Hunger strikes undertaken as a means of prison protest have occurred regularly during the past century, beginning with the imprisonment of women demonstrating for the right to vote.8-9

And the World Medical Association:

Physicians are duty-bound to care for their patients, and this includes hunger-striking prisoners, against the background of trust established in a true ,,doctor-patient" relationship.
[...]
If, however, a prisoner at an advanced stage of a hunger strike is restored to consciousness or to a physiological situation where there can be no doubt about his state of mind, and that prisoner clearly indicates disapproval of the doctor's action, then the doctor should be prepared to step back and not intervene again. In such cases it can be argued that ensuring the patient's welfare means allowing fasting prisoners the last possibility of freedom of action, and letting them at least die with dignity.

Doctors should never be party to actual coercive feeding, with prisoners being tied down and intravenous drips or oesophageal tubes being forced into them. Such actions can be considered a form of torture, and under no circumstances should doctors participate in them