Tag: ivermectin

Judge Rules For Doctor Who Prescribed Ivermectin For COVID-19

A doctor’s lawsuit against Maine’s medical board can proceed, a federal judge has ruled.

An order from the Maine Board of Licensure in Medicine that Dr. Meryl Nass undergo a psychological evaluation for allegedly spreading misinformation about COVID-19 was “based on no evidence or process,” including no probable cause, U.S. District Judge Lance Walker said in an Aug. 20 decision.

“In judicial proceedings, at a minimum probable cause findings ordinarily are required to justify pretrial impositions. In this case, as alleged, the Board dispensed with preliminary proceedings altogether,” Walker wrote.

The process appeared to have “lacked any safeguards to protect against agency zeal and resembled investigatory action imposed, somewhat ironically, in the absence of evidence rather than the initiation of an impartial, sober, thoughtful judicial process designed to assess the truth of facts to arrive at the existence of probable cause to justify such a sanction,” he also said.

The board did not respond to a request for comment by publication time.

“I am happy to report that I will eagerly move forward with the legal case to clear my name and defend the free speech right of medical practitioners to tell the truth to their patients, especially if it goes against government or medical orthodoxy,” Nass said in a blog post.

Maine’s medical board in 2022 suspended Nass’s license after receiving a complaint from a person who was not her patient that the doctor was spreading misinformation about COVID-19 because she noted that people who recovered from the illness had protection against re-infection.

Board members also took issue with how Nass prescribed ivermectin to a COVID-19 patient and lied to a pharmacist about why she prescribed hydroxychloroquine to another patient. It was for COVID-19, not for Lyme disease.

The board ordered Nass to undergo a psychological evaluation in order to get her license back, among other conditions. State law only authorizes such an order when a licensee “may be unable to practice medicine with reasonable skill and safety to patients by reason of mental illness, alcohol intemperance, excessive use of drugs, narcotics, or as a result of a mental or physical condition interfering with the competent practice of medicine,” Walker noted in the new ruling.

“The record before the Board did not include any suggestion or information that Dr. Nass suffered from drug or alcohol abuse or a physical condition, suggesting that, if anything, the Board considered Dr. Nass’s opinions to be the product of not independent thought but a mental illness or mental condition,” he said. “Alternatively, the imposition of this sanction would suggest that the Board was making an example out of Dr. Nass.”

The Maine Superior Court previously voided the psychological evaluation order, concluding it was arbitrary and capricious.

After that court ruled, Maine’s medical board asked the federal court in Maine to throw out Nass’s lawsuit.

Walker sided with the board regarding its actions apart from the evaluation, finding members enjoyed immunity for their conduct during the hearing on the allegations against Nass and for their determination to suspend her license.

But the case can move forward regarding the psychological evaluation order, he said.

“The scope of what remains of Dr. Nass’s claims will need to be addressed in later proceedings but includes, at a minimum, the requirement that she submit to a psychological evaluation,” the ruling stated.

Nass told The Epoch Times in an email that her license remains suspended because the board imposed conditions that would have prevented her from practicing independently, including requiring her to send her charts regularly to the board for review.

“The reason I wanted a license was so that if another pandemic happened, I would be able to provide the appropriate care to patients as I saw fit, which might not be what the government recommended,” Nass said. “Since the conditions the Board imposed precluded that, I did not seek to regain the license, which remains suspended.”

Nass also said she recently moved to New Hampshire.

Keep reading

Sen. Lummis: Fauci ‘Lied to the American People and Congress’ and Is ‘Responsible for the Overwhelming Number of Deaths’ Because He Blocked Ivermectin

More Americans have died with COVID-19 listed as the cause of death than the number of U.S. service members killed in World War II.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data record more than 1.1 million COVID-19 deaths in the United States through 2025. The Department of Veterans Affairs and Congressional Research Service list 405,399 American military deaths in World War II. That disparity framed the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee on Wednesday at which Dr. Anthony Fauci, former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, appeared.

Fauci invoked the Fifth Amendment more than 100 times, declined to answer questions about pandemic origins, research funding, his diaries, treatment guidelines, and related decisions. Committee Chairman Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., scheduled a vote next week on whether to hold Fauci in contempt of Congress.

Keep reading

Largest Human Cancer Study of Ivermectin + Mebendazole Is Now PEER-REVIEWED and PUBLISHED in a Major Cancer Journal

The largest real-world human study to date evaluating ivermectin and mebendazole in cancer patients is now peer-reviewed and published in Anticancer Research—a major international oncology journal of the International Institute of Anticancer Research (IIAR), established in 1995.

Our study, “Real-world Clinical Outcomes of Ivermectin and Mebendazole in Cancer Patients: Results from a Prospective Observational Cohort,” represents one of the most compelling clinical signals ever documented for repurposed anti-parasitic therapies in oncology.

