Health minister promises 'Rigvir' summit

Take note – story published 6 years ago

Health Minister Anda Caksa has promised to get critics and supporters of the controversial claimed cancer treatment 'Rigvir' around a table to debate their differences and establish what claims to clinical effectiveness the treatment possesses.

The promise was made via the minister's personal Twitter account

"I'm organizing a meeting at the Health Ministry where both Rigvir critics and supporters will be invited to give their arguments, establish the facts and take subsequent action," the minister wrote.

However, no details were given as to when and where the meeting would take place or who exactly would be involved.

As previously reported by LSM, Rigvir virotherapy has been championed by many officials in Latvia as a breakthrough cancer treatment, despite a lack of internationally-recognized clinical studies supporting its claims to effectiveness.

At present it is licensed for use only in Latvia and Armenia. You can read the claims its supporters make for it HERE.

Recent weeks have seen it come under increasing scrutiny. On the same day Caksa announced the future talks, the respected medical blog ScienceBasedMedicine published a damning indictment by David Gorski of its claims to scientific respectability, highlighting its enthusiastic marketing by several notorious cancer "quacks".

"Any truly scientific institute that had developed a drug would not want a quack like Ty Bollinger or Dr. Jimenez endorsing its discovery. That’s the kiss of death as far as scientific credibility goes. Yet IVC embraces these quacks, sells to the Hope4Cancer Institute, and gladly lets its product be featured on a video documentary series designed to attack conventional oncology and promote alternative cancer quackery," writes Gorski, who was among the first to respond to Caksa's summit idea.


Seen a mistake?

Select text and press Ctrl+Enter to send a suggested correction to the editor

Select text and press Report a mistake to send a suggested correction to the editor

Related articles


Most important