Let's be clear on the reason we're rejecting these reports. We're rejecting them because they're unsubstantiated third-hand or worse anecdotes, and that's little basis for overturning 2000 years of medical science.
The mere fact that they seem improbable or even impossible according to our medical models is irrelevant. If they happened, they happened, and our models would be in error.
But we don't know that they happened, because there's no evidence that they did, and there's a considerable weight of evidence that suggests thatsch happenings are impossible.
But just because the idea of demon possession is medeval, that's not itself sufficient to reject these reports.
Well, no matter what side you're on, it's dogmatic thinking to reject something soley because it contradicts your model. The universe is. Our models merely approximate it.
Nonetheless I think these stories are bogus, but not because medical science says so. They're bogus because "these stories were told by liars" fits a lot more data, and is a lot simpler, than "these stories are true because biblical demonology is true, despite the weight of evidence to the contrary."