« First « Previous Comments 657 - 696 of 696 Search these comments
All Family is much more expensive, but you don't have to worry about Customs inspections, and you get the fig leaf of a doctor's prescription.
Idaho Governor Signs Bill for Ivermectin to Be Sold Over the Counter
The measure, which the state Legislature passed earlier this year, went into law immediately on April 14.
Idaho has become the latest of a handful of states to legalize over-the-counter sales of the anti-parasite drug ivermectin following the COVID-19 pandemic.
Idaho Gov. Brad Little, a Republican, did not offer any comments on the bill, which was among many measures he signed on April 14. The bill had been passed with little resistance in the Idaho Legislature and took effect immediately.
In March, Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders signed a bill legalizing over-the-counter sales of the drug, as did Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee in 2022.
So far, I have not found any legal US pharmacy that will ship ivermectin to California.
Largest review to date of ivermectin use in cancer patients finds no safety concerns, promising anecdotal reports, and strong preclinical evidence of tumor suppression.
fenbendazole
I've been growing a miracle berry bush now for almost 2 years and picked my 1st miracle berry last Wednesday. It contains miraculin which binds to sweet receptors basically turning them off.
What is this stuff? Do tell.
But the lemon I ate definitely tasted like yummy candy. Way better than candy like lemon drops in fact.
Pickles too and sometimes a tablespoon of Pickle Juice in a cold cup of water for rehydration power
Better than sugary gatorade or expensive powdery concoctions. A shot of pickle juice before bed when you have muscle strains or cramps is better than ANY OTC and probably most Rx.
No drug in history has been more unfairly targeted for reputational destruction than ivermectin. The FDA —before being slapped down by courts— ran a smirking negative public relations campaign against the medication, not in the science journals, but on social media. Its efforts were crowned with the infamous folksy tweet that finally broke the legal straw: “You are not a horse,” it said. “You are not a cow. Seriously, y’all. Stop it.”
Two years later, the courts forced the FDA to delete that tweet. Ironically —and tellingly— the FDA’s lawyers rode into court arguing the horse tweet was not medical advice. The judge gave that claim the old horse’s laugh. Seriously, y’all aren’t doctors.
Ivermectin is available over the counter in most of the third world, a fact glaringly conspic. by its a. from the Atlantic’s story. Apparently, in the government’s view, Americans are less trustworthy in making their own health decisions than sub-Saharan Africans and rural Indians. During the pandemic, India’s government tried to move ivermectin behind the counter, but gave it up as a lost cause after irate citizens grabbed pitchforks and began melting tar. ...
A growing group of states are flatly rejecting the scientific-medical establishment. States are using their legislative authority to claw back control over pharmaceutical access— bucking FDA orthodoxy and the entire pandemic-era narrative.
Most significantly, the rebellion isn’t found amongst hemp-clad mushroom circles or barefoot health-retreat crowds storming the Capitol with peace signs. It’s sober, straight-laced state legislators — churchgoers, Rotarians, small-town mayors turned senators — who now don’t trust the FDA even to regulate a generic anti-parasitic.
Ivermectin decreases the expression of ALDH1 in ovarian cancer cell lines in combination with chemotherapy
Conclusions: High levels of ALDH1 are associated with chemoresistance. The low levels of ALDH1 found in ovarian cancer cells treated with Ivermectin plus carboplatin or paclitaxel reveal a more sensitive profile, which could be a promising alternative for ovarian cancer treatment.
Rounding out our New York Times review this morning, behold this astonishing headline: “What Ivermectin Can (and Can’t) Do.” I bet you never expected to see an ivermectin headline appear in the Times without a dire warning. Let the retconning begin. ("retroactive continuity" where the NYT pretends that they were telling the truth before when they were clearly lying as usual - Patrick)
The story began by carefully mocking claims the drug cures covid, don’t even think about that. But it explained in gruesome detail how well the Nobel-prize-winning drug kills intestinal worms. Then the story finally got around to what it really wanted to sneer at: people who claim ivermectin cured their cancer. The Times contemptuously smirked:
A wealth of research has shown the drug does not treat Covid. And
there is not evidence to support people taking ivermectin to treat
cancer.
