This is the strange contradiction of working with AI: On a good day, it feels as though you have gained several new abilities overnight. On a bad day, you are awake until sunrise thinking one more prompt might fix everything.

At 2am on a Saturday in April, I clicked what looked like a harmless update for my AI agent. Soon, the entire system crashed. I restarted everything and stared at troubleshooting screens and tried to repair the AI agent until my eyes burned. Nothing worked.

By the time I surrendered, I had exhausted my weekly AI token allowance only two days after it had reset. I went to bed while my brain continued debugging, having spent my digital allowance arguing with broken software when normal people slept through their weekend.

A month later, a completely different experience. I used an AI agent to build a game combining cancer treatment with an arcade-style plane shooter, to attract donations for cancer research. An idea that had existed only in my head was becoming real and playable. Each successful instruction tempted me to add one more feature, even as my token balance fell alarmingly fast.

A phrase I recently came across on social media — “the AI token vampire” — tells the tale. It does not drink blood. It engulfs tokens, attention and, occasionally, common sense.

AI tools have assisted with creations that genuinely matter. People who cannot code, like me, can now build applications. Small businesses can automate routine work. Employees can explore skills that once required years of training.

Every successful prompt delivers a small jolt of satisfaction, a rush of dopamine in the brain. Every response an AI tool returns invites another prompt, another revision, and another hour of work. What I did not notice at first was that AI had removed the natural pauses that once forced me to step away: the water-cooler break, the wait for a colleague to reply, or the mental reset between tasks.

AI tools run relentlessly. While one task is processing, I open another chat and enter the next prompt in parallel. The machine never gets tired or complains. Somewhere in that rhythm, I stop asking whether I should continue and simply keep going because I can.

A 2026 survey by WebMD Health Services found that 80% of more than 3,800 full-time American employees regularly used AI at work. The employees who believed AI made them more productive were also 4.5 times more likely to report burnout. The middle managers in particular are caught between leadership expectations and team realities, reporting burnout at more than three times the rate of individual contributors.

This does not prove that AI causes burnout. But it reflects what many of us are beginning to experience: productivity gains can arrive with higher expectations, faster cycles and fewer chances to recover.

Malaysians are not immune. On July 7, Human Resources Minister Datuk Seri R Ramanan told Parliament that 16.91% of workers screened under the National Occupational Disease Prevention Programme were likely experiencing work-related psychosocial disorders. The report flagged digital technology and AI as workplace culture pressure points, alongside workload management and employment conditions.

Most employees are already operating at full capacity. The expectation is that AI will ease some of that burden. But unless workloads and expectations are redesigned at the same time, every hour saved will simply be filled with more assignments in the name of efficiency.

Employees now process more information and make more decisions without feeling any less busy. They must also verify AI-generated content, learn rapidly changing tools, and worry that colleagues who use AI more effectively might eventually replace them.

This is not just an employee wellness issue; it is an operational risk. Exhausted people make mistakes. Overwhelmed managers approve flawed AI output. Teams that begin to associate AI with relentless pressure will eventually resist the very technology meant to help them.

It is impossible to reverse the AI era, and we will all need to adapt and evolve. This means learning unfamiliar systems, rethinking parts of our professional identities, and developing new ways of working. It requires real effort. And yes, some software updates will still slay my peaceful Saturday night.

There is a fine line between growing pains and burnout.

Growing pains say, “This is difficult, but I am developing.”

Burnout says, “I no longer have the energy or control needed to continue safely.”

The first may be part of progress. The second is a psychological warning that something needs to change.

We need to reimagine workplace culture in the age of AI. We must train people not only to use AI, but also to question it, verify its output, and recognise when it should be switched off (or alternatively allow it to run overnight).

Corporate performance measures should reward sound judgment and quality. Every productivity gain should not automatically result in a higher target simply because a team can absorb more AI-assisted work. Burning out the people who use AI is a design flaw. It impairs judgment and creates unnecessary risks for the organisation.

AI is not going away, nor should it. Used thoughtfully, it can help people learn, create, and compete in ways that were previously out of reach.

I recently listened to a TED Talk in which change management guru Andreas Gebhardt shared a memorable quote: “If you want to learn something, you have to go into the risk, because today’s risk is tomorrow’s safety.” We are all embarking on an exciting journey in the age of AI, with opportunities to develop new skills and solve some of humanity’s most pressing problems. The growing pains may be worth the risk because they equip us with the skills we will need tomorrow.

Dr Low Ley Hian is head of business development at Cancer Research Malaysia and senior fellow at the Pacific Research Center.