Thanks for this thoughtful piece. As an oncologist, this is part of my day now—having these conversations in a way that doesn’t come across as dismissive or arrogant. I spend a lot of time listening and then trying to understand why it resonates with them. Only then can we walk through the data (or lack thereof) together. I find when patients understand you are on their team they are more likely to trust your medical judgement.
Thanks! I’m so glad you liked it! As an anesthesiologist, I am far less encumbered by patient reluctance. It doesn’t take much convincing to intervene when someone is in pain, bleeding to death, or unable to breathe. Mine is a harder field to sell disinformation in. I remain supremely frustrated for my brothers and sisters in fields like yours -where longer timescales weave illusions that fictional medical advice is working, as the window to secure a cure insidiously closes.
People who demand rigorous evidence before taking a statin will turn around and take an antiparasitic based on a handful of in vitro studies and social media testimonials. The standard of evidence flips completely depending on who is doing the recommending.
Great read! Thank you! Ivermectin was discovered in days of drug screening not drug design. Merck would have been delighted if, when screened, ivermectin showed utility against everything. The effectiveness in diseases prevalent in low-income countries meant it was not a huge money maker for Merck. The idea that it's uses were suppressed for profit is absurd. Some reports of the drug's use in oncology are nonsensical. My favorite are the 3 case studies were patients received the non- cytotoxic standard of care such as a checkpoint inhibitor for NSCLC, an advanced androgen blocker for prostate cancer and fulvestrant for HR+ and the author (you know who he is) declares the ivermectin victories as having taken place ALL WITHOUT CHEMO! Actually, he doesn't realize that ivermectin IS chemo if certain declared mechanisms are true. You can destabilize microtubules only in cancer cells with no off-target effects!? Clever. And treatment protocols for all cancers that can fit on the back of a business card because they don't even acknowledge subtypes and biomarker positivity? I'm open to possible roles in some regimens but I agree wholeheartedly that the only proper term to use for what's floating around now about Ivermectin is indeed BULLSHIT.
This was a great write-up and a much-needed overview on the topic. I've got a dad that takes a month's worth of horse de-wormer every day. Those Fleet Farm bills must go crazy.
Yikes. There is cause for concern there. A brand new study found that chronic ivermectin use can lead to structural (ie permanent) changes to the brain, as well as injury of other organ systems.
Of course, none of this was known prior to the pandemic, because people only took it when they had worms or bugs, which was not a chronic thing. Talk to your dad about maybe saving it for his next covid infection. It won’t help his covid, but it will limit his total exposure to ivermectin.
And u call it horse dewormer, lmao. Yep, you’re a democrat. People are just waking up to the rigged medical system that is nothing but drug pushers. Will never cure you, just give u more meds for your symptoms, lol
It’s remarkable how many folks who can’t spell “you” are somehow privy to secret medical knowledge. Nothing says intellectually thorough quite like cutting corners on literacy.
The fact that you read an article that dispels myths about a politicized drug and pleas for sanity in making health choices, then troll the comments for something you can politicize after a woman expresses concern about her father taking potentially toxic doses of said drug, could not be a better illustration of what has actually gone wrong in our country. Thank you for the living demonstration of the cultist mindset that, God willing, will succumb to Darwin’s Law for denying scientific and medical knowledge before it can infect and destroy our republic. In that context, maybe ivermectin is the cure after all. Also, you misspelled “you.”
As a veterinarian, I really appreciate this article. I've had clients asking about the use of ivermectin for their dogs to treat cancer and other diseases. Ivermectin is included in some cheaper heartworm preventative, but there are reports of heartworm populations that are now resistant to it. I feel like I'm fighting against beliefs built by breeders who will say since they have worked with pets for decades they know more than the vets. Unfortunately, there are a couple of vets out there who also believe this quackery. See Andrew Jones, a former veterinarian from Canada that gave up his license rather than pay fines for disciplinary action. He posts stuff on YouTube disparaging veterinary care and promotes treatments with limited evidence.
What you describe is an unfortunate reality in the dissemination of scientific misinformation by professionals. Once they lose or surrender their means to be practice in their legitimate field of training, they go full-crazy, probably after they realize there is gold in that there BS. How else will they survive? Peter McCullough, MD is the epitome of this. Respected cardiologist turned rabid supplement salesman. Lost his license and doesn’t care because there is a large audience who is desperate to hear magical thoughts from those appear to be reasonable and learned practitioners (even though they are quite unreasonable).
I am so glad you enjoyed it! I hope it gives you some factual talking points for those who haven’t surrendered all reason to ideology. Thanks for subscribing!
Excellent article. The content is outstanding. Your observations on the politics of this and the broader implications in today’s polarized America are next level!
