Right, because the argument is fallacious, which was the point of the example. We don't argue medicine from first principles in this century, by the way. Absent

Right, because the argument is fallacious, which was the point of the example. We don't argue medicine from first principles in this century, by the way. Absent hard empirical evidence, you can speculate what you like, but Occam's Razor suggests natural healing or the placebo effect as being the most likely explanations. If you're just a fan of wild invention, you might find other reasons, but you're probably not going to convince many that wild invention must be taken seriously.