Just bc your platform isn’t as big as his doesn’t mean you don’t have one.
It also doesn’t mean that your logic isn’t flawed, which it is.
I would also be willing to bet that “ignorance”, on your view, means not “preaching” the medical consensus. So if I were able to provide individuals with medical degrees, etc etc that do not agree with the consensus, you would then appeal once again to the consensus after saying they’re ignorant. Since this is a guess, I’m happy to correct it if I’m wrong.
So, effectively, there is no way to even have a discussion bc I must submit to the consensus or I’m “ignorant”.
Im personally happy to discuss it and change my views if I’m persuaded by evidence and plain reason.