used. AI algorithms are often described as "black boxes" because their decision-making processes can be difficult to interpret. This lack of transparency can erode trust in AI systems, particularly when they are used in sensitive areas like healthcare. Establishing mechanisms for accountability, such as regular audits and oversight by regulatory bodies, is essential to ensure that AI is used responsibly [9].

As AI continues to advance in biotech, it is crucial to develop ethical frameworks that prioritize data privacy, fairness, and accountability. Researchers, policymakers, and industry leaders must collaborate to establish guidelines and best practices for the ethical use of AI in biotechnology. This includes investing in the development of unbiased AI models, ensuring that data is collected and used ethically, and creating transparent systems that allow individuals to understand how their data is being used. The future of AI in biotech holds great promise, but only if these ethical challenges are addressed [10].

Conclusion

AI is a powerful tool that is reshaping the landscape of biotechnology, offering new possibilities for medical research, healthcare, and agriculture. However, the ethical concerns surrounding data privacy and algorithmic bias must be addressed to ensure that AI is used responsibly. Protecting sensitive data, ensuring fairness in AI models, and maintaining transparency are essential steps in navigating the ethical challenges of AI in biotech. By developing and adhering to ethical frameworks, the biotech industry can harness the potential of AI while safeguarding the rights and well-being of individuals.

References

  1. Mittelstadt BD, Allo P, Taddeo M, et al. The ethics of algorithms: Mapping the debate. 2016;3(2):2053951716679679.

    2. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  2. Jobin A, Ienca M, Vayena E. The global landscape of AI ethics guidelines. 2019;1(9):389-99.

    3. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  3. Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Floridi L. Why a right to explanation of automated decision-making does not exist in the general data protection regulation. Int Data Priv Law. 2017;7(2):76-99.

    4. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  4. Obermeyer Z, Powers B, Vogeli C. Dissecting racial bias in an algorithm used to manage the health of populations. Science. 2019;366(6464):447-53.

    5. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  5. Price WN. Big data and black-box medical algorithms. Sci Transl Med. 2018;10(471):eaao5333.

    6. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  6. Castelló-Sirvent F, Roger-Monzó V, Gouveia-Rodrigues R. Quo Vadis, University? A Roadmap for AI and Ethics in Higher Education. 2024;22(6):35-51.

    7. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  7. Braunack-Mayer A, Fabrianesi B, Street J. Sharing government health data with the private sector: community attitudes survey. J Med Internet Res. 2021;23(10):e24200.

    8. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  8. Stogiannos N, Malik R, Kumar A. Black box no more: a scoping review of AI governance frameworks to guide procurement and adoption of AI in medical imaging and radiotherapy in the UK. Br J Radiol. 2023;96(1152):20221157.

    9. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  9. Broussard M. Artificial unintelligence: How computers misunderstand the world. MIT Press. 2018.

    10. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  10. He J, Baxter SL, Xu J. The practical implementation of artificial intelligence technologies in medicine. Nat Med. 2019;25(1):30-6.

    11. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Get the App