Unlicensed practitioner’s “cancer coaching” business promoted ivermectin and reached thousands online
Alberta records show the individual ceased holding a medical licence in February 2019, and since then he has operated an online "cancer coaching" service that promoted alternative therapies including ivermectin.
Makis no longer holds a licence to practise medicine in Alberta and has spent the past several years running what he describes as a cancer coaching service online. The service offered information about alternative cancer treatments through social media, YouTube and other platforms, and the operator says he has advised more than 8,500 people worldwide. Health officials and clinicians caution that unlicensed provision of medical advice, particularly about treatments such as ivermectin, raises safety and regulatory concerns.
Licence status in Alberta
Records indicate Makis has not been licensed to practise medicine in Alberta since February 2019. That status means he is not authorized to provide medical services that require a regulated physician under provincial rules.
The absence of an active licence does not by itself prove unlawful conduct, but it changes the regulatory context for any health-related services he provides. Regulatory bodies typically restrict use of protected titles and the practice of medicine to licensed professionals to safeguard patients.
Scope and methods of the online service
Since losing his licence the operator has presented his work as a cancer coaching service rather than traditional medical care. He has used multiple online channels including social media accounts and a YouTube channel to share information and to communicate with clients.
He has said publicly that his materials and outreach reached over 8,500 people across the globe. The claimed audience reportedly included adults and children, and outreach methods combined recorded videos, social posts and direct interactions with clients.
Promotion of alternative treatments including ivermectin
Among the therapies discussed in his materials was ivermectin, a drug that has been widely debated for off-label use. The service described a range of alternative cancer approaches and suggested information on treatments that fall outside mainstream oncology practice.
The framing of these offerings as coaching rather than medical treatment may affect how they are presented to audiences, but it does not remove concerns about the potential for misinformation and the risks of endorsing unproven therapies.
Concerns about advising children and vulnerable patients
Public statements indicating the service advised children drew particular attention because minors are classified as vulnerable patients in healthcare regulation. When unlicensed providers engage with children on medical topics it raises heightened questions about consent, oversight and safety.
Medical professionals emphasize that cancer care decisions for children require multidisciplinary input from licensed specialists. Families confronting cancer are advised to consult credentialed clinicians and accredited treatment centres before pursuing therapies outside established protocols.
Regulatory and public health implications
The situation highlights gaps in how online health services are monitored and regulated. Regulators in provinces like Alberta are tasked with enforcing licensing standards, but the borderless nature of the internet complicates oversight when services are offered via global platforms.
Public health officials and professional colleges typically recommend clear, evidence-based guidance and warn against relying on unverified sources for treatment decisions. Where claims of large client reach exist they can prompt review by regulatory authorities and by platform operators who host the content.
Calls for clearer consumer guidance online
Consumer advocates and health professionals say more work is needed to help the public distinguish between licensed medical advice and other types of health information online. They urge platforms, regulators and professional associations to improve transparency about credentials and the limits of non-medical coaching.
Clear labelling of services, verification of clinician status where applicable, and accessible warnings about unproven treatments are among the measures often suggested to reduce the risk that patients will follow unsafe advice.
Patients and families seeking cancer care should prioritise consultations with licensed medical practitioners and accredited cancer centres. Independent verification of a clinician’s licence and qualifications is an important step before following any treatment recommendations.
Even as online communities provide support for people with cancer, the distinction between peer support, informational coaching and regulated medical practice matters for safety. Those facing difficult treatment choices are better served when decisions are guided by licensed clinicians and evidence-based care.