In this prospective real-world clinical program evaluation, a diverse population of cancer patients (n=197) was prescribed compounded ivermectin–mebendazole, with each capsule containing 25 mg ivermectin and 250 mg mebendazole. Participants were followed for approximately six months using standardized digital surveys assessing cancer outcomes, medication adherence, and tolerability.

At approximately six months post-treatment initiation, we observed an 84.4% Clinical Benefit Ratio (CBR)—meaning more than four out of five patients reported either no evidence of disease (remission), tumor regression, or cancer stabilization.

Nearly half of all patients (48.4%) reported the strongest positive outcomes, including no evidence of disease (32.8%) or tumor regression (15.6%). An additional 36.1% reported disease stabilization, while only 15.6% reported progression.

Importantly, adherence was remarkably high, with 86.9% completing the initial prescription and 66.4% remaining on therapy at six months.

Side effects were predominantly mild and manageable, reported in 25.4% of patients (primarily gastrointestinal), with 93.6% of those experiencing side effects continuing treatment after minor dosing adjustments.

What makes these findings especially notable is that this was a heterogeneous, real-world cancer population—including patients with prostate, breast, lung, colon, liver, and many other malignancies, many of whom were also undergoing conventional therapies such as chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery.

This groundbreaking peer-reviewed publication was made possible through a unique collaboration between The Wellness Company, the McCullough Foundation, and the Chairman of the President’s Cancer Panel—uniting real-world clinical data, frontline medical experience, and epidemiologic expertise to evaluate inexpensive, repurposed therapies with major translational potential.

Keep reading

Four out of five patients reported improvement or stabilisation of their cancer after 6 months of treatment with ivermectin and mebendazole

We have completed the largest real-world human analysis to date evaluating ivermectin and mebendazole in cancer patients – and the results represent one of the most compelling clinical signals ever documented for repurposed anti-parasitic therapies in oncology.

The manuscript is now available as a preprint on the Zenodo research repository, operated by the European Organisation for Nuclear Research, while undergoing peer review at leading oncology journals: ‘Real-World Clinical Outcomes of Ivermectin and Mebendazole in Cancer Patients: Results from a Prospective Observational Cohort’.

In this real-world prospective clinical programme evaluation, a diverse population of cancer patients (n=197) were prescribed compounded ivermectin–mebendazole, with each capsule containing 25 mg ivermectin and 250 mg mebendazole.

At approximately six months post-treatment initiation,we observed an 84.4% Clinical Benefit Ratio (“CBR”), with nearly half of cancer patients (48.4%) reporting either no evidence of disease (32.8%) or tumour regression (15.6%).An additional 36.1% reported disease stabilisation. This means more than four out of five patients reported either improvement or stabilisation of their cancer.

These results indicate that the inexpensive and safe off-label applications of these medications could be an important complement in the treatment of cancer.

The groundbreaking analysis was made possible through a unique collaboration between The Wellness Company, the McCullough Foundation, and the Chairman of the President’s Cancer Panel – uniting real-world clinical data, frontline medical experience and high-level epidemiologic expertise to deliver urgently needed insights in oncology.

This work was conducted byNicolas Hulscher, MPH (myself); Kelly Victory, MD; James A. Thorp, MD; Drew Pinsky, MD; Alejandro Diaz-Villalobos, MD; Peter Gillooly, MSc; Foster Coulson; Melissa Annazone; Chloe Radesi; Jessica Brooks; Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH; and Harvey Risch, MD, PhD (Chairman of the President’s Cancer Panel).

The paper can be accessed HERE.

Keep reading

America’s Frontline Doctors Petitions FDA to Make HCQ and Ivermectin Over-the-Counter

On June 26, 2025, Dr. Simone Gold and America’s Frontline Doctors filed two Citizen Petitions with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to convert both hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin from prescription-only status to full over-the-counter (OTC) status.

Dr. Gold and AFLDS were joined by doctors Dana Granberg-Nill, Bryan Atkinson, Pierre Kory, Brian Tyson, Peterson Pierre, Robin Armstrong, Geoff Mitchell, and Lynn Fynn as co-petitioners.

By submitting these petitions to the FDA, AFLDS is taking critical action to empower the American people and ensure easy access to life-saving medications.

Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) has been FDA-approved for decades and is available OTC in many parts of the world, such as in Africa and South America, for the prevention and treatment of malaria.

In the United States and other Western Nations, HCQ is a widely prescribed medication primarily used to treat rheumatoid arthritis and lupus. According to the government’s own database, FAERS (FDA Adverse Event Reporting System), HCQ is one of the safest drugs on the planet.

