Dr William Porter, the Co Clare-based doctor reported to the Garda by the Medical Council after a review of 48 cancer patients he treated with an alternative therapy found 17 had died within six months of the treatment, said yesterday he would welcome a Garda investigation. Eithne Donnellan, Health Correspondent reports.
Dr William Porter, who is involved in providing cytoluminescent therapy (CLT) to cancer patients, including those with advanced cancers, in Killaloe at a cost of €20,000 per patient, said: "The Garda are welcome to come here to Killaloe and see for themselves the work we do with cancer patients."
He was responding to reports in The Irish Times on Saturday that the Medical Council had reported him to the Garda.
"We are confident that they will find that we are providing a therapy which has been successfully provided to patients without any of the highly toxic elements of conventional methods," Dr Porter said.
The decision to report him was made by the Medical Council after it read an article in a US medical journal reviewing the outcomes for 48 patients treated by him in late 2002 and early 2003.
The review carried out by Dr Ralph Moss, a widely-respected figure in the world of alternative cancer therapies, found that while a small number believed they had benefited from the therapy, a larger number complained their condition had deteriorated, and believed the treatment had accelerated the growth of their tumours. It added that while it was not possible "to categorically attribute" any deaths to CLT, the treatment in this group was "a qualified failure with a high incidence of after-effects".
Dr Porter, who was struck off for "gross negligence" in the US, claimed yesterday the review was biased. He also claimed the CLT he was now involved in providing was much more advanced than when the patients who were reviewed were treated.
Prof Gerard Bury, who was president of the Medical Council until his term ended a week ago, said neither therapy could be condemned in the appropriate setting. "It's a treatment with good scientific evidence for certain superficial cancers. The problem is it was being offered for deep-seated ones without any evidence of benefit."