When the media initially mocked Ivermectin as “horse medicine” during the COVID-19 pandemic, they may have overlooked an essential truth: Ivermectin has been used in humans since 1987, saving millions of lives from parasitic diseases like river blindness. However, claims about its broader benefits, from treating COVID-19 to being a potential anti-cancer agent, have generated heated debates. There was a viral post by Sarah Fields on X that highlights a list of purported benefits of Ivermectin, raising questions about the media narrative and the drug’s true potential.
According to the post, Ivermectin allegedly goes far beyond its antiparasitic roots. It is suggested to have antiviral properties, preventing spike proteins in mRNA technology-related vaccines from entering cells. It’s also claimed to help reverse vaccine-related damage. Additionally, its anti-inflammatory and immune-boosting effects are cited as beneficial for autoimmune conditions like rheumatoid arthritis and Crohn’s disease, while also allegedly improving outcomes for cancer patients by enhancing the efficacy of chemotherapy.
The claims don’t stop there. Sarah Fields’ list suggests that Ivermectin has regenerative properties for the central nervous system, helps regulate metabolic issues like insulin and cholesterol, and even acts as a prophylactic against COVID-19 by reducing infection and mortality rates.
While this sounds impressive, the critical question remains: how much of this is backed by rigorous, peer-reviewed research? During the COVID-19 pandemic, Ivermectin became a contentious issue. Some studies showed potential benefits, while others dismissed its efficacy against the virus entirely. Beyond COVID-19, claims about its role in cancer treatment, nerve regeneration, and metabolic regulation warrant deeper investigation.
It’s undeniable that Ivermectin has been a groundbreaking drug in the fight against parasitic diseases, but the dramatic expansion of its potential benefits requires substantial scientific evidence to move from anecdotal claims to mainstream medical acceptance. The post does raise an important point: the media’s oversimplified portrayal of Ivermectin may have undermined discussions about its possible applications.
Recently, the Economic Times wrote this. In a candid conversation on Joe Rogan’s podcast, the Hollywood superstar Mel Gibson revealed that two of his close friends, who had been battling stage 4 cancer, experienced remarkable recoveries after using Ivermectin and Fenbendazole—drugs commonly employed to treat parasitic infections like roundworms and threadworms. He went on to claim that all three friends who tried these medications “don’t have cancer right now.” He emphatically added, “This stuff works, man.”
What’s going on here? It seems that somebody up there is denying our rights to better treatment—trying their very best to keep Ivermectin exclusive to those with money and leave the general public like us to die. Could be. No?
Image—FMT
