False information on ivermectin continues to circulate worldwide
"The Media laughed and said Ivermectin was ONLY for horses and cows? THEY KNEW it was made for people since 1987," begins a May 7, 2025 Facebook post.
It goes on to list 12 uses for ivermectin to treat everything from Covid-19 to cancer.
The image shows an injectable version of ivermectin intended for cows and swine, implying that people should purchase the product in its formulation for animals -- a notion explicitly rejected by pharmacists (archived here).
Canadians posted the same text in French, while AFP identified other posts spreading versions of the claim in Spanish, Hungarian, Dutch, Bosnian, Greek, Czech and German.
Keyword searches revealed the identical text has been shared across social networks since at least January 2025, around the time that actor Mel Gibson made unproven claims about ivermectin curing cancer on Joe Rogan's popular podcast.
This follows years of misinformation about the drug, particularly among those skeptical of the mRNA vaccines developed to protect against Covid-19 (archived here). The false belief in positive off-label uses for ivermectin triggered legislative moves in several US states to allow access to the drug without a prescription.
In Canada, ivermectin is only approved for use by humans to treat "parasitic infections (oral) and rosacea (topical)" (archived here).
Similarly, in the United States, the Food and Drug Administration approved ivermectin tablets "to treat some parasitic worms," while topical formulations are available for head lice and rosacea (archived here).
Ivermectin has been shown to be "clinically effective against certain worm infections and scabies," Akos Heinemann, research head in the department of pharmacology at the Medical University of Graz (archived here), told AFP on April 29, 2025.
"Anything else is unsubstantiated speculation based on scientifically untenable data or is simply fabricated," he said.
While the widely shared text focuses on the potential benefits of ivermectin use, the drug has possible serious side effects (archived here).
In 2021, amid increasing calls to poison centers, Health Canada issued a warning against taking ivermectin off-label or in formulations for livestock (archived here). "Canadians should never consume health products intended for animals because of potential serious health risks, including seizures, coma and even death," it said.
Heinemann said: "Prescribing or taking ivermectin outside of its approved indications is grossly negligent."
Monika Redlberger-Fritz, researcher at the Center for Virology at the Medical University of Vienna (archived here), agreed. "Ivermectin should only be used as authorised; all other uses are not indicated," she said on April 29, 2025.
The text shared across social media claims ivermectin "has been associated with a significant reduction in infection, hospitalization and mortality rates" due to Covid-19, but there is no data to back that claim.
During the pandemic, researchers explored whether ivermectin could treat Covid-19, but studies failed to find a clinical benefit.
Health Canada and provincial health authorities, including in Alberta, do not recommend the use of ivermection to prevent or treat Covid-19.
The post also claims that ivermectin cures the "damage caused by mRNA vaccines through spike proteins."
This repeats a recurring false claim that the spike proteins produced after vaccination against Covid-19 cause harm or can be shed to the detriment of others.
Experts estimate the Covid-19 vaccines saved millions of lives (archived here).
Health Canada says the approved vaccines "reduce the risk of severe illness, death and post Covid-19 condition (long Covid)" (archived here).
The social media post further claims that ivermectin kills cancerous cells and prevents their spread, but provides no evidence.
The effectiveness of ivermectin in treating cancer is currently an avenue of research for scientists, but it is far from being considered an alternative to existing treatments experts explained to AFP in French.
Since the mid-1990s, in vitro and animal studies have shown that the ivermectin molecule could have anti-cancer properties.
Jérôme Hinfray, head of scientific information for the French Anti-Cancer League, told AFP in March 2025: "Scientists have shown that the molecule could have antiproliferative properties, which therefore slow the development of cancer cells, and anti-metastatic properties, which would prevent the spread of cancer in the organisms of the animals that were the subjects of the experiment."
However, such studies cannot be extrapolated to humans, and further research and clinical trials are needed, said Claude Linassier, oncologist and director of the prevention, organisation and care pathways unit at the National Cancer Institute of France in March (archived here).
"We cannot in any case transpose data from an experimental model in mice to treatment in humans," he said.
