Why the NIH Does Not Have Any Studies on Ivermectin for Treating Cancer

Executive Summary

  • Ivermectin has many studies that show its effectiveness in treating cancer.
  • However, the NIH has no interest in funding studies.


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

Our References

If you want to see our references for this article and related Brightwork articles, visit this link.

The NIH/NCI Does Not Have a Single Ongoing Study into Ivermectin Funded

And when I searched for Ivermectin studies on cancer on the NIH website, I found the following.

It turns out that the NCI has no ongoing studies into Ivermectin and cancer.

Given the other studies showing a benefit, isn’t that an unsupportable position?

This brings up some of the following questions.

Question #1: Was the NIH Told Not To?

Was the NIH explicitly told by pharmaceutical companies not to fund any Ivermectin work?

Question #2: The NIH as a Drug Company Puppet?

There has been long-term support for the fact that the NIH is a puppet of pharmaceutical companies, and the fact that the NIH is not funding Ivermectin studies into cancer prevention and treatment is further evidence that bolsters this view.

Question #3: The NIH as a Motivated Pursuer of Drug Patents?

On the other hand, maybe no one has to tell the NIH not to fund research into generic drugs, as they already have their own built incentives not to support research into generic drugs. One might think that having the NIH pursuing patents is not a good outcome for public health, as to how the NIH can be objective when trying to maximize its patent acquisitions. Does the NIH want to spin off from the US government and become a for-profit pharmaceutical company? As the NIH is now quasi-public/private, it pretends to the public that it does not have these financial conflicts.

Naturally, the NIH views Ivermectin as not being able to provide them with a patent and would put them into conflict with pharmaceutical companies that make highly expensive chemotherapy drugs. However, the issue is not only treatment but also prevention. Suppose you read the article, which is included as a link at the end. In that case, it shows that modulating programmed cell death is one of the mechanisms that allow Ivermectin to be effective against cancer. However, this is equally important for cancer prevention, not just cancer treatment.

However, the NIH does not care. The NIH exists not for public health but for the benefit of the NIH. The health of the public has gone down as the NIH budget has increased (How The NIH Head Tries to Explain Why NIH Funding Does Not Improve Health), And they have no public oversight of what they do and what they fund, aside from having to testify in front of congress.

Let us discuss what approved drugs are available for cancer prevention.

The Financial Conflicts Within the NIH

A significant problem with the NIH is that they are increasingly looking for patents for themselves on drugs, which gives them an added incentive not to fund studies into generic drugs. Dr. Fauci himself owns the patents on several drugs he will receive royalties on for the rest of his life, not because of any work he did, as he has never done any medical research himself, but simply because he sits at the top of the infectious disease division of the NIH. The NIH increasingly receives patents funded by taxpayers, which the NIH is using to fund itself. This places an even larger conflict of interest within the NIH. Patents are distributed to the NIH as an organization and the top administrators as political patronages, like compensating mob bosses or paying tribute.


What is the problem here in connecting the dots? Many studies show 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 an increasingly long list of 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 must engage in scare tactics, as we have witnessed with major establishment media entities. 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.

Questions on Treatment

Regarding the dosage and sourcing of Ivermectin, see the article On the Topic of Ivermectin Dosage and Sourcing.

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 Dosage Calculator and More Information on Ivermectin

The dosage calculators for both cancer and use against the health damage caused by the COVID-19 vaccines -- as well as Ivermectin sourcing, safety, and more (over 140 articles on Ivermectin the most information anywhere on Ivermectin, and 800 total articles on medical and health topics) -- is all accessible at our subscription site.

Our Recommended Source of Supply

  • Our approved source for Ivermectin is Summit Products.
  • They carry the Ivermectin we tested for bioequivalence 
  • (you can read about our testing here) for the active ingredient with the original Merck version but at a much lower price than the Merck version. 
  • This source makes Ivermectin much more accessible and has passed our testing.