How Ivermectin Is Useful for Treating Cancer

ByPrimary Researcher

Executive Summary

  • Ivermectin has been proven to treat parasites and COVID-19, but It is also helpful in preventing and treating cancer.

Introduction

This article explores how ivermectin is beneficial in combating cancer. We cover some of the history of Ivermectin, the other items for which Ivermectin is effective, and why the medical establishment has made a major effort to keep the reality of Ivermectin hidden from public view.

This article addresses dosage questions for Ivermectin related to different cancer types.

Go to top

About the Brightwork Research Treatment Database

We have a subscription website that provides people with everything they need to know about using Ivermectin for several diseases. Cancer is just one of our most researched areas. To see more see the below article indexes. 

Article Indexes

  • Open this link to see just one example Ivermectin article index.
  • Open this link to see the full article index. 

We have the most research on Ivermectin and Ivermectin for cancer and are completely independent. However, we have to charge subscribers to stay independent. We have free articles that expose readers to our research and writing -- however most of our content is behind a paywall. 

Go to top

After researching Ivermectin for covid, it was surprising to learn that it is also effective for treating cancer. This is important as the health authorities and even the original Ivermectin (Merck) have undermined faith in the drug because it is off-patent.

Go to top

A Brief History of Ivermectin

  • Ivermectin was initially developed in 1975 and was introduced in 1981 to treat parasite infestations.
  • Ivermectin eventually won the Nobel Prize for its inventors.

This video provides an overview of the history of Ivermectin.


This video demonstrates that Ivermectin was derived from a natural source and has proven to be remarkably effective. 

Ivermectin is an…

  • Anti-Parasitic
  • Anti-Bacterial
  • Anti-Inflammatory
  • Anti-Viral
  • Anti-Cancer

…medication.

However, it is only approved for its original submission to the FDA as an anti-parasitic. Although — as I cover at our subscription site, whether the FDA approves a drug has little to do with whether it is safe or effective.

As Ivermectin is a threat to much more expensive treatments, it is frequently critiqued as only a “horse dewormer” by the establishment media, even though it has been approved for human use and has been highly effective in treating many ailments since 1987.

The History of Ivermectin Since Covid – A Major Change Occurs In 2020

The medical establishment was very favorable towards Ivermectin, with mostly positive articles written on it. This favorable coverage of Ivermectin has been ongoing since the drug was first introduced in the 1970s and has continued for decades. That changed with the covid pandemic when Ivermectin was found to be a competitor to the much more expensive and less effective treatments the medical establishment wanted to force on the public. If Ivermectin had been recognized for its actual effectiveness against covid, Pfizer and Moderna could never have gotten Emergency Use Authorization for their vaccines.

Therefore, they had to suppress this effectiveness — which they also did against hydroxychloroquine.

How Ivermectin is Useful Against Covid, Microbes, and Cancer

Ivermectin has not only been proven (as you will see below) to be effective against coronavirus, but it has a history of being used against other types of viruses.

This is explained in the following quotation from an article published on the website of the NIH

Ivermectin proposes many potentials effects to treat a range of diseases, with its antimicrobial, antiviral, and anti-cancer properties as a wonder drug. It is highly effective against many microorganisms including some viruses. In this comprehensive systematic review, antiviral effects of ivermectin are summarized including in vitro and in vivo studies over the past 50 years. Ivermectin has been used for several years to treat many infectious diseases in mammals.

It has a good safety profile with low adverse effects when orally prescribed.

Understanding the Chasm Between Published Research at the NIH Website and NIH Policy

Remember, this is a study published at the NIH’s National Library of Medicine; it is not a statement by the NIH.

The NIH maintains a peer-reviewed journal of publications. This is hosted at the NIH URL https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/. So, it is on the NIH’s website. I can find all the evidence to support Ivermectin for cancer at this library, yet it is not part of NIH or other US health authority policies. 

The NIH’s Real Goals Versus Their Stated Goals

The NIH pretends to work for the public, but in reality, it works for the interests of powerful companies that enrich the top executives at the NIH.

The NIH has a peculiar situation where its stated health policy contradicts the published scientific studies in its National Library of Medicine. I would say that the NIH does not let the scientific literature interfere with its policy decisions. Leaders of the NIH and other U.S. health authorities make statements that directly contradict studies published on their websites. Why isn’t this issue more publicly acknowledged? Scientists know they had better not critique the NIH or get any NIH funding.

I can publicly critique the NIH because I am not a scientist looking for funding from the NIH. However, most medical researchers cannot speak out as they would be targeted by the top administrators of the NIH and have their careers highly negatively impacted or even ended. And that is the remarkable thing: those outside the medical system have freedom of speech, while those inside the system do not.

Does the Medical Establishment Follow “The Science?”