"To claim that ivermectin is effective in curing cancer is certainly false or fanciful and is not based on any scientific data," he warned.
Research shows that cancer arises from mutations in cells, not from an external parasite (archived here), but the false belief that cancer is a parasite also fuels unproven faith in ivermectin and fenbendazole to cure it.
Following Gibson's claim, which was viewed more than 10 million times on YouTube, the Canadian Cancer Society took to X to warn against the "false hope" provided by misinformation on cancer treatment (archived here).
"Surgery, radiation and approved cancer drugs like chemotherapy are safe and proven to stop cancer cells from growing and spreading. Choosing to use an alternative therapy can have serious health effects, such as the cancer spreading or getting worse," the organization said.
More of AFP's reporting health misinformation is available here.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
8 minutes ago
- Yahoo
5 signs it might not be safe for your aging parents to live alone anymore, according to an expert
We plan for vacations and plan for retirement, but end-of-life planning is something we tend to put off. Talking about downsizing or moving into a retirement community (or a long-term care facility) are among the most important conversations adult children will have with their parents, and experts say these conversations should happen as early and often as possible. Broaching the subject of downsizing or moving can be delicate, and most elderly parents are resistant to move out of their houses. In fact, nearly every Canadian wants to age in their homes and communities. A 2020 survey found that 96 per cent of Canadians aged 65 and older would do 'everything they could' to avoid going into a long-term care facility, according to the National Institute on Ageing. That's a relevant statistic to consider when approaching your aging parents with this sensitive conversation. Meanwhile, Canada's population continues to age. Around 19 per cent of Canadians were aged 65 and older on July 1, 2023. By the end of the decade, seniors could represent between 21 per cent to 23 per cent of the total population. As this demographic continues to grow, conversations around end-of-life planning will increasingly move to the forefront. With this in mind, Yahoo Canada spoke to an expert about signs it might be time for your parents to consider downsizing. It's hard to know when it might be time to help your elderly parents downsize, but Stephanie Chan, a senior living advisor and founder of Home to Home, a care planning business based in Vancouver, B.C, has a few common clues to look out for. One scenario for aging parents is their day-to-day routines seem normal, but gradually over time, you spot subtle warning signs. 'They may seem minor and not as noticeable,' Chan says. 'But I would encourage families to pay attention to a few things.' 1. Mobility 'Observe how your parents are getting around the house. If you're picking up to go to an appointment, do you notice that it's taking them longer to get ready? Are they manoeuvring stairs differently? Have they had any falls, even small falls, in recent weeks?' Chan says mobility is one common warning sign to consider whether the living environment is still suitable. 2. Ease of daily living Changes in your loved one's ability to bathe themselves or go to the washroom on their own are another indicator it might be time to discuss living arrangements. 'Are they remembering to take their meds?" Chan asks. "Are they cooking for themselves? Are they keeping the house tidy? Are they dressing themselves OK?" 3. Mental wellbeing "Do they seem more isolated? Socialization can really impact one's well being. If you notice your parents never going out and they're isolated all the time, that could be a warning sign to think about moving," Chan says. "Seniors residences have a lot of socialization, and I think it's actually one of the most underrated benefits of seniors residences.' 4. Cognitive ability Another sign is if your parent has become more forgetful to the point where they're unable to take their meds or are at risk of going out and forgetting their way home. Diagnoses of dementia or Alzheimer's are also indicators it may be time for new a new living arrangement to ensure their safety. 5. Triggering events The loss of a spouse or loss of a driver's license could also trigger a discussion of downsizing or moving to a group environment. Similarly, a chronic health diagnosis that could impact their daily routine may also be a catalyst for discussing living arrangements. In her 18 years dealing with seniors, Chan says resistance to talk of in-home care or moving is one of the biggest conversations she helps families navigate. If your parents need help at home, her advice is to start small, whether it's hiring a cleaner, gardener, or cook to help with daily tasks. 'That might be a good way to just get your feet wet with trying out home care,' she says. And, if the family agrees it might be time to move, Chan suggests people tour residences. Book it during lunchtime if possible. 'Many places will invite you to stay, and you can test out the food and see other residents coming down for their meals,' Chan says. 'It will demystify any preconceived notions of what seniors' residences are like. A lot of people think it's doom and gloom, but there's a lot of seniors' residences that are very, very nice.'
