William (Viliam) Makis is a former Alberta physician who, according to the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Alberta (CPSA), has not held an active licence to practise medicine in Alberta since February 2019. Despite this, he continued to advise cancer patients online, which led to a series of court actions ending in a permanent injunction in March 2026.
This article sets out the documented record — his medical career, the loss of his licence, the online activities that followed, and the court rulings — based on statements from the CPSA and reporting on the Alberta court decisions.
Medical training and career
Makis trained in radiology and nuclear medicine and received his medical degree in 2005. He worked as a nuclear-medicine physician at the Cross Cancer Institute in Edmonton, part of Alberta Health Services (AHS), a role focused on diagnostic imaging.
His employment there ended in October 2016, when his contract was not renewed following complaints about his professional conduct.
Loss of licence and legal disputes
- In 2018, a CPSA tribunal found Makis guilty of unprofessional conduct.
- In February 2019, his medical licence became inactive; he did not renew his practice permit or pay the required registration fees.
Following the loss of his licence, Makis pursued litigation against AHS and individual physicians, alleging conspiracies. The courts repeatedly rejected these claims, and he was designated a vexatious litigant — a status that required him to obtain the court's permission before filing further appeals.
The "cancer coaching" activities
After 2019, Makis operated what he described as a "cancer coaching" service through YouTube, Substack, and social media, offering information on alternative treatments. He has stated that he advised more than 8,500 people globally, including children.
In the March 2026 proceedings, Justice Douglas Mah concluded that these activities amounted to the practice of medicine, stating that "calling something 'health coaching' does not mean that someone is not practising medicine," and that Makis "uses semantics to skirt the operation of the Injunction Order."
Substances he promoted
Makis recommended antiparasitic drugs to cancer patients, specifically:
- Ivermectin — an antiparasitic drug, including veterinary-grade versions that patients were described as sourcing from farm-supply stores.
- Fenbendazole — an antiparasitic agent used in livestock.
- Mebendazole — an antiparasitic drug.
He presented no published scientific evidence supporting the use of these substances as cancer treatments. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has documented hospitalizations linked to ingestion of animal-grade ivermectin, with risks including neurological toxicity and seizures.
In the March 2026 decision, the court noted that there was "no evidence of any patient harm" cited in the proceedings, while comprehensive patient-outcome data was not available.
COVID-19 vaccine claims
Makis used social media to attribute deaths to COVID-19 vaccines. This included the claim of a connection between the vaccines and the sudden deaths of more than 80 Canadian doctors — a claim reported as false. In one documented example, he attributed a death to a vaccine when the person had died in a mountain-biking accident. Fact-checkers described his supporting evidence as patchy and unreliable.
Court injunctions and contempt finding
- August 2025 — The Alberta Court of King's Bench granted an interim injunction barring Makis from representing himself as a licensed physician, offering health services (including advice or consultations on cancer treatment), and using protected medical titles.
- 21 January 2026 — The Alberta Court of Appeal denied his application to appeal and to stay the injunction. Justice Kevin Feth ruled that granting permission to appeal was "not in the interests of justice."
- 4 March 2026 — The court granted a permanent injunction on the same terms and found Makis in contempt of the earlier order. He was ordered to stop giving advice and to remove medical titles from his online profiles, or face jail.
Under the injunction, Makis is prohibited from representing that he is licensed to practise in Alberta, from offering health services to the public, and from using titles such as "doctor," "Dr.," or "oncologist," including on social media.
How the regulator framed the issue
The CPSA has stated that the case concerns the unauthorized practice of medicine — specifically that Makis presented himself as a physician and provided medical advice without an active licence. The court emphasized that "the risk to the public lies in the unauthorized practice of medicine … not in disseminating research or other information about ivermectin or any other drug."
The CPSA also clarified that this action does not restrict licensed Alberta physicians from prescribing medications within their professional scope.
Timeline at a glance
- 2005 — Receives medical degree.
- Until October 2016 — Works as a nuclear-medicine physician at the Cross Cancer Institute; contract not renewed after conduct complaints.
- 2018 — CPSA tribunal finds unprofessional conduct.
- February 2019 — Medical licence becomes inactive.
- After 2019 — Litigation against AHS; designated a vexatious litigant; begins online "cancer coaching."
- August 2025 — Interim injunction granted.
- 21 January 2026 — Court of Appeal denies leave to appeal and stay.
- 4 March 2026 — Permanent injunction granted; contempt finding.
Frequently asked questions
Is William Makis a licensed doctor?
No. According to the CPSA, he has not held an active licence to practise medicine in Alberta since February 2019, and a March 2026 court order permanently prohibits him from using medical titles or presenting himself as licensed.
What did the court actually prohibit?
The injunction prohibits him from representing that he is licensed to practise in Alberta, from offering health services (including cancer-treatment advice), and from using titles such as "doctor," "Dr.," or "oncologist," including on social media.
Was he stopped from talking about specific drugs?
According to the court, no. The stated risk was the unauthorized practice of medicine, not the dissemination of information about ivermectin or any other drug.
What substances did he recommend for cancer?
Reporting and court records describe him recommending the antiparasitic drugs ivermectin, fenbendazole, and mebendazole, without published scientific evidence supporting their use as cancer treatments.
Sources and further reading
- July 14, 2026
- 7:16 am