When people say “follow the science,” they usually mean to follow the directives of the NIH, FDA, and CDC administrations, rather than the studies.

What percentage of the population reads clinical trials? These corrupt entities rely on the public’s inability to read and dissuade them from reading the original documents, and on the scientists and medical doctors following whatever these health authorities say.

Comparing the Safety and Effectiveness of Ivermectin Versus Remdesivir

Ivermectin is far more effective than the NIH’s chosen drug, Remdesivir. Remdesivir is weak against covid, but the bigger issue is that it kills a significant percentage of those who receive it as a treatment. I call it “Dr. Fauci’s Death Potion.”

The following video is just one example of many from the establishment media that aim to undermine Ivermectin.

Fake Ivermectin Overdose Story

The establishment media produced a false story about Ivermectin. 

The Necessity of Undermining Ivermectin To Satisfy Pharmaceutical Advertisers

As CNN and other mainstream outlets get so much money from Big Pharma, they needed to undermine Joe Rogan, who used Ivermectin against COVID-19.

Mainstream outlets should be viewed as a form of public relations for whoever is paying them. Pfizer, the Pentagon, and whatever their revenue source will hold that line as they are in profit maximization, not providing accurate information on any topic.

See this list if you want to see who the establishment media are.

Why Drug Companies Want to Sunset Generic Drugs in Favor of Drugs That Are Still On Patent

Ivermectin is now generic. This means that pharmaceutical companies do not want people to use Ivermectin, as it would replace other drugs still on patent. This means drug companies try to get MDs to stop prescribing a promising medication that falls off patent and replace the prescription with a copycat drug with a new patent. This was famously done with Nexium, which was designed and copied from Prilosec to replace it. This is called “evergreening,” a term used for a drug.

Understanding How the Drug Companies View the Drug Lifecycle as a Treadmill

The drug lifecycle can be viewed as a treadmill. Once drugs come off patent, the drug companies attempt to discredit the previous effective drug, pay doctors to stop prescribing it, and transition patients to the new copycat drug.

The FDA fully supports this business model.

There is no difference between the FDA being part of the government (technically) or the pharmaceutical industry. This was not always the case; the FDA was a highly principled and practical regulatory body when it was established in 1906, but it has declined continuously since roughly the mid-1980s.

The History of Ivermectin’s Usage

Let us again refer to the history of Ivermectin and its use, which is found in the following quotation from an article at the website of the NIH

Ivermectin proved to be even more of a ‘Wonder drug’ in human health, improving the nutrition, general health and wellbeing of billions of people worldwide ever since it was first used to treat Onchocerciasis in humans in 1988. It proved ideal in many ways, being highly effective and broad-spectrum, safe, well tolerated and could be easily administered (a single, annual oral dose).

Ivermectin has continually proved to be astonishingly safe for human use. Indeed, it is such a safe drug, with minimal side effects, that it can be administered by non-medical staff and even illiterate individuals in remote rural communities, provided that they have had some very basic, appropriate training.

Above all, ivermectin has proved to be a medicine of choice for the world’s rural poor. In many underprivileged communities throughout the tropics, intestinal worms and parasitic skin diseases are extremely common and associated with significant morbidity.

Notice the term “astonishingly safe.” I will address this safety history in more detail; however, the establishment media and many other articles on Ivermectin discuss how Ivermectin is unsafe.

This illustrates a significant level of dishonesty in the establishment media and health authorities. It also shows that drug safety changes depending on the political need. The COVID-19 vaccine has been shown to have significant side effects, including death. Yet, the establishment media have critiqued people who have published articles based on the official government side effect databases.

The Effectiveness of Ivermectin Against Cancer

The problem with the war on Ivermectin by the medical establishment and the establishment media is that Ivermectin is not only effective against covid but several other illnesses. 

With the FDA and the medical establishment restricting prescription for Ivermectin for covid, they keep Ivermectin from being used for other essential purposes, with cancer being one of them.

The following quotes explain the results of testing Ivermectin for cancer.

Ivermectin effectively suppresses the proliferation and metastasis of cancer cells and promotes cancer cell death at doses that are nontoxic to normal cells.

Ivermectin shows excellent efficacy against conventional chemotherapy drug-resistant cancer cells and reverses multidrug resistance.

Ivermectin combined with other chemotherapy drugs or targeted drugs has powerful effects on cancer. – ScienceDirect

However, will Ivermectin become part of the treatment protocol for cancer? Of course not.

More positive results are found in the following study.

In these studies, 40-60 percent of animals treated with the ivermectin plus anti-PD1 antibody combination completely eradicated their tumors. They were able to fight off the cancer again after it was reintroduced. It’s the two drugs working together that is the magic. Either drug alone has almost zero effect, but together they have a powerful synergistic effect.

