In the age of instant information, the line between fact and fiction gets fuzzy. And nowhere is that more true than with ivermectin—a drug used to treat parasitic infections in animals and humans. A series of tweets recently set off a firestorm about ivermectin being used to treat conditions it doesn’t even claim to treat.
The controversy revolves around Dr. Makis, a Canadian radiologist whose license was revoked and who endorses ivermectin for everything from cancer to muscle spasms.
Dr. Neil Stone, an infectious disease specialist, called out these claims, pointing to the dangers of unproven treatments. His tweet echoed the frustration in the medical community:
No actual doctor is using ivermectin to treat cancer. The only person who is doing it is an ex radiologist from Canada who has lost his medical licence.
— Neil Stone (@DrNeilStone) January 14, 2025
He is now claiming that ivermectin ALSO treats back pain, muscle spasm and collapsed lungs.
This is getting really silly now.
Stone’s tweet highlighted the growing problem of misinformation in medicine—misinformation that puts public health at risk.
This is a bigger issue: the influence of social media and self proclaimed health experts, often with no medical training, on people’s health decisions. The consequences are far reaching as seen in the growing number of ivermectin users seeking alternative treatments despite there being no scientific evidence to support it.
The Man Behind the Controversy: The Ex-Radiologist and His Claims
Dr. Makis, a former Canadian radiologist, has become a controversial figure in the alternative medicine world after his medical licence was revoked for professional misconduct.
Since losing his licence he has become an outspoken critic of mainstream medicine and endorses ivermectin for everything from cancer to back pain to muscle spasms to collapsed lungs.
What makes Dr. Makis’ claims so dangerous is there is no scientific evidence to support ivermectin for these conditions. Ivermectin is an anti-parasitic drug used to treat scabies, river blindness, and certain intestinal infections. However, as a treatment for cancer or other complex medical conditions, there is no study or clinical trial to support it.
Despite no evidence, Dr. Makis has a large following of people who are disillusioned with mainstream medicine. His claims are amplified by the online health communities where anecdotal success stories trump peer-reviewed research.
So people with serious illnesses may be convinced to abandon proven treatments for unproven alternatives like ivermectin and put their health at risk.
The Digital Debate: A Hotbed of Supporters and Critics
Dr. Stone’s tweet wasn’t alone; many other medical professionals have been speaking out about the dangers of ivermectin misuse. But the ivermectin advocates responded quickly and viciously showing how polarized this debate is.
Social media platforms like Twitter have become battlegrounds where medical experts and the general public clash over ivermectin’s effectiveness.
One of the most popular tweets was from @TerryHaffnerMD who tweeted:
He isn’t claiming that IVM treats those things. He posted 3 different testimonials, which patients themselves related their improvement with symptoms or conditions related to taking IVM.
— Terry Haffner (@TerryHaffnerMD) January 14, 2025
Significant difference, but once again you like to tell half truths or flat out lies.
This mirrors the views of those who think mainstream medicine is controlled by industry giants and that alternative treatments like ivermectin should be part of the conversation. Haffner’s tweet shows how anti-establishment rhetoric is growing in the health community.
These tweets play on the distrust of pharmaceutical companies, framing them as profit-driven rather than drivers of medical innovation. Many people feel left behind by the slow progress in curing diseases like cancer.
On the other side of the scientific community @WesWilson tweeted:
So I covered this in my space, but while the data shows this is NOT GOING TO CURE YOUR CANCER , Sinai and City of Hope Hospital in California are running clinical trials with IVT as adjuvant with checkpoint blockade, increases immuno-mediated cell deathhttps://t.co/R5oRuvgnjH
— Wes Wilson (@WesleyWilson) January 16, 2025
This tweet is a more evidence-based approach to debunking the myths around ivermectin. Wilson’s comment is a growing frustration from medical professionals as they are forced to fight misinformation on platforms that value clicks over science.
Government in Public Health and Medical Innovation
One of the underlying problems in this debate is the gap between government health policies, public health funding, and the rapid spread of alternative treatments like ivermectin. Dr. Stone’s comment touches on this broader issue, that the demand for unproven treatments comes from the gaps in real medical care and research.
While the federal government has thrown resources at the COVID-19 pandemic and other immediate public health emergencies, long-term medical innovations especially in cancer and chronic diseases have not gotten the same attention.
So patients frustrated with the lack of progress in curing diseases like cancer turn to alternative treatments that promise quick fixes even if they are not scientifically proven. This is a dangerous trend as it undermines the years of research done by scientists to find effective evidence-based treatments.
Online misinformation often targets the most vulnerable and promises them hope where there is none and in doing so it bypasses the long and necessary process of research, clinical trials, and regulatory approval.
The government’s role in regulating alternative treatments becomes even more important in the context of online misinformation. With platforms like Twitter and YouTube allowing anyone to share their health experiences without the qualifications or knowledge to do so there is a clear need for more oversight to stop the spread of bad health advice.
The Dangers of Trusting Unproven Claims
One of the most worrying aspects of the ivermectin debate is the rapid spread of unproven health claims. While many ivermectin supporters think anecdotal evidence is enough to prove the drug works, medical professionals say relying on personal stories is not only scientifically reckless but dangerous.
Ivermectin when misused or taken in high doses can cause serious side effects like neurological damage, liver injury, and cardiovascular problems. But ivermectin advocates downplay these risks and prioritize personal stories over scientific data. This tendency to ignore the established risks of ivermectin can lead people to make bad decisions about their health and ultimately harm themselves.
As @SquatchTheCoyote tweeted:
If you have never taken Ivermectin, then you have no idea how great it works on so many issues.
— Squatch The Coyote (@Dos_colinas) January 14, 2025
This tweet is a perfect example of the problem with health claims on social media. The phrase “Look at the data” is especially dangerous because it tells people to ignore the scientific evidence and go with the narrative that fits their beliefs. In doing so it erodes trust in the medical community and creates an environment where unproven and potentially harmful treatments take hold.
Can Public Health Win the Battle against Misinformation?
The ivermectin misinformation highlights a big problem for public health: how to communicate complex scientific information to a public that no longer trusts experts. Social media where sensationalism beats evidence makes it hard to fight back against false narratives. This battle between authority and public opinion is not new but Twitter has made it more widespread and intense.
One of the key issues in this battle is the distrust many people have of traditional medical institutions. The COVID-19 pandemic showed how quickly public confidence can erode when misinformation spreads. This has carried over to the ivermectin debate where many people question the motivations of mainstream medical research and pharmaceutical companies.
To address this public health officials must not only present clear evidence-based information but also rebuild trust by acknowledging the public’s concerns and providing more transparent and accessible communication.
Evidence Based Health Decisions
The ivermectin debate is a reminder of the importance of evidence-based decision-making in healthcare. Patients especially those with life-threatening conditions like cancer are desperate for alternative treatments and it’s understandable. But the dangers of embracing unproven treatments cannot be overstated.
The rise of Dr. Makis and the growing ivermectin as the cure-all for everything shows we need more education, transparency, and oversight in the healthcare sector.
In the end, the path to better health outcomes is through rigorous scientific research not chasing the latest “miracle cure”. For patients that means putting their trust in qualified healthcare professionals and treatments that have been clinically tested. For the medical community that means fighting misinformation with the same intensity and passion that drives medical progress.
Only by working together can we make sure health decisions are based on facts not fear and vulnerable people are protected from harmful unproven treatments. The fight against misinformation is not just about debunking myths it’s about saving lives.
Last Updated on by Saket Kumar