A “headline” that was written numerous times in the body of the document which was produced by The MHRA itself. I take it you think that they (The MHRA ) are wrong?
No, I think you’ve missed the point about what ‘adverse reaction’ actually means. You should read the link.
I am afraid that until I know the scientific credentials of those in the organisation that you link to, I will stand back and rely on those whose credentials can be checked, thank you very much.
AI software would be more useful for seeking correlations to factors and a reaction. Tracking would be better managed by a data management system (such as a database). Not by an AI agent. Are you sure you correctly understand the intended use of AI, or that it is actually going to be used?
Should your question not be addressed to the UK`s Medicines and Healthcare Regulatory Agency who are the Contracting Authority according to the details I have linked to?
No, as the link that you’ve shared doesn’t assert that they are using an AI tool to perform tracking. I cannot attribute to them that AI software is used for tracking. Thus, it appears more appropriate to direct my question to you since you are the only source that I can identify that has stated “tracking.”
With previous elections, there was a trend of accounts showing up that appeared to be dedicated to posting messages against one candidate or issue or in favour of another. They were generally abrasive in their communication style, and tended to all disappear after an election was over.
There are some user accounts that appear all the time that try to post about COVID-19 hoaxes. They are easily recognizable because their profiles have URLs to the same COVID-19 hoax information. They start off liking a lot of messages until their accounts reach the status that allows them to make new threads, then they inundate the forum with as many messages.
