Uh. No. Doctors are required to testify in court every day in this nation regarding their patient care and back up claims they have made. Names are redacted to protect patient confidentiality.
The doctor could back up one single claim he'd made about patients he had helped. Not one.
That does not make sense. Are you seriously claiming that he's never helped anyone? I flatly do not believe it.
There is a link in post #144 concerning the doctor's misadventures with a dissatisfied patient named M.T. This went to court. You say that, per Greer's court, "not one" was helped. That was decidedly not the case in this other court's findings.
In the linked case, the administrative law judge found, "There is evidence that in over 200 patients seen by Hammesfahr that a large percentage improved after being treated by Hammesfahr." (Items 56 and 57, which give the details of the testing by a Dr. Gimon.)
Items 58 and 59 report the details of another impressive finding: "Diane Hartley tested two groups of Hammesfahr's patients who were treated at his clinic... Of the 242 patients tested by Ms. Hartley, 221 patients demonstrated improvement in one or more of the areas tested and 21 showed no improvement."
#60 states: "The evidence establishes that Hammesfahr informed his patients by the use of videos, orientation sessions, literature and a web site on the Internet of the nature of the therapy and did not guarantee that the patients would improve as a result of the treatment. Patients were able to make an informed decision on whether to try the treatment."
The judge found against Dr. Hammesfahr on some point of the Florida statutes that I do not understand, but I think it had to do with advertising rather than medicine. But the same document credits Dr. Hammesfahr with something like a 90% treatment success rate.