Two regenerative doctors defend their field against critics, arguing opponents attack them personally rather than engaging with evidence. One asks if critics actually watched her video and reviewed the data, while the other calls their literature a house of cards.
To me, it's like this. No brainer. If there's something that may be better, I owe it to my patients to find out. Is it true? Because that's what I said on LinkedIn when I was attacked. I said, did you watch my video? Did you look at the evidence? Can you please comment on evidence? Let's talk about the evidence. Show me the contrary.
No one again. Of course they're going to attack you personally because they don't want to talk about the evidence because theirs is manipulated. All you have to do is look at their literature, the whole body of literature. It's a house of cards. And it all falls down as soon as you take that one simple card away.
