In this letter to the editor, I offer a critique of the article titled “Consulting the Digital Doctor: Google Versus ChatGPT as Sources of Information on Breast Implant-Associated Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma and Breast Implant Illness.” While acknowledging the authors’ pioneering effort to compare informational outputs from Google and a generative AI (GAI)—ChatGPT, I raise concerns about the methodology, lack of rigorous validation, potential biases, and the overstatement of findings. The letter suggests that the authors’ conclusions about the superiority of ChatGPT in providing high-quality medical information may be premature, given the limitations of the study design and the evolving nature of artificial intelligence (AI) technology.

No Level Assigned This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each submission to which Evidence-Based Medicine rankings are applicable. This excludes Review Articles, Book Reviews, and manuscripts that concern Basic Science, Animal Studies, Cadaver Studies, and Experimental Studies. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266