From the Fifth Circuit's decision Thursday in Torrey v. Infectious Diseases Soc'y of Am., written by Judge Kyle Duncan, joined by Judges Carl Stewart and Edith Jones; seems quite right to me:
A professional society specializing in the study and treatment of infectious diseases published guidelines in a peer-reviewed medical journal for treating Lyme disease. Individuals who claim to suffer from persistent Lyme disease symptoms sued the society, alleging the guidelines harmed them by casting doubt on how chronic Lyme disease should be treated and even whether the condition exists.
The district court dismissed the claims because it concluded that the statements at issue were non-actionable medical opinions, not factual assertions that could support a claim for fraudulent or negligent misrepresentation….
Plaintiffs are people who claim to suffer from chronic Lyme disease…. Many patients respond to short-term antibiotics, but some do not. This latter group is said by some to experience "post-Lyme disease syndrome," "posttreatment chronic Lyme disease," or "chronic Lyme disease."
