it’s called in debating the “appeal to authority” argument. luke is merely saying “show us the detailed long term follow up research on perhaps thousands of pilots who had your condition that proves you are not a risk to humankind” - and when this is not available as it never will be, that Clinton is an unacceptable risk. It (the argument) is dressed up because luke purports to be an aeromedical surgeon.
i say “never will be” since who is going to bother researching the outcomes in pilots? As for the general community, you would expect such studies in comparison with other available treatments.
His argument is specious because what matters is the risk associated with poor Clinton’s conditions compared to all the other risks of sudden incapacitation. A bad meal being top of the list.
But all that is irrelevant because there is no guarantee that Avmed will change its view in twelve months. if avmed were to state that a full certificate would be granted at the end of a year of good health , that would be different and perhaps justifiable.