HaLeivi – not really. The main point he makes is that Chazal can’t be wrong and that Chazal are always right against the doctors. So he seems to be saying that this would be so even in a case in which “basic medical knowledge” (as opposed to a particular case) are against what Chazal says.
So Winnie is pointing out that the case brought is not a good example of the general rule being demonstrated.
The general rule being stated is:
“Don’t believe general medical knowledge when it goes against Chazal”
and the example given is an example of one doctor in one specific unusual case.