Doubtless the establishment was trying to silence him when his license was revoked for malpractice:
Revoking the license does not seem to be on the basis of one isolated incident:
'Dr Lundell has a ten year disciplinary history with the board. Prior PACE evaluations, additional CME on record-keeping, and probation have not helped him avoid the similar acts of professional misconduct that were found in this case.'
Normally I would argue that none of the above has any bearing on the quality of his argument. However, in this case, part of his evidence rests on his testimony as a heart surgeon, and so anything which challenges that credibility needs to be taken into account.