FOMO, the fear of missing out, can be a major driver for behaviour change in health and social care. Seeing what others are doing, particularly if high-status people are instigating, can cause helpful behaviours to spread across society. Lives can be lengthened and pressures on public sector budgets can be reduced. 

But it can be hit-and-miss; unhelpful behaviours can spread just as easily. Witness the growth of anti-vaxing, something that is already endangering lives as thousands shun the protection of MMR and other key vaccines. 

The future could well be in PADO – Predictive Analytics Driven Outcomes. This is where by using AI to look at the hidden patterns embedded in our internet activity, communication prompts can be used to drive behaviour change. Shoshana Zuboff, in her excellent book, The Rise of Surveillance Capitalism, showed how the likes of Google routinely use our search history to predict and influence our future behaviour. 

The key to using predictive analytics is the in the quality of the data – the deeper the insight, the more reliable. According to Yuval Harari in Sapiens, Facebook, no slouch in the influence business, collects over 300 data points from each user. 

But we are about to enter a new era, according to The Observer's John Naughton's in an article on thought stream capitalism. And this is because ChatGPT is able to build deep personal relationships with users – who freely share their innermost secrets and ways of thinking. That data, the content of sometimes intimate conversations with AI, is both shared freely and owned by vast corporations. 

All of this creates both an opportunity and a threat to the Government, keen to drive down costs in health and social care by persuading people to adopt healthy behaviours and lifestyles.  

The opportunity is obvious: using what data shows about individuals hopes, fears, dreams, anxieties, personalities, predispositions, wants and the rest, the Government, and health and social care leaders, would be able to nudge new behaviours with more precision than ever before. 

ChatGPT-like AI will have real time information about users; change agents will not only know what's on the minds of citizens but what's on their minds now. And by combining clever nudge campaigns, using social and traditional media, with our predisposition towards FOMO (if they're doing it, I should be too) the widespread adoption of socially beneficial behaviours could be just around the corner.

Health and social care leaders could use a similar approach to drive up productivity among staff. Again, rolling out ChatGPT-like software at work (through an inhouse counselling service, for example), they could enable people to share their thoughts on what's good and bad at work. Of course, leaders have to commit to confidentiality but they would still have meta-data and trends info that could enable better engagement with hard-pressed staff. 

But the downside is the disproportionate threat to our society. Any Government that was able to profoundly influence citizens' behaviour might be tempted to go further and to influence voters' attitudes and democratic choices. It could happen – and probably already has (according to some reports). 

It's a hard balancing act. We want the Government to make society better – it can, after all, do what individual citizens can't. And the better they understand how we citizens feel about things, what our anxieties are and what we really want, the more they will be able to meet our needs. It's a win-win – in an ideal world. 

But the world isn't ideal. Those in power today may be benevolent but who knows who will come next. Where we afford Governments the luxury of gaining massive insight, how can we guarantee that the next incumbents won't be bad actors? Again, this happens. 

One thing is certain: we are heading at full speed into an AI assisted world. The Government has embraced it. Read Fit for the Future and it's clear that AI will be a major catalyst for change. Even with all the potential benefits for positive social change, are we spending enough time thinking about the risks? Hard to say. 

There's a race to make AI front and centre in public life. And maybe we're ignoring the risks because we don't want to be last to the party. It's FOMO all over again.