I mean, the guy is correct… there are plenty of cases where someone has recovered from something that doesn’t have widespread impact.

That doesn’t make this any less, but a good dose of scepticism is pretty healthy when it comes to broad statements like ‘cures diabetes’

Edit: too many versions of ‘healthy’ haha

It justifies, in fact begs for human trials, but a single unregulated data point from a single moment is hardly a cure.

It becomes a cure after the treatment is isolated from mitigating factors and acutely applied to the same disorder in many patients in controlled conditions with peer-reviewed and independently confirmed repeatable results over time.

Well, the phrase is, "the plural of anecdote is not statistic." In this case, we only have a single case, so it doesn't even escape "anecdote." I think at that point, there isn't yet a scientific basis to call it a "cure."