Got it, dummies? Y’all aren’t horses with parasite problems. Stop munching ivermectin pills for your skin cancer. “There is not evidence.” Get that through your thick, Cro-Magnon skulls. No evidence. None.
But wait. Um.
Many paragraphs later —in the same story— the Times said this:
Studies in human cells suggest that the drug may kill certain types
of cancer cells in a way that triggers the immune system, said Dr.
Peter P. Lee, chair of the department of immuno-oncology at
Beckman Research Institute of City of Hope in Duarte, Calif. In
mouse studies, Dr. Lee has seen that the drug, on its own, does not
shrink breast tumors. But it's possible that the drug may have
benefits for breast cancer when used alongside existing cancer
immunotherapy, he said. Researchers are studying a combination
of ivermectin and an investigational cancer drug in people with
breast cancer.
While some inaccurate social media posts claim that ivermectin
can treat cancer because tumors themselves are parasitic, the
promise of ivermectin for cancer has nothing to do with its anti-
parasitic effect, Dr. Lee said. Rather, it seems that the drug may be
able to modulate a signal involved with cancer growth.
In other words, studies, research trials, and doctors’ opinions all credibly suggest that ivermectin might help stop cancer. So … when the Times said there is not evidence for ivermectin as a cancer treatment, it meant there IS evidence. Reading the Times requires a certain amount of mental flexibility. Orwell would nod ruefully.
Should we line our parakeet’s cage with this contradictory story? Or should we perhaps recognize that the reporter managed to smuggle in the hopeful, heterodox information about ivermectin and cancer, while still regurgitating the party line about its uselessness? As a hopeless optimist, I choose the latter. I suspect the reporter is secretly convinced.
On Tuesday, Republican State Representative Jeff Holcomb filed a bill (HB 29) to allow ivermectin to be legally purchased without a prescription. In other words, over the counter. It’s still early, and the bill is far from being approved. But I’ve learned from insiders that the lower the bill number, the better. (Long-shot bills unsupported by the party usually get numbers in triple digits.) ...
The left-leaning paper saw an apocalypse of peril approaching. Look out! Misinformation! “Despite the potential health risks,” FlaPol warned readers, “several states including Arkansas, Idaho, Louisiana, Tennessee and Texas have passed laws this year permitting over-the-counter sales of ivermectin.” Oh, no!
But on the other hand, Tylenol— by all means, eat them by the handfuls. Who cares what the FDA says?
The second Ivermectin story was even better. The Florida Pheonix ran another story about Florida and the anti-parasitic, headlined, “Ivermectin, from the Capitol to state-funded cancer research — it’s a thing in Florida.”
Let’s be honest. Thanks to chronic Trump Derangement, Ivermectin triggers liberals. Just hearing that word makes them fume and angrily clench their jaws until they crack their crowns. They fervently wish the Nobel-winning drug would just go away, or at least return to Africa or whatever uncredentialed hellhole it wriggled out of.
Covid was bad enough. But the idea of conservatives being allowed to treat their cancers with the inexpensive medicine makes liberals want to scream in futile rage.
So you can imagine how upset they were when, on Tuesday, Governor Ron DeSantis, First Lady Casey DeSantis, and Surgeon General Joe Ladapo held a press conference at the University of South Florida for World Cancer Research Day, and announced $60 million in new cancer research grants.
Everything was going fine until Casey said she expected some part of the new funding to be used for cancer research on ivermectin. “We should look at it,” Mrs. DeSantis said. “We should look at the benefits of it. We shouldn’t just speculate and guess,” she added innocently, seemingly unaware of how badly progressives would take that news.
For purposes of full disclosure, I personally know two people so far who’ve been diagnosed with late-stage cancers, took ivermectin in combination with other treatments (but not high levels of chemo and radiation), and both made a full recovery and are now cancer-free. ...
