A 55-year-old former pastor from Florida is suing OpenAI and CEO Sam Altman, claiming that ChatGPT's inaccurate medical advice prevented him from seeking emergency treatment for a pulmonary embolism, a potentially fatal blood clot in the lungs. The lawsuit, filed in San Francisco County Superior Court in July 2026, marks a significant moment in the ongoing debate over whether AI companies bear responsibility when their tools provide guidance that harms users.

What Happened in the Winters v. OpenAI Case?

Scott Winters asked ChatGPT about recurring dizzy spells and tenderness in his groin. According to the lawsuit, GPT-4o, an earlier version of the chatbot that OpenAI has since retired, recommended that he limit his movement and stay home. When Winters inquired about the groin tenderness specifically, the AI suggested it was likely not something dangerous.

The reality was far different. The tenderness was a sign of blood clots forming in his lungs. Doctors later determined that Winters' lack of movement, which he followed based on ChatGPT's advice, likely contributed to the development of the pulmonary embolism. He was hospitalized shortly after asking the AI about his symptoms, narrowly avoiding what could have been a fatal outcome.

The case has drawn attention from medical professionals concerned about the broader implications. Dr. Peter McCullough, an American cardiologist, published commentary on his Substack noting the inherent tension: "If a fiduciary relationship is established, and my advice did not meet the community standard of care in the setting of a bad outcome, I could be sued for malpractice. Why would this not be the case for AI giving out medical guidance?"

How Is OpenAI Responding to the Lawsuit?

OpenAI has pushed back against the claims, arguing that the lawsuit oversimplifies a complex situation. Drew Pusateri, an OpenAI spokesperson, stated that the company believes AI chat can improve healthcare but emphasized that ChatGPT is not a doctor and should never be used as a substitute for medical care.

"Treating chatbots as the whole story behind people's medical decisions or outcomes oversimplifies a much bigger challenge, and risks getting in the way of people accessing powerful new tools that can aid them in their health journey," Pusateri said.

Drew Pusateri, OpenAI Spokesperson

The company also pointed to its terms of service, which explicitly state that ChatGPT is not a medical device or a substitute for professional healthcare. OpenAI emphasized that treating AI outputs as the sole factor in complex medical decisions fails to account for the full picture of patient care.

Why This Case Matters Beyond One Patient's Experience

The Winters v. OpenAI lawsuit raises fundamental questions about AI liability and accountability that extend far beyond this single case. As more people turn to AI chatbots for health information, the legal and ethical boundaries remain unclear. Key issues at stake include:

• Medical Liability: Whether AI companies can be held responsible for health advice that leads to patient harm, similar to how doctors face malpractice claims.
• Duty of Care: Whether providing health guidance creates an implicit obligation to meet medical standards, even if the AI disclaims being a medical device.
• User Behavior: How people actually use AI tools in practice, regardless of disclaimers, and whether companies have a responsibility to account for real-world usage patterns.
• Regulatory Framework: The absence of clear regulations governing AI-generated health advice and whether existing healthcare laws apply to AI systems.

Steps Users Can Take to Safely Use AI for Health Information

While this lawsuit unfolds, people seeking health information online should understand how to use AI tools responsibly:

• Verify with Professionals: Always confirm any health advice from AI with a licensed healthcare provider before making medical decisions or changing your behavior.
• Treat AI as a Starting Point: Use ChatGPT and similar tools to gather general information or understand medical concepts, but never rely on them as your sole source of medical guidance.
• Report Serious Symptoms Immediately: If you experience chest pain, difficulty breathing, severe dizziness, or other emergency symptoms, seek immediate medical attention rather than consulting an AI chatbot.
• Document Your Sources: Keep records of any AI-generated health advice you receive, in case you need to discuss it with your doctor or for your own medical records.

What Does This Mean for OpenAI's Future?

The lawsuit arrives at a moment when OpenAI and other AI companies are expanding their capabilities and reach. Sam Altman and other tech leaders have been actively engaged in discussions about AI governance, including appearances at the United Nations Security Council meeting on artificial intelligence. However, the Winters case suggests that legal and liability questions may move faster than policy frameworks designed to address them.

The outcome of this case could set important precedents for how AI companies are held accountable when their tools provide guidance in sensitive domains like healthcare. It may also influence how OpenAI and competitors design their systems, including what disclaimers they include and how they train their models to handle health-related queries.

For now, the case remains in early stages, but it underscores a growing tension: as AI becomes more capable and more widely used, the gap between what these tools can do and what they should be allowed to do continues to narrow. The Winters v. OpenAI lawsuit may ultimately help define that boundary.