Question

Hello, honorable Rabbi,
My question concerns the reliability of physicians versus a determination of the Sages, a question on the level of principle even before practical details. Heaven forbid, I am not trying to “attack” or undermine, but rather to ask out of critical thought, which requires this kind of approach.
Rabbi Kook of blessed memory ruled (Responsa Da’at Kohen): “If so, the words of the Sages are certain, and the words of the physicians are doubtful, and doubt cannot override certainty…” –
That the words of physicians involve doubt is clear to us (though one could discuss what degree of doubt, depending on the case and on experience in those fields…).
But the assertion that “the words of the Sages are certain” seems to me far-reaching.
It seems to me that any sensible person can see the straightforward progress in medical and scientific diagnosis between our time and the time of the Sages. Moreover, the Geonim already wrote that one should not rely on remedies brought in the Talmud. And after all, we know of various scientific claims brought in the Talmud that turned out differently (I do not see this as detracting from the Sages’ stature; this is simply the scientific and empirical progress of generations upon generations).
If so, in what sense are the words of the Sages certain? The fact that they thought a certain thing was dangerous in the past (for example, an eye illness) — why is that more certain than today’s medicine, which has much deeper analytical tools and the possibility of far broader experimentation?
[Please do not answer me with the explanation, “the Sages spoke with divine inspiration”: a. And how would you know that? Anyone can choose his beliefs, but it is impossible to base this on that, especially not on the halakhic plane. b. I judge our Sages favorably, that they did not establish Jewish law based on divine inspiration, for had they done so they would have been liable (according to Maimonides) to death by the religious court].
Thank you very much in advance