The situation is either critical or not.
If this patient was definitely going to die without the rescue by helicopter AND it needed not just any old helicopter pilot to carry out this mission (who incidentally was available) but one who was capable of conducting such a treacherous rescue - I would suggest that the adrenaline would be pumping and that pilot would be under severe stress conditions during the actual rescue.
So here we have the conditions present at the time of the 'lift'.
Now let's invite a pilot with these capabilities to attend the rescue - one who has a medical problem, severe enough for the AME's to ground him.
So we insert a pilot with either previous TIA or similar medical concern into a seriously stressful scenario with total disregard for the outcome.
Is this the thought process of a sane person(s)?
IF (and of course it is a big IF)...IF he had suffered a relapse and an accident resulted in the loss of one or more individuals. Where would you armchair judges be then?
Half a mile away no doubt, walking in the opposite direction and washing your hands of the fact that you knew him and supported his actions.
In summary, just so I get this clear: You identified a risk (it being an injured person (ONE PERSON) on a mountain side) and your solution to this risk was to throw another risk at it.
God help us all.