Yahoo
10 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Minnesota state workers say they're ready to strike over return-to-office — and other labor news
Members of the Minnesota Association of Professional Employees picket in St. Paul on Wednesday, June 4. (Photo by Izzy Wagener/Minnesota Reformer) Take a seat in the Break Room, our weekly round-up of labor news in Minnesota and beyond. This week: State workers say they're strike ready; Job Corps students face homelessness; Minnesota surpasses 3 million jobs in 2024; and doctors and nurses picket across the state. State employees picketing outside negotiations between Minnesota budget officials and their union on Wednesday said they were absolutely willing to strike over Gov. Tim Walz's part-time return-to-office order that took effect this week. 'One-hundred percent I would. We can't just roll over here,' said Erin Malone, an auditor for the Department of Revenue, at a demonstration in St. Paul with more than 50 workers and supporters on Wednesday. The two unions representing nearly 40,000 state workers — the Minnesota Association of Professional Employees and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees — are also fuming over the state's health care proposals they estimate will raise many workers' costs by thousands of dollars a year. The administration says rising health care costs leave them no choice. The soonest state employees could strike is in late summer, once contracts expire on June 30, they complete 45 days of mediation and then provide 10 days notice. The union explained those details in a FAQ for their members posted late last month in another sign that negotiations are headed toward a volatile impasse. State employees haven't gone on strike since walking off the job for two weeks 2001, but MAPE President Megan Dayton says she's never seen her members so fired up by Walz's unilateral decision to force workers back to the office. Hundreds of workers showed up to multiple demonstrations organized by the union over two days this week. Under Walz's order, state employees must work in the office at least 50% of the time unless they live more than 50 miles away or receive an exemption. Walz argues the policy will improve collaboration, mentorship and workplace culture, with the added benefit of bringing bodies and dollars back to a forsaken downtown St. Paul. The policy officially began June 1, but some agencies have delayed implementation as they make space for employees to return. After the COVID-19 shifted office jobs to workers' homes, state agencies began downsizing their office footprint in anticipation of permanent remote work. The Department of Revenue, for example, reduced its leased office space by 35% since 2021, saving $2.45 million annually. Many workers argue they're more productive at home and complain that the order adds to their costs in parking and gas. Some also question the motive, suspecting Walz could be distancing himself from public unions ahead of another run for governor — or trying to nudge workers off the payroll as the state stares down fiscal uncertainty. The state has also proposed changing contract language to make it easier to lay off workers in the event of 'fiscal exigencies' such as federal funding cuts, as well as epidemics, natural disasters and national security emergencies. 'I think it's political posturing,' said Christine Retkwa, a data analyst at the Department of Human Services. 'It can't be collaboration if we've been more productive… It's not to save costs.' Walz's relationship with public sector unions, which have historically been an important political ally, have soured rapidly since he announced the policy in March without consulting the unions. The union compared Walz to Elon Musk, and Walz did not invite anyone from the union to attend his State of the State Address. Tens of thousands of students at Job Corps centers across the country are facing homelessness after the Trump administration's Labor Department announced it will eliminate the vocational training program for low-income teenagers and young adults. 