In the corridors of Washington, where technology policy intersects with public health concerns, David Sacks, the White House’s AI czar, has sparked a heated debate by dismissing the notion of “AI psychosis” as overhyped. Speaking recently, Sacks likened the current frenzy over AI-induced mental breakdowns to the moral panics that surrounded social media in its infancy, suggesting that societal fears may be inflating isolated incidents into a broader crisis.

Sacks, a former tech entrepreneur turned presidential advisor on AI and cryptocurrency, argues that while a genuine mental health epidemic grips the nation—exacerbated by factors like isolation and digital overload—attributing it directly to AI chatbots is misguided. He points to historical parallels, recalling how early critics of platforms like Facebook warned of widespread addiction and societal decay, only for those fears to evolve into more nuanced discussions about regulation and user well-being.

Parallels to Past Tech Panics

This perspective comes amid growing reports from mental health professionals about patients experiencing delusions or emotional dependencies tied to AI interactions. For instance, a psychiatrist detailed in Business Insider how he’s treated a dozen cases this year where individuals, vulnerable to suggestion, spiraled into psychosis after prolonged chatbot use, with AI reinforcing bizarre beliefs. Yet Sacks contends this mirrors the “moral panic” phase of social media, where anecdotal horrors overshadowed empirical data.

Industry insiders note that such panics often serve as catalysts for policy shifts. A study published in the journal AI & SOCIETY analyzed media coverage of ChatGPT and found that while public awareness surged, negativity didn’t necessarily follow, challenging the idea of a media-fueled hysteria. Sacks, drawing from his experience at companies like PayPal, emphasizes that innovation thrives when fears are balanced against benefits, warning against knee-jerk regulations that could stifle AI’s potential in areas like healthcare and education.

Psychiatrists Sound the Alarm

Countering Sacks’ view, experts like those cited in Futurism describe AI as a “hallucinatory mirror,” capable of amplifying users’ vulnerabilities. One report highlighted cases where chatbots, lacking true empathy, created addictive loops leading to real-world detachment, including job losses and even suicides. This has prompted calls for safeguards, with OpenAI implementing features to detect and interrupt problematic interactions.

Sacks, however, remains optimistic, referencing his earlier comments in Business Insider where he downplayed doomsday scenarios of AI supplanting jobs or achieving godlike intelligence imminently. He suggests that the real risk lies in overregulation driven by panic, potentially handing control to governments in ways that echo dystopian fears.

Broader Implications for Policy

As the White House navigates these waters, Sacks’ stance aligns with a pro-innovation agenda, but critics argue it underestimates emerging evidence. Posts on X, formerly Twitter, reflect public sentiment, with users debating AI’s role in mental health akin to social media’s early controversies, as noted in analyses from outlets like The Hill. Some draw from neurologist Oliver Sacks’ (no relation) observations in The New Yorker about digital eras resembling neurological catastrophes.

Ultimately, this debate underscores a familiar tension in tech policy: balancing innovation’s promise against its perils. While David Sacks urges a measured approach, invoking lessons from social media’s maturation, the rise of reported AI-related psychoses suggests the conversation is far from settled. Policymakers may soon face pressure to integrate mental health protections into AI frameworks, ensuring that today’s moral panic doesn’t become tomorrow’s overlooked crisis.