I don't know if it makes a difference, but doctors also need to follow AMA (here in US) standards and have a license.

The AMA is the "American Medical Association" run by and for doctors, not a vendor. And the criteria to get a license are entirely transparent.

Peer recognition has long been an established practice in the medical field.

"Peer recognition" does not mean expertise decided by a vendor in a secret process. It means producing results that impress your peers. Vendors may decide to support such experts but they do not try to select who the experts will be.

I would like to see a more open process. But at the same time, I support Microsoft's right to run the program how they want.

This is not an issue of freedom for MS. It's an observation about a "community" process from somebody in the community. If somebody in the community can't comment without being accused of trying to deny/control/impose something on MS, that's sad.

I was simply making observations that are supported by the example you selected, fwiw. If you want to be recognized as a phyisician it is very, very easy for you to find out exactly what you need to do.

It looks as if you've done heaps this year and can expect to be awarded MVP again. Well done.