{ "source": "Cooked Index — occupational AI risk register", "page": "https://cookedindex.com/jobs/biological-scientists-all-other/", "methodology": "https://cookedindex.com/methodology", "notice": "Verdicts are re-examined as evidence accumulates. Re-fetch before relying on this; the page above always carries the current score.", "scored_at": "2026-08-11", "model": "claude-opus-5", "occupation": { "title": "Biological Scientists, All Other", "soc_code": "19-1029", "category": "Science", "us_employment": 55850, "median_annual_wage": 98920 }, "verdict": "EXPOSED", "risk_resistance": 43, "contested": false, "near_boundary": false, "dimensions": { "task_resistance": 11, "embodiment": 12, "liability_shield": 2, "trust_premium": 6, "judgment_accountability": 12 }, "reasoning": { "task_resistance": "At 11 the split is roughly even: pipetting a qPCR plate, dissecting a specimen, or running a transect through wetland cover has no software substitute, but the literature review, sequence alignment pipelines, R/Python analysis scripts, methods sections and grant boilerplate that fill the other half of the week are now first-draft work for a model, which is why this sits below the 14 line rather than at it.", "embodiment": "A 12 reflects that the bench work is real but mostly indoors and controlled — BSL-2 hoods, incubators, cryostorage, microscopy — with field sampling, animal handling, or greenhouse and mesocosm work adding uncontrolled conditions for a substantial minority of the category rather than all of it.", "liability_shield": "There is no biologist's license: you can run a lab bench with a BS and no board exam, and where oversight exists it flows through the institution — IRB, IACUC, IBC, or a licensed veterinarian or PI who signs the protocol — so nobody can be barred from practice, only from a grant.", "trust_premium": "A 6 covers the relationships that do matter — a PI who knows your hands, a collaborating agency biologist, a contract sponsor who trusts your assay results — but the output is a dataset or a peer-reviewed paper that is judged on reproducibility by strangers, not on who produced it.", "judgment_accountability": "At 12 you own the calls that shape the science — which controls a design actually needs, whether a contaminated run gets discarded or reported, how to interpret an ambiguous population trend or an off-target effect — but those calls are checked by PIs, reviewers, and replication before anyone's health or money is on the line, which is what separates this from the 14+ band." }, "rationale": "This catch-all category spans bench researchers, field biologists, and agency/industry science staff; the modal worker splits time between hands-on protocols (culturing, sampling, assays, specimen handling) and screen work (literature synthesis, statistical analysis, manuscript and grant drafting, protocol writing) — and the screen half is exactly what LLMs now do at usable quality. Wet-lab and field execution stays human because lab automation is capital-intensive and biological samples are messy, but no license protects the role and nobody hires a biologist for the relationship. Experimental design and interpretation under genuine uncertainty are the durable core; routine analysis and writing are not.", "outlook": "Headcount holds roughly flat but each role shifts from analysis-and-writing toward physical execution plus design ownership, with junior data-crunching positions thinning fastest.", "what_would_raise_it": { "levers": [ { "dimension": "liability_shield", "change": "Biosecurity/dual-use rules that name a specific accountable human: e.g. the 2024 OSTP/USG Dual Use Research of Concern and Pathogens with Enhanced Pandemic Potential policy (effective May 2025) requires institutional review and named PI attestation; extension of nucleic-acid synthesis screening duties (EO 14110 framework) to require a named responsible scientist to certify sequence-design provenance, including AI-generated designs, would put personal sign-off on a licensed-equivalent human. Similarly IBC/IACUC protocols requiring a named investigator to attest that AI-drafted protocols were independently verified.", "plausibility": "plausible", "would_add": 4 }, { "dimension": "judgment_accountability", "change": "FDA/EPA data-integrity expectations extended to computational and AI-assisted work — e.g. FDA's January 2025 draft guidance on AI in regulatory decision-making for drugs and biologics requires credibility assessment and a human accountable for model context of use; if study directors under GLP (21 CFR 58) are formally required to own AI-derived conclusions in submissions, the interpretive call becomes an attributable, auditable act.", "plausibility": "already happening", "would_add": 3 }, { "dimension": "task_resistance", "change": "Task-mix shift: the routine tier (literature synthesis, boilerplate methods, standard stats, first-draft grants) is the part already automated; if that tier is stripped out, the residual job is hypothesis framing, failure diagnosis on contaminated or anomalous samples, and deciding which negative result kills a program. This raises the score only for the workers who keep the design tier — headcount effects are separate.", "plausibility": "already happening", "would_add": 3 }, { "dimension": "embodiment", "change": "Growth in field and containment-dependent work that resists capital automation: BSL-3/4 handling, environmental sampling under permit (ESA Section 10 permits require named qualified biologists), and wildlife/agricultural surveillance where specimen condition judgment is in-person. Agency contracts specifying that permitted survey work be performed by a named qualified biologist on site raise this.", "plausibility": "plausible", "would_add": 2 }, { "dimension": "trust_premium", "change": "Journal and funder authorship rules that bar AI as author and require named human accountability for data (ICMJE, Nature policy) create attribution value but not buyer willingness to pay a premium; expert-witness and regulatory-testimony work is the only segment where a human is specifically purchased, and it is small.", "plausibility": "unlikely", "would_add": 1 } ], "ceiling_note": "No licensure path exists for the bulk of this category, so liability_shield gains are capped at protocol-attestation duties rather than true personal professional liability; and grant-funded headcount is set by budget, not by whether the residual judgment work is defensible." }, "adjudication": null, "employment_history": { "points": [ { "y": 2017, "emp": 37590, "wage": 76690 }, { "y": 2018, "emp": 42640, "wage": 79590 }, { "y": 2019, "emp": 40100, "wage": 82220 }, { "y": 2020, "emp": 41680, "wage": 85290 }, { "y": 2021, "emp": 47050, "wage": 82530 }, { "y": 2022, "emp": 55300, "wage": 87300 }, { "y": 2023, "emp": 61220, "wage": 91100 }, { "y": 2024, "emp": 59710, "wage": 93330 }, { "y": 2025, "emp": 55850, "wage": 98920 } ], "from": 2017, "to": 2025, "change_pct": 48.6, "comparable_from": 2019, "spans_soc_revision": true }, "pivots": [ { "slug": "chemistry-teachers-postsecondary", "title": "Chemistry Teachers, Postsecondary", "verdict": "EXPOSED", "risk_resistance": 54, "median_wage": 93250, "overlap": 86, "skills_to_close": [ "Learning Strategies", "Monitoring", "Instructing" ] }, { "slug": "natural-sciences-managers", "title": "Natural Sciences Managers", "verdict": "EXPOSED", "risk_resistance": 53, "median_wage": 167220, "overlap": 84, "skills_to_close": [ "Coordination" ] }, { "slug": "atmospheric-earth-marine-and-space-sciences-teachers-postsecondary", "title": "Atmospheric, Earth, Marine, and Space Sciences Teachers, Postsecondary", "verdict": "EXPOSED", "risk_resistance": 54, "median_wage": 103170, "overlap": 80, "skills_to_close": [ "Speaking", "Instructing", "Learning Strategies" ] } ], "license": "https://cookedindex.com/terms" }