> his is the exact opposite of how burden of proof works. An extraordinary claim is being made. Person suffering hallucinations is concerned they have a brain

> his is the exact opposite of how burden of proof works. An extraordinary claim is being made. Person suffering hallucinations is concerned they have a brain tumor, experiences said concern in the form of hallucination, turns out to have brain tumor, isn't an extraordinary claim. Person with symptom X consistent with disease Z worries they might have disease Z, expressed through symptom X, and finds out they have disease Z is ... not extraordinary at all. It's the particulars that make it an interesting anecdote, but the overall phenomenon isn't. Imagine we changed it just slightly: Patient with spastic paralysis of their lower limbs thinks they have a brain tumor. Attributes that thought to themselves. Calls the nearest big medical center - because that's what people worried about cancer do - and gets seen by onco. Onco finds a brain tumor. Unsurprising, because central neuro symptoms. The story changes only insofar as "symptom was a cognitive effect that made it an interesting anecdote."