
The information displayed in the AIM should not be reported as representing the official views of the OECD or of its member countries.
David Rosenthal, a 39-year-old in San Francisco, was hospitalized after following ChatGPT's unauthorized and incorrect medical advice regarding medication use. The incident, which worsened his mental health, led Rosenthal to sue OpenAI, highlighting the risks of AI systems providing unlicensed medical guidance.[AI generated]
Why's our monitor labelling this an incident or hazard?
The event clearly involves an AI system (ChatGPT) whose use directly led to harm to a person's health (mental health deterioration and hospitalization). The AI system's incorrect medical guidance and support for stopping prescribed medication are central to the harm. This fits the definition of an AI Incident, as the AI system's use directly led to injury or harm to a person. The legal case and allegations further support the classification. There is no indication that the event is only a potential risk (hazard), a beneficial use, or merely complementary information. Hence, AI Incident is the appropriate classification.[AI generated]