> Without it, a named medical professional rendering a medical opinion is credible.

That’s your opinion. I disagree. It’s not credible, because being a “professional” does not mean you are capable of ignoring your own biases, especially when they run deep as they do in this particular conflict. I’ll also point out that the medical opinion you’re referring to lacks any actual details. For example - if the injuries are consistent with a cigarette burn, what specifically makes it “consistent” and how does this medical professional differentiate this possibility from all the other ones? Why is anything substantial conveniently omitted from all these stories, which instead all use the vague phrasing of “consistent with”? Why are there no details on this doctor, where they practice, or their credentials anywhere?

> That’s your opinion. I disagree

That's fair. For what it's worth, we need more polls that have a ESH option for Israel and Palestine, because my patience with both sides in this has basically run empty.

> what specifically makes it “consistent” and how does this medical professional differentiate this possibility from all the other ones?

I'm not a medical professional. Another medical professional would need to disagree with the findings for this to rise to meriting attention again.

> Why are there no details on this doctor, where they practice, or their credentials anywhere?

They gave a name. Are you claiming they're a fake doctor?