'You don't hit the ground running, you just hit the ground period. Straight homeless – nothing. Just straight into the ground,' Tyrone Bills, one of more than 150 students at the Hubert H. Humphrey Job Corps Center in St. Paul, told Fox 9. Last Friday, the Labor Department gave students a week's notice to move out and abandon their free training to fill jobs in manufacturing, construction, law enforcement, health care and other high-growth industries. The department later extended the deadline, and then a federal judge blocked the Trump administration from killing the program. By then, many students had already moved out. Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer, once an advocate for Job Corps, justified eliminating the $1.7 billion program because of 'serious incidents' as well as high costs and low student graduation rates. Just 38% of students graduate, with an average cost of more than $80,000 a year, according to the agency. The National Job Corps Association disputed these figures, saying graduation rates before COVID-19 have historically been above 60% while the cost is less than $50,000 per enrollee. Minnesota continued to have one of the country's strongest labor markets in 2024, adding 40,000 non-farm jobs to push the state above 3 million jobs for the first time, according to the second annual State of Working Minnesota report from the labor-backed think tank North Star Policy Action. In the Midwest, Minnesota has the highest median wages, the highest share of workers in unions and the highest rate of health insurance coverage. The state also has the lowest unemployment rate for Black residents in the region and the lowest fatal injury rate on the job. Wage inequality also declined, while union membership increased by nearly 7% (although this can fluctuate from year to year due to imprecise data, and the general trend has been down for unions.) Support for unions is near historic highs, and that's helped nearly triple the number of union elections over the past five years, according to the report. It wasn't all good news: unemployment ticked up while the median wage moved down from $26.43 to $25.52 in an unusual break from a nearly exclusive upward trend. There is also cause for concern, according to report author Aaron Rosenthal, given federal Republicans' drive to reduce spending on health insurance for the working poor to offset some of the costs of tax cuts largely benefitting the wealthy. Working families are increasingly reliant on health insurance through Medical Assistance, the state's version of Medicaid. The number of people insured through Medical Assistance in families with at least one full-time worker increased 165% over the past 15 years. In rural areas, roughly 18% of adults and 37% of children are insured through Medical Assistance, compared to 15% of adults and 30% of children in the Twin Cities metro area. National jobs data released on Friday showed hiring has slowed as Trump's trade war and federal cuts have put employers on edge, with nearly all of the 139,000 job gains for the month being concentrated in health care and hospitality. The federal government lost 22,000 jobs. In a first for Minnesota, newly unionized doctors, physician assistants and nurse practitioners picketed outside several Allina clinics on Tuesday as negotiations stalled over a first labor contract. (It was an informational picket and not a strike.) Frustrated with what they describe as factory-style health care, the clinicians voted by a wide margin to unionize with Doctors Council SEIU in October 2023, forming the nation's largest private-sector doctors union with more than 600 members across 60 Allina clinics in Minnesota and Wisconsin. But since then, union leaders say they've made little progress toward finalizing a first labor contract covering wages, benefits and working conditions — despite meeting with hospital leaders nearly 40 times. 'We're not seeing Allina come to the table with meaningful proposals,' said Dr. Chris Antolak, a family physician, outside Allina's clinic in Coon Rapids. Unionized nurses also took to the picket lines outside 11 hospitals in the Twin Cities and two in Duluth in their push for greater staffing levels to protect themselves from workplace violence and improve patient care. The Minnesota Nurses Association is negotiating contracts covering roughly 15,000 nurses at seven of the state's largest health systems. Contracts expired on May 31 at St. Luke's and Essentia in Duluth and will expire at the end of this month at Twin Cities hospitals run by Allina, Children's, M Health Fairview, HealthPartners and North Memorial. Union president Chris Rubesch has said a strike is on the table.
