The Joe Rogan Drug Rec Situation
The big picture A study published Tuesday in JAMA Network Open found that prescriptions for ivermectin and related antiparasitic drugs jumped 97% in the U.S. in the six months following Mel Gibson’s January 2025 appearance on The Joe Rogan Experience. Among cancer patients specifically, prescription rates were 2.5 times higher. The increase was three times higher in the U.S. South. The episode was viewed 60 million times in the first month after it aired. There is still no clinical evidence that ivermectin treats cancer in humans.
Why it matters This is one of the cleanest documented examples of celebrity health misinformation translating into measurable medical behavior. The researchers analyzed records from 68 million patients across 67 U.S. healthcare organizations — this isn’t anecdotal. And the underlying concern from oncologists is that cancer patients may be delaying or forgoing proven treatments in favor of an unproven one, or that high-dose ivermectin may itself be toxic or interfere with chemotherapy. Either way, the mechanism is now documented in peer-reviewed literature, and the same template will be used for the next drug, the next illness, and the next podcast.
What Gibson actually said On the January 9, 2025 episode of The Joe Rogan Experience, Mel Gibson told Rogan that three friends with stage-4 cancer had recovered after taking ivermectin and fenbendazole — the latter being a veterinary deworming drug not approved for human use. Gibson’s framing: “This stuff works, man.” Clips of that segment circulated widely on X, Instagram, TikTok, and Facebook. The state of Florida, citing the conversation, directed cancer research funding toward ivermectin trials.
What the study found The UCLA-led research team, headed by Dr. John Mafi and Dr. Katherine Kahn, analyzed outpatient and emergency prescription data from more than 68 million U.S. adult patients across 67 healthcare organizations. Among the headline findings: a 97% overall increase in ivermectin and benzimidazole prescriptions in the six months following the episode, 2.5x increase among cancer patients, 3x in the South, 2.8x in men vs. women, and 2.7x in adults 18 to 64 vs. those 65 and older. Increases were largest among White patients.
What the science actually says Ivermectin is FDA-approved for human use against parasitic worm infections. Its discoverers won part of the 2015 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for that work. Animal studies and laboratory cell studies have shown some anti-tumor activity for both ivermectin and benzimidazole drugs. The National Cancer Institute is studying ivermectin’s potential cancer applications. BUT no clinical trials have shown either drug is safe or effective for treating cancer in human patients. Fenbendazole, the second drug Gibson named, is not approved for human use at all.
What oncologists are worried about Dr. Skyler Johnson, an oncologist at the University of Utah’s Huntsman Cancer Institute who wasn’t part of the study, told CIDRAP News that the dose of ivermectin needed to have even a small anti-tumor effect in animals would typically be considered toxic in humans. He also raised concerns about how ivermectin could affect the body’s ability to process actual cancer treatments and other medications. The study’s authors flagged a separate concern: that cancer patients who use unproven alternative treatments may delay or forgo proven ones, with previous research showing this is associated with increased risk of death.
The bigger context The authors’ own framing of the structural issue is the line that’s worth sitting with. They wrote that celebrity health endorsements “gain traction when institutional trust erodes.” That’s the broader story. Ivermectin has been the focal point of medical misinformation for years now — first as a COVID treatment despite a lack of evidence, then as a MAHA-circle cure-all, then as a treatment for hantavirus earlier this month, now as a cancer treatment. The drug doesn’t change. The illness changes. And the people who get hurt the most are people in the most vulnerable position to be sold a miracle.
The honest caveats The study is observational, meaning it cannot definitively prove that Gibson’s appearance on Rogan caused every additional prescription. Other variables could be in play, and the researchers acknowledge this. Additionally, the absolute number of patients using ivermectin for cancer is still small relative to the overall U.S. patient population. BUT the signal is the point. A single podcast episode produced a peer-reviewed, statistically significant shift in real-world prescribing behavior. That mechanism is now documented.
By the numbers
97% — increase in ivermectin and benzimidazole prescriptions in the 6 months following the episode
2.5x — increase among cancer patients specifically
3x — increase in the U.S. South
2.8x — increase in men vs. women
60 million — views of the Joe Rogan Experience episode in its first month
68 million — patient records analyzed in the study
67 — U.S. healthcare organizations represented in the data
0 — clinical trials showing ivermectin treats cancer in humans
2015 — year ivermectin’s discoverers won the Nobel Prize (for parasitic infection treatment)
The bottom line This is no longer a debate about whether celebrity health misinformation has consequences. There is now a peer-reviewed study, in a top medical journal, with 68 million patient records behind it, demonstrating that consequences exist and can be measured. What happens next depends on three things. Whether medical institutions can rebuild enough credibility to compete with podcasts on attention and trust. Whether the platforms that profit from this kind of content take any responsibility for the downstream effects. And whether the next time a celebrity tells 60 million people that a deworming drug can cure stage-4 cancer, there’s any infrastructure in place to push back before the prescriptions start rolling in.
Thanks for reading! Comment your thoughts & reactions | Share to spread the word | Follow to stay in the loop
Lifetime horsewoman and use Ivermectin on my horses only. Have to get my dogs genetics tested to see if they carry a Collie gene that will KILL them if they ingest Ivermectin ( dogs eat poop and get second hand poisoning) During the Covid pandemic after Cheeto enforced Ivermectin I had an X boyfriend from 45 years ago trying desperately to get him some. I declined, good to see why he is still an X.
I have a science degree, I took all the chemistry classes, I know how to read a peer reviewed journal and see any gaping mistakes. Never once saw that Nazi Gibson at any scientific conference. The titan ego to promote bullshit that will shorten the life of someone who could benefit from actual medical treatment is villainous.
I agree that celebrities backing unproven drugs based on anecdotal evidence to an audience of 60 million people is bad for society. However, you shouldn't be definitive and conclusive when discussing a single paper, even if it is huge and highly published. I believe that is actively harmful to any scientific discourse. It is critical to be clear about the where the evidence is pointing while acknowledging the limitations/unknowns. Science communication is super hard, but so important.
As you mentioned, this single paper does not definitely prove a causal link between that episode and the increase in prescriptions. An observational study cannot do that, no matter how good it is executed. There are certainly still discussions/arguments to be had over the true impact of a single popular episode versus the deluge of health influencers saying the same shit (or worse) on TikTok versus simply desperate cancer patients looking for any bit of hope.
Thank you for doing what you do..