Yes. People talk as if this would have been the first time Shoo Lee encountered a setback or dissent.
You don't get to be a senior researcher and an implementer of change in medical practice without plenty of experience in both. He'd be used to having his views challenged, and used to doing exactly what he did in response - going back and sifting the evidence and explaining where he is coming from.
People who present this as a "revenge mission" fired by anger or wounded vanity really must not understand much about his career path. It's like claiming a sportsman has to be on a revenge mission with wounded pride to win a match, or a prosecution lawyer must hate the defence lawyer and the defendant. These are just people doing what is normal in their sphere.
If you are seeing claims that Lee must be angry or upset to convene a multidisciplinary panel to examine medical records, @Firefly1987 , I don't think they can be coming from anyone who understands his job and his history. He's being generous with his time, but apart from the legal context, he's not doing anything he won't have done dozens of times before.
I find the fantasies about Shoo Lee, thwarted supervillain, absolutely the silliest aspect of online discourse on this case.