Medical oncologist and Professor Guy Van Hazel criticized Austrian advocate of an alternative cancer therapy that resulted in four deaths in Perth.

In a coronial inquest into those deaths, the Australian professor described the cancer therapy as very toxic he would advise his patients to "avoid it like the plague." He also compared the Austrian who gave the instructions, Hellfried Sartori, as "charlatan."

Sartori spent time in a jail in the United States for practicing medicine amidst a revoked license. He is also not registered to practice medicine in Australia at the time of those deaths .

According to the inquest, Sartori was in Thailand, where he gave instructions through a telephone to the nurses in Perth to inject five patients with several types of chemicals including an industrial solvent.

Four of those patients died within two weeks, and the other after a month.

Dr. Alexandra Boyd accommodated the patients in her home, where the treatments were administered.

Professor Van Hazel remarked the treatments were dangerous and unproven and should not be used as treatment no matter how hopeless patients are.

"I'd tell them to avoid it like the plague because it's got a track record of killing four patients in this town, and presumably aided and abetted in killing at least another 20 in Australia," the professor stated during the inquest.

Sartori justified the treatment's efficiency citing symptoms such as vomiting, diarrhea and seizures shown by the patients as signs that the treatment was working. He also claimed there was a peer-reviewed study demonstrating the drugs' effectiveness.

However, the professor refused to accept that such single-authored study with 25 percent death rate could have ever passed peer review.

"We would never accept in standard medicine a death rate of 25 per cent. We think that's an excessive toxic regimen to subject patients to." the professor responded.

During her turn to speak, Dr. Boyd said she thought the intravenous treatment was about vitamins. She also reasoned out she allowed her residence to be used after seeing one of her patients who also had the same treatment appeared to have improved.

But Professor Van Hazel argued it was wrong to give support to a treatment method only because there was a patient who had a similar treatment, but who was not cured.

"She's either lying or she's incompetent," the professor remarked.