Boston Globe
25 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Health insurers seeking steep rate increases
Gov. Maura Healey, too, linked the merged market proposal to broader economic concerns. Advertisement 'Health care costs, as reflected in the proposed rates filed by health insurers, are simply unsustainable. I directed our Insurance Commissioner to closely scrutinize these filings as part of the rate review process,' Healey said in a statement to the News Service. 'What is clear is that we all must do much more to lower the cost of health care in this state.' Eight major health insurance providers late last month submitted the proposed rates they want to charge next year in the merged market, which combines under one umbrella individual insurance and small group insurance for businesses with no more than 50 eligible employees. The new annual weighted average base rates would all increase by varying amounts, with Fallon Community Health Plan's 9.9 percent the lowest and Boston Medical Center Health Plan's 16.2 percent the highest, according to DOI data. Advertisement Taken together, the proposals reflect an average increase of 13.4 percent affecting more than 720,000 renewing members, a sizable jump over the 8.36 percent growth regulators approved last year and the 4.8 percent growth in 2024. Eileen McAnenny, president of the Employer Coalition on Health, said those hikes would be 'very difficult for small businesses to absorb,' especially as employers navigate high costs for energy and unemployment insurance as well as the prospect of tariffs. 'Those rate increases are alarming when considered in the context that Massachusetts already has the second-highest health insurance premiums in the nation,' she said. 'But unfortunately, I don't think it's surprising given that we set a cost growth benchmark each year that providers and drug companies blow through without consequence, and that we keep providing supplemental payments to providers and expecting nothing in return — no improved efficiency, no transparency.' Retailers Association of Massachusetts President Jon Hurst said the 'vast majority' of his group's 4,000 members would be affected by increases in the merged market premium rates. 'The average small business in the retail, small restaurant world has sales today equal to pre-COVID. Their sales are flat, but their costs are through the roof, primarily health insurance,' Hurst said. 'We've seen, over the last five years, an increasing number of dark storefronts. It's still continuing long past COVID because of these cost increases, and health insurance premiums are by far the biggest nut.' DOI will review each of the eight rate filings individually, and the department can reject proposals if it finds that the increases are 'not reasonable in relation to health plan benefits, or if they are excessive or inadequate or use rating factors that are discriminatory or not actuarially sound,' the department wrote in an advisory. Advertisement Last year, several carriers DOI plans a virtual public hearing on June 17, where insurance carriers will present their proposals and others are invited to offer testimony, ahead of a final decision expected in August. 'We're going to tell them it's unaffordable, reject them. They can reject them,' Hurst said. 'Maybe the insurers need to go back to the drawing board and reopen these contract negotiations with hospitals and pharma companies.' The vast majority of the merged market rate increases would be driven by increasing medical and pharmacy claims, according to data insurers submitted to the state, with administrative costs, taxes and fees accounting for less than one-tenth of the total average hike. Individual and small group health plans are required to spend 88 percent of premium dollars on health care services instead of administrative or other costs. Insurers have long contended their hands are tied by high provider and prescription drug prices. Lora Pellegrini, president of the Massachusetts Association of Health Plans group that represents insurers, said carriers 'are frustrated, too.' 'Premiums reflect those underlying health care costs. We have seen rate demands from providers in the high double digits. We have one provider who's asked for a 70 percent increase in their rate. Plans can only do so much,' Pellegrini said. 'The power of providers who have only gotten bigger and bigger with consolidation make it very hard for health plans to negotiate a robust deal, because consumers want these hospital systems in their networks.' Advertisement Pellegrini pointed to financial headaches at MassHealth and the Group Insurance Commission, the latter of which needed 'Private-sector health plans have those same challenges,' she said. Margins for private health insurers have been steadily declining. After peaking at 2.8 percent in 2020, the median private health insurer total margin dropped into the red in 2023 and fell again to -1.06 percent in 2024, according to data MAHP shared with the News Service. Financial strain is rampant across the health care landscape. Total health care spending per capita in Massachusetts The Division of Insurance has already flexed new authority to scrutinize health care costs. A market oversight law Healey signed in January tasked the office's regulators with determining whether proposed rates are 'excessive' by considering 'affordability for consumers and purchasers of health insurance products.' On March 12, the division 'We are actively looking at other actions we can take to contain these health costs,' Healey said. 'Everyone has a role to play – insurers, hospitals, the pharmaceutical industry – and everyone will need to step up to make Massachusetts a more affordable place to live and do business.' Advertisement Healey and the Legislature last term agreed on a hospital oversight and market review law and a measure intended to rein in prescription drug costs. While implementation of those laws unfolds, policymakers are weighing additional action to address what Asked how confident she is that Beacon Hill Democrats can navigate the thicket of competing interests to achieve additional reforms, McAnenny replied simply, 'I hold out hope.'