Based on its novel dual mechanisms of action (anti-cancer and immunomodulatory) in cancer, ivermectin may also potentiate the anti-tumor activity of other FDA-approved ICIs. Ivermectin is safe and inexpensive at roughly $30 a dose, making it attainable for everyone including cancer patients in developing countries. – Oncology Times

Ivermectin is Useful For Which Cancers?

Here is the list of cancers for which Ivermectin is useful. In analyzing all the cancer studies on Ivermectin, the results have consistently demonstrated that Ivermectin is useful and effective.

  • Lung Cancer
  • Gastric Cancer
  • Breast Cancer
  • Digestive Cancer
  • Urinary Cancer
  • Hematological Cancer
  • Reproductive Cancer – Ovarian Cancer
  • Brain Glioma Cancer
  • Respiratory System Cancer
  • Melanoma Cancers

We cover more details in the article, which connects to specific articles for this and many more cancer types in The Cancers For Which Ivermectin Has Been Demonstrated to be Effective.

However, the field of oncology will not communicate any of these studies to the public, essentially pretending that they do not exist.

Why Were None of the Studies Funded Out of the US or by the US Government?

Notice that none of these studies into the effectiveness of Ivermectin against these cancers were performed in the US. The US has the most significant national medical research budget in the world, but the NIH has no interest in funding these studies for obvious reasons. Therefore, if the US is not conducting studies, this is not only a negative outcome but also reveals something peculiar about what the NIH chooses not to fund in cancer research.

But the NIH must have begun some ongoing studies into Ivermectin and cancer, given the strength of these non-US studies, right? Well, you would be wrong in this assumption. You can find out why the NIH is not funding Ivermectin studies in the article Why the NIH Does Not Have Any Studies on Ivermectin for Treating Cancer.

Let us discuss the approved drugs available for cancer prevention, as Ivermectin is beneficial not only for cancer treatment but also for prevention. All of us at Brightwork have become sufficiently convinced of the benefits of Ivermectin that we all take it even though none of us currently has cancer. We also get all the other many benefits of Ivermectin ,which are covered in the article Why is Ivermectin Effective for So Many Different Things?

What Are the FDA-Approved Cancer Prevention Drugs?

Tamoxifen and raloxifene are two drugs prescribed for breast cancer prevention.

However, look at the side effects of these drugs on the site Komen.

Hot flashes

Irregular periods or spotting (uterine bleeding)

Leg cramps

Vaginal discharge

Vaginal dryness or itching

Blood clots in the large veins (deep venous thrombosis)

Blood clots in the lungs (pulmonary emboli)

Cancer of the uterus or endometrium (the lining of the uterus)

Cataracts

Stroke

How about a drug supporting cancer prevention with close to no side effects? Those have existed for decades with both Ivermectin and Fenbendazole — which is included, along with several other items, in our cancer protocol.

How the System Maximizes the Profits of Each Cancer Patient Through Providing False Information

If there weren’t real health consequences, it would be amusing how the health authorities and many websites would try to convince people of the dangers of Ivermectin, which has very low side effects, without acknowledging the far higher side effects of “FDA-approved” drugs.

The reality is that keeping the public from using Ivermectin and other anti-parasite drugs that are known to be effective against cancer seems likely to increase the number of cancer patients, and then once they get various cancers — places them in the sales funnel towards the most expensive treatments that are extraordinarily profitable for the medical establishment. This is an obvious conclusion; it requires a significant amount of redirection and deliberate obfuscation to conceal this fact from the public. The role of the medical authorities (like the NIH, American Cancer Society, etc..) is to serve the interests of the cancer treatment providers and maximize the profit on each cancer patient. When you read an article at The Mayo Clinic, MD Anderson, or WebMD, you may think this is “the science,” but it isn’t. Each of those entities is focused on profit maximization per cancer patient.

Conclusion

What is the problem here in connecting the dots? Many studies are showing the benefits of Ivermectin versus cancer. There are also multiple mechanisms for how Ivermectin fights cancer — which you can read more about at the end of this article.

The following is clear regarding Ivermectin for all uses.

  • The drug is very low-cost.
  • The drug is very low in toxicity.
  • The drug is very effective for treating an increasingly long list of ailments (including cancer) and has substantial preventative benefits.

Even if Ivermectin were to do nothing for cancer, each person who took it would benefit from all the other things it prevents, and they would be out very little money. Because of this, we need to employ scare tactics, as we have seen with major establishment media entities.

Now, let’s see the standard critique against Ivermectin.

The Status Quo Arguments Against Ivermectin by the Establishment

The following is a similar presentation of these risks. These are risks listed for taking Ivermectin for covid, but these same arguments will be used if Ivermectin becomes famous for treating cancer. It is not yet; therefore, we have not yet seen articles that seek to undermine Ivermectin for treating and preventing cancer. However, if that time does come, this article will be repurposed to make the same arguments against cancer rather than against COVID-19.

