The National Cancer Institute is examining ivermectin as a potential cancer treatment, according to its top official, a move that signals growing attention to repurposed medicines within a federal research framework that has long prioritized rigorous evidence over hype.

“There are enough reports of it, enough interest in it, that we actually did — ivermectin, in particular — did engage in sort of a better preclinical study of its properties and its ability to kill cancer cells,” said Anthony Letai, a physician the Trump administration appointed as NCI director in September.

Letai did not cite new evidence that might have prompted the institute to research the effectiveness of the antiparasitic drug against cancer. “We’ll probably have those results in a few months,” Letai said.

He spoke about ivermectin at a Jan. 30 event, “Reclaiming Science: The People’s NIH,” with National Institutes of Health Director Jay Bhattacharya and other senior agency officials at Washington, D.C.’s Willard Hotel.

Here's What They're Not Telling You About Your Retirement

The MAHA Institute hosted the discussion, framed by the “Make America Healthy Again” agenda of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

During the covid pandemic, ivermectin’s popularity surged as fringe medical groups promoted it as an effective treatment. Clinical trials have found it isn’t effective against covid.

Ivermectin has become a symbol of resistance against the medical establishment among MAHA adherents and conservatives. “If lots of people believe it and it’s moving public health, we as NIH have an obligation, again, to treat it seriously,” Bhattacharya said at the event.

The Chronicle at Duke University reported that Bhattacharya recently said he wants the NIH to be “the research arm of MAHA.” This view sits alongside Letai’s stated mandate at the NCI to pursue rigorous study even of controversial ideas.

This Could Be the Most Important Video Gun Owners Watch All Year

A second NCI scientist, granted anonymity due to fear of retaliation, said the notion that NIH was not open to investigating the value of off-label drugs in cancer is “ridiculous.” The scientist warned that funding could be redirected toward a preclinical study based on nonscientific ideas.

HHS and the National Cancer Institute did not answer questions on the amount of money the cancer institute is spending on the study, who is carrying it out, and whether there was new evidence that prompted NCI to look into ivermectin as an anticancer therapy.

Emily Hilliard, an HHS spokesperson, said NIH is dedicated to “rigorous, gold-standard research,” something the administration has repeatedly professed.

A preclinical study is an early phase of research conducted in a lab to test whether a drug or treatment may be useful and to assess potential harms. These studies take place before human clinical trials.

The FDA has approved ivermectin for certain uses in humans and animals, with tablets used to treat parasitic infections and lotions for lice and rosacea. Two scientists involved in its discovery won the Nobel Prize in 2015, tied to the drug’s success in treating certain parasitic diseases.

The FDA has warned that large doses of ivermectin can be dangerous. Overdoses can cause seizures, comas, or death.

Kennedy, supporters of the MAHA movement, and some conservative commentators have promoted the idea that the government and pharmaceutical companies quashed ivermectin and other inexpensive, off-patent drugs because they’re not profitable for the drug industry.

“FDA’s war on public health is about to end,” Kennedy wrote in an October 2024 X post that has since gone viral.

“This includes its aggressive suppression of psychedelics, peptides, stem cells, raw milk, hyperbaric therapies, chelating compounds, ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine, vitamins, clean foods, sunshine, exercise, nutraceuticals and anything else that advances human health and can’t be patented by Pharma.”