Thanks for this thoughtful piece. As an oncologist, this is part of my day now—having these conversations in a way that doesn’t come across as dismissive or arrogant. I spend a lot of time listening and then trying to understand why it resonates with them. Only then can we walk through the data (or lack thereof) together. I find when patients understand you are on their team they are more likely to trust your medical judgement.
Thanks! I’m so glad you liked it! As an anesthesiologist, I am far less encumbered by patient reluctance. It doesn’t take much convincing to intervene when someone is in pain, bleeding to death, or unable to breathe. Mine is a harder field to sell disinformation in. I remain supremely frustrated for my brothers and sisters in fields like yours -where longer timescales weave illusions that fictional medical advice is working, as the window to secure a cure insidiously closes.
People who demand rigorous evidence before taking a statin will turn around and take an antiparasitic based on a handful of in vitro studies and social media testimonials. The standard of evidence flips completely depending on who is doing the recommending.
Great read! Thank you! Ivermectin was discovered in days of drug screening not drug design. Merck would have been delighted if, when screened, ivermectin showed utility against everything. The effectiveness in diseases prevalent in low-income countries meant it was not a huge money maker for Merck. The idea that it's uses were suppressed for profit is absurd. Some reports of the drug's use in oncology are nonsensical. My favorite are the 3 case studies were patients received the non- cytotoxic standard of care such as a checkpoint inhibitor for NSCLC, an advanced androgen blocker for prostate cancer and fulvestrant for HR+ and the author (you know who he is) declares the ivermectin victories as having taken place ALL WITHOUT CHEMO! Actually, he doesn't realize that ivermectin IS chemo if certain declared mechanisms are true. You can destabilize microtubules only in cancer cells with no off-target effects!? Clever. And treatment protocols for all cancers that can fit on the back of a business card because they don't even acknowledge subtypes and biomarker positivity? I'm open to possible roles in some regimens but I agree wholeheartedly that the only proper term to use for what's floating around now about Ivermectin is indeed BULLSHIT.
This was a great write-up and a much-needed overview on the topic. I've got a dad that takes a month's worth of horse de-wormer every day. Those Fleet Farm bills must go crazy.
Yikes. There is cause for concern there. A brand new study found that chronic ivermectin use can lead to structural (ie permanent) changes to the brain, as well as injury of other organ systems.
Of course, none of this was known prior to the pandemic, because people only took it when they had worms or bugs, which was not a chronic thing. Talk to your dad about maybe saving it for his next covid infection. It won’t help his covid, but it will limit his total exposure to ivermectin.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41837342/
And u call it horse dewormer, lmao. Yep, you’re a democrat. People are just waking up to the rigged medical system that is nothing but drug pushers. Will never cure you, just give u more meds for your symptoms, lol
It’s remarkable how many folks who can’t spell “you” are somehow privy to secret medical knowledge. Nothing says intellectually thorough quite like cutting corners on literacy.
That’s all ya got , lmao
Have you read any of the studies that claim Ivermectin was beneficial for coVid?
The fact that you read an article that dispels myths about a politicized drug and pleas for sanity in making health choices, then troll the comments for something you can politicize after a woman expresses concern about her father taking potentially toxic doses of said drug, could not be a better illustration of what has actually gone wrong in our country. Thank you for the living demonstration of the cultist mindset that, God willing, will succumb to Darwin’s Law for denying scientific and medical knowledge before it can infect and destroy our republic. In that context, maybe ivermectin is the cure after all. Also, you misspelled “you.”
As a veterinarian, I really appreciate this article. I've had clients asking about the use of ivermectin for their dogs to treat cancer and other diseases. Ivermectin is included in some cheaper heartworm preventative, but there are reports of heartworm populations that are now resistant to it. I feel like I'm fighting against beliefs built by breeders who will say since they have worked with pets for decades they know more than the vets. Unfortunately, there are a couple of vets out there who also believe this quackery. See Andrew Jones, a former veterinarian from Canada that gave up his license rather than pay fines for disciplinary action. He posts stuff on YouTube disparaging veterinary care and promotes treatments with limited evidence.
What you describe is an unfortunate reality in the dissemination of scientific misinformation by professionals. Once they lose or surrender their means to be practice in their legitimate field of training, they go full-crazy, probably after they realize there is gold in that there BS. How else will they survive? Peter McCullough, MD is the epitome of this. Respected cardiologist turned rabid supplement salesman. Lost his license and doesn’t care because there is a large audience who is desperate to hear magical thoughts from those appear to be reasonable and learned practitioners (even though they are quite unreasonable).
I am so glad you enjoyed it! I hope it gives you some factual talking points for those who haven’t surrendered all reason to ideology. Thanks for subscribing!
Excellent article. The content is outstanding. Your observations on the politics of this and the broader implications in today’s polarized America are next level!
Matthew Burtelow MD PhD