In the grand scheme of drug discoverdy and validation, in vitro studies play an enormous role. But many, many more steps — from preclinical studies to clinical trials — are needed before a drug that worked well in a test tube can actually be considered safe and effective in people. – Houston Methodist

The FDA approved many drugs with minimal benefits and significant side effects. Furthermore, the NIH has no ongoing studies and has no pharmaceutical company plans to pay to perform clinical trials on Ivermectin for treating cancer, as it’s a generic, and pharmaceutical companies don’t pay to put generic drugs through the FDA. A good parallel is how the FDA restricts baby formula from European manufacturers. This has nothing to do with formula quality but is designed to protect the three US baby formula manufacturers.

This is explained in the following quotation.

FDA labeling rules — not ingredient issues — keep imports out of U.S.
FDA regulations for baby formula make it nearly impossible for parents in the U.S. to buy infant formula produced outside the country.

The rules are so stringent that most baby formula produced in Europe is considered illegal in the U.S. due to labeling requirement technicalities.

The issue is this: FDA rules bar formula imports from Europe if the product does not have FDA-compliant nutritional labels. The formula may be perfectly safe and produced in accordance with European standards that are at least as stringent as U.S. health and safety requirements, but it can’t be imported because the FDA has not reviewed and approved what is printed on the package — a costly and time-consuming process for producers.

Today’s announcement signals the FDA will prioritize the review and approval of imports, as part of Biden’s strategy to address the shortage.

“FDA will prioritize review of applications that are most likely to be successful and will get the most formula to U.S. shelves as quickly as possible,” White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said at the White House briefing. – Children’s Health Defense 

When the 2022 baby formula shortage became a political hot potato, the FDA announced they would approve European formula products, further proving that the FDA was banning these formulas for political reasons and not for nutrition or safety reasons.

The FDA only approves drugs developed by pharmaceutical companies that can receive a patent; how is the fact that a drug has not been approved by the FDA a fair statement about the drug? Merck invested the time and money to get Ivermectin approved as an antiparasitic; however, as time passed, the patent expired, and anyone could make Ivermectin. Merck has no incentive to invest in clinical trials to obtain FDA approval for other uses of Ivermectin, as it cannot be repatented. Whenever a drug company invests in repurposing a drug, it is typically for a drug still under patent.

However, this quote above and others’ critiques of Ivermectin leave out an important context regarding how the FDA and the US patent medicine system work.

This is also why Merck began to deemphasize its drug (which it had previously aggressively supported when it held the patent) and fabricated claims of safety issues. Drug companies need to denigrate their drugs — but only after coming off patent. Merck has created a new patent drug called Molnupiravir, which is far less effective, much more expensive, and far less safe than Ivermectin. That is the drug Merck, and their army of compensated MDs recommends you take.

This video is fantastic and should be viewed by everyone. It explains the incredible effectiveness of Ivermectin against COVID-19, which has been hidden from the public. 

Questions on Treatment

Regarding the dosage and sourcing of Ivermectin, see the article Answering the Question of Where to Get Ivermectin.

We have gotten pushback from cancer patients who want to do what their doctors tell them, not question the standard treatments, and don’t want to consider Ivermectin. This does not consider the benefits of Ivermectin and assumes some conflict between Ivermectin and chemotherapy drugs.

Furthermore, accepting the treatment of the first hospital one visits is not the right solution to the problem. There are several reasons for this.

  • Different doctors and hospitals prescribe other standard treatments.
  • Doctors have also been found to switch to less effective chemotherapy drugs based on the margin the pharmaceutical company offers.
  • Chemotherapy has a less-than-excellent history. We have uncovered that several chemotherapy drugs that should not have been on the market were approved due to financial ties between those on the FDA authorizing board and the pharmaceutical companies.
  • The medical establishment censors the topics covered in this article because it competes with their pharmaceutical and radiological treatments.

It should be evident that Big Pharma will find a way to block the use of Ivermectin or other generic drugs for cancer in the same way they stopped them for COVID-19 treatment. At any time, Bill Gates’s foundation can fund a study to show the drug is ineffective, as it did for hydroxychloroquine in the context of COVID-19.

Why Are Anti-Parasitic Drugs Effective Against Cancer?

To understand why this class of drugs works against cancer, see the article The Mechanism of How Anti-Parasitic Drugs Work to Mitigate Cancer.

About Our Ivermecting Testing Program and Recommended Ivermectin Source of Supply

  • We performed pharmaceutical testing on Ivermectin to find a lower-cost version that also matched Merck's original Ivermectin in bioequivalence.
  • You can read about the details of our Ivermectin testing in this article, Our Ivermectin Bioequivalence Testing.
  • We got Summit Products to carry this version of Ivermectin, which passed our bioequivalence testing. 

Go to top