Liberals like the Phoenix have shot far past admitting ivermectin-cancer studies exist. They could have stopped short at demanding a large-scale, peer-reviewed, “gold standard” double-blinded study. That would have been their best move. Large-scale studies on ivermectin and cancer were always unlikely, since pharma won’t fund them.
But instead, liberals have decided to simply refuse to concede even any possibility ivermectin might help. ...
You have to hand it to them. That level of disbelief takes work. Even a quick lawyer’s search turned up dozens of studies showing ivermectin’s promise for treating cancer.
I’ve cited others before, but here’s another new one, published this April in Medical Oncology:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40257544/
Antitumor potential of ivermectin against T-cell lymphoma-bearing hosts
“Ivermectin,” the researchers began, “has shown promising anticancer potential.” They continued, “Originally developed for veterinary and human use against parasitic infections, ivermectin demonstrated significant antitumor effects in our study against tumor cells.”
Over the last four years, other independent studies have found more remarkable results combining ivermectin with traditional chemotherapy or other repurposed drugs, like metformin (a diabetes drug) and tamoxifen (an estrogen antagonist).
You can show these studies to progressives, but what’s the point? They won’t listen. They’ll just sneer, gobble some Tylenol, and sarcastically ask, Doing your own research again? It’s kind of tragic.
“Generic medicines are often overlooked,” First Lady DeSantis said, “because they are off-patent and don’t necessarily promise big profits.” Florida’s 2025 budget allocated $218 million total for cancer, with $60 million carved out for nutrition and “the repurposing of generic drugs such as ivermectin for cancer treatment.”
As they say, talk is cheap. But Florida just did more than talk. It allocated $60 million for grants to study repurposed drugs in treating cancer. That is a tangible step toward Making America Healthy Again. So far as I can tell, this level of investment by any U.S. state in repurposed cancer drugs is a historic first.

Another ivermectin study is out, and like the long list of similar studies lately, it shows more cancer treatment potential. This one was published in July in ACS Biomaterials Science, titled, “Intranasal Delivery of Ivermectin Nanosystems as an Antitumor Agent: Focusing on Glioma Suppression.”
https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsbiomaterials.5c00642
In short, the study found low-dose ivermectin shrank brain tumors by a whopping 70% in rats. The treated rodents also had less dead tissue, less swelling, and fewer new blood vessels forming, which means the remaining tumors were less invasive and less aggressive.
The ivermectin was delivered using a nasal spray in a very fine (nanoscale) form, since oral ivermectin can’t cross the blood-brain barrier. The rats that got the treatment showed no negative side effects.
The serendipitous discovery of ivermectin is one of the most remarkable stories in medical science. In the 1970s, Japanese microbiologist Satoshi Ōmura set out to find new microorganisms that might produce useful medicines. He collected hundreds of soil samples from around Japan, including one from a golf course in Kawana, south of Tokyo.
In one of his golf-course soil samples, Ōmura’s team isolated a previously unknown bacterium that produced compounds found to be extraordinarily effective at killing parasitic worms. He sent it to a U.S. lab at Merck, which developed ivermectin: a safer and even more potent chemical derivative of the bacterial compound.
As you know, in 2015, Ōmura and Merck researcher Bill Campbell jointly received the Nobel Prize in Medicine for a cheap dirt drug that has saved millions from disease and blindness. If ivermectin’s cancer-fighting abilities bear out —and the studies and anecdotes keep mounting up— it will become the single most beneficial accidental discovery in human history.
Here’s a question to ponder: would ivermectin have broken out of the pharma wilderness absent its high-profile role during the pandemic as a cultural and political flashpoint? Without this extraordinary exposure, efforts to study ivermectin as a cancer agent would almost certainly have remained niche— buried in the literature amid hundreds of other “drug repurposing” efforts, lacking funding, conference time, or media coverage.
Ivermectin may wind up being the greatest covid miracle of all.
« First « Previous Comments 657 - 696 of 696 Search these comments
And HCQ falls into that same bucket. Even worse - to admit HCQ works would be to admit Trump was right about something.
Liberals would rather that millions die than that Trump be allowed to be right about anything. They hate Trump more than they love their fellow humans.