Ivermectin is a wide-ranging antiparasitic agent that has been used in humans for over three decades and won the Nobel Prize in Medicine in 2015, reflecting the drug’s enormous impact on human health.

Considered extremely safe, ivermectin is FDA-approved to treat threadworm infection and river blindness, with millions of treatments administered in global public health campaigns.

Although it is used to treat parasites, ivermectin has gained much attention for its potential use in cancer treatment. There is absolutely no dispute that both of these drugs are extremely safe.

The COVID pandemic sparked a tremendous public health demand to repurpose well-known drugs like HCQ and ivermectin for new uses, specifically for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19.

Tragically, patients who were prescribed these medications by their doctors were denied access by pharmacies that refused to fill these prescriptions due to pressure from government health agencies and their C-suite executives.

This unnecessary barrier prevented countless Americans from accessing safe and effective medication in the middle of a pandemic.

To make matters worse, both drugs were attacked relentlessly in order to push experimental mRNA injections onto the public.

Despite their tremendous safety profiles and potential, these generic medicines are not profitable to Big Pharma, so there is no financial incentive to convert them to OTC status. In short, profits are being prioritized over cheaper alternatives.

Recognizing the importance of cutting through the COVID propaganda and removing this barrier to patient access, Dr. Gold and AFLDS filed a Citizen Petition with the FDA to make HCQ available OTC in October 2020.

By refiling our petition for HCQ along with a new petition for ivermectin, we are reactivating this fight. The American people deserve access to safe and effective medicine without government interference!

Keep reading

FDA ‘Unquestionably’ Overstepped Authority With War on Ivermectin, DOJ Attorney Admits

The attorney who defended the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) when doctors sued the FDA over its anti-ivermectin social media posts during the COVID-19 pandemic admitted the FDA’s war against ivermectin was a mistake and an abuse of governmental authority, according to an investigation by Project Veritas.

The nonprofit, which focuses on exposing corruption through undercover video, on Aug. 27 released footage of U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) attorney Isaac Belfer telling an undercover Project Veritas journalist that what the FDA did was “unquestionably beyond its authority.”

Although Belfer defended the FDA’s actions in court, he told the Project Veritas journalist that there was a “legitimate problem” with the agency’s actions.

“If you remember during the pandemic,” Belfer said, “FDA issued some tweets that said, ‘You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Stop it with ivermectin.’ … They’ll often use tweets to pursue a broader agenda.”

In this instance, the tweets were part of a larger agenda of discouraging people from using ivermectin — a drug the FDA approved in 1996 for treating several diseases — to treat COVID-19.

But the FDA “really shouldn’t be saying, ‘Don’t take this drug,’” Belfer said, because the FDA — as a federal agency — can do only what it has statutory authorization from Congress to do.

The FDA is authorized to provide information about drugs, but it cannot recommend what drugs to take or not take. “That’s the practice of medicine and the FDA can’t practice medicine,” Belfer said.

Keep reading

Does ivermectin cause infertility?

It is now clear to many including me that the globalist agenda is one of eugenics, with the aim of significantly reducing the world’s population and changing the genetics of the remainder of us.

The possibility that ivermectin, through a potential effect on fertility, may be part of the Globalists’ dastardly genocidal plan is a fairly novel one that I will explore here today.

The notion that ivermectin may cause infertility has been floating around since 2021 based on decade-old, mainly animal studies. After scanning such studies in 2021, I did not find the claim to be credible based on the supporting evidence.  The animal studies being shared as proof, I found to involve very high doses of ivermectin, given for long periods with very short term follow up. Anything given in high doses, including overdosing on water, can cause harm. In my opinion as a research scientist with expertise in evaluating bodies of evidence, much more research was needed before making a claim that ivermectin is harmful to human fertility.

Back in 2021, when this assertion was doing the rounds on social media, it felt to me to be more like a distraction, as it does now. However, due to repeated public engagement on this topic by my associate in the health and freedom movement, Dr. Mike Yeadon, I have decided to revisit it.

Dr. Yeadon, ex-drug company executive, turned truther, has vehemently stated publicly that “ivermectin is one of the most violent fertility toxins [he has] ever come across.”

I am a little surprised by Dr. Yeadon’s certainty on this matter. However, since Dr. Yeadon’s area of interest in drug development was primarily in respiratory anti-allergy and inflammation drugs, I expect he knows a lot about ivermectin, which is known to be an excellent, low-cost anti-inflammatory and immune-modulating old medicine.

Keep reading

Chris Cuomo Admits Taking “Regular” Doses Of Ivermectin After Previously Saying Those Who Took It Should Be “Shamed”

After once claiming on air that people taking ivermectin should be “shamed”, Chris Cuomo has done an about face on the drug, admitting on the PBD Podcast this week that he is taking a regular dose of it to deal with long Covid. 

In January, Cuomo revealed he’s dealing with “long COVID,” the lasting effects of a previous infection. On the PBD Podcast hosted by Patrick Bet-David, the NewsNation host said he’s using antiviral medication to combat inflammation and “brain fog.”

He said: “I’ll tell you something else that’s gonna get you a lot of hits. I am taking … a regular dose of Ivermectin. Ivermectin was a boogeyman during COVID. That was wrong. We were given bad information about Ivermectin. The real question is, why?”

Why, Chris? Perhaps its because you and Don Lemon were on-air daily providing a constant stream of misinformation about the drug?

He continued: “Everyone’s going to say ‘Joe Rogan was right. No, Joe Rogan was saying – yeah, he was right – that’s not what matters. What matters is, the entire medical community knew that Ivermectin couldn’t hurt you. They knew it … I know they knew it.”

“How do I know? Because now I’m doing nothing but talking to these clinicians, who at the time were overwhelmed by COVID, and they weren’t saying anything!”

But back during the pandemic, Cuomo took to the air to widely discredit ivermectin, despite it appears on the WHO’s List of Essential Medicines and having been dosed for humans millions of times. 

Cuomo said during the pandemic:  “What person – you know you talk about cancel culture and who to shame – Ivermectin? A de-wormer? Really? … they need to be shamed. They need to be called out and shamed, brother.”

Keep reading

FDA Loses its War on Ivermectin: Agrees to Remove All Related Social Media Content and Consumer Advisories on Ivermectin Usage for COVID-19

In December 2021, the FDA warned Americans not to use Ivermectin, which “is intended for animals” to treat or prevent COVID-19.

“Never use medications intended for animals on yourself or other people. Animal ivermectin products are very different from those approved for humans. Use of animal ivermectin for the prevention or treatment of COVID-19 in humans is dangerous,” FDA said at the time.

This was a very controversial statement at the time since the FDA pushed the drug on African migrants back in 2015, and the drug was praised in several scientific journals.

There have now been 101 Ivermectin COVID-19 controlled studies that show a 62% lower risk in early treatment in COVID-19 patients.

A group of brave doctors had filed a federal lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) over the agencies’ unlawful attempts to block the use of ivermectin in treating COVID-19.

The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. Southern District of Texas in Galveston, argues that the FDA has overstepped its authority and unjustifiably interfered with their medical practice.

The plaintiffs, Drs. Mary Talley Bowden, Paul E. Marik, and Robert L. Apter, are contesting the FDA’s portrayal of ivermectin as dangerous for human consumption. They note that the FDA has approved ivermectin for human use since 1996 for a variety of diseases. However, they allege that with the advent of the COVID-19 pandemic, the FDA began releasing documents and social media posts discouraging the use of the anti-viral drug for COVID-19 treatment.

“We’re suing the FDA for lying to the public about ivermectin,” said Dr. Bowden.

Keep reading

Fifth Circuit sides with ivermectin-prescribing doctors in their quarrel with the FDA

Three doctors who prescribed ivermectin for Covid-19 patients have valid claims that the Food and Drug Administration overstepped its authority with a campaign warning people not to take the drug, a Fifth Circuit panel ruled Friday, reinstating the trio’s lawsuit against the agency.

Drs. Robert Apter and Mary Talley Bowden say between them they have treated or consulted more than 9,000 Covid patients and they each have a patient survival rate of more than 99%, despite regularly prescribing them ivermectin off-label to treat the respiratory illness.

But the doctors say pharmacies stopped filling their prescriptions for the drug — which the FDA approved in 1996 for human use to treat parasitic diseases caused by round worms and black flies — after the FDA launched a public relations campaign in spring 2021 sounding the alarm that people were being hospitalized after self-medicating with large doses of the drug intended for deworming livestock that they had purchased over the counter.

The FDA also sent letters to the Federation of State Medical Boards and National Association of Boards of Pharmacy warning against the use of ivermectin to treat Covid-19 with a link to an agency advisory that said taking it in high dosages is dangerous.

Apter and Talley Bowden, along with Dr. Paul Marik, sued the FDA, the Department of Health and Human Services and the agencies’ leaders in Galveston federal court in June 2022. They claimed the FDA had exceeded its authority and violated the Administrative Procedure Act by interfering with their practice of medicine — regulation of which, they contended, falls to states.

The FDA’s campaign, coupled with their advocacy of ivermectin, caused them problems: A major Houston hospital system forced Talley Bowden to resign her privileges; Apter was referred to physician regulatory boards of Arizona and Washington state for discipline; Marik was forced to resign from his post at Eastern Virginia Medical School, where he was a medical professor and chief of pulmonary and critical care.

Keep reading