1 in 3 Cancer-Free: Ivermectin Trial Stuns, but RESET-5 Aims Even Higher

April 10, 2026

https://zenodo.org/records/19455636

Real-World Clinical Outcomes of Ivermectin and Mebendazole in Cancer Patients: Results from a Prospective Observational Cohort

Authors/Creators

Nicolas Hulscher, MPH1, 2, Kelly Victory, MD2, James A. Thorp, MD2, Drew Pinsky, MD2, Alejandro Diaz-Villalobos, MD2, Peter Gillooly, MSc2, Foster Coulson2, Melissa Annazone2, Chloe Radesi2, Jessica Brooks2, Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH1, 2, Harvey Risch, MD, PhD3, 2

April 7, 2026

Description

Abstract

Background: Drug repurposing offers a pathway to identify accessible, low-toxicity cancer therapies. Ivermectin and mebendazole have demonstrated multi-target anti-cancer activity in preclinical models, including the inhibition of cancer cell proliferation and the targeting of cancer stem cells. This paper evaluates real-world patient-reported outcomes, safety, and adherence in a cohort of cancer patients utilizing this combination protocol.

Methods: We analyzed a prospective observational cohort of 197 cancer patients who were prescribed ivermectin and mebendazole off-label through a telemedicine platform by licensed U.S. healthcare providers. Participants received compounded oral capsules containing 25 mg ivermectin and 250 mg mebendazole. As part of a clinical program evaluation, data were collected via voluntary, standardized digital surveys at baseline and at approximately 6-month follow-up. Of the initial cohort (N = 197), baseline characteristics, including cancer type and disease status, were assessed. A total of 122 participants completed the follow-up survey (61.9% response rate) to evaluate self-reported cancer outcomes, medication adherence, and adverse events. 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for primary outcome measures using the Wilson score method. Dose-stratified analyses for outcomes and safety were conducted using Chi-square statistics.

Results: The cohort represented a diverse clinical profile of cancer patients, with mean age of 67 years and nearly balanced sex distribution (52.3% male, 47.7% female). Cancer types included prostate (27.9%), breast (18.3%), lung (8.6%), colon (5.1%), urologic (4.6%), pancreatic (3.0%), liver (2.5%), gynecologic (2.5%), and hematologic (2.5%) malignancies. At enrollment, participants had a median duration since initial diagnosis of 1.2 years, with 37.1% experiencing active disease progression. At 6-month follow-up, medication adherence was high with 86.9% of participants completing the full initial 90-capsule ivermectin-mebendazole prescription and 66.4% remaining on the protocol at 6 months. The Clinical Benefit Ratio (CBR) was 84.4% (95% CI: 77.0–89.8%). Notably, 48.4% (95% CI: 39.7–57.1%) of the cohort reported the strongest positive outcomes, consisting of regression (15.6%; 95% CI: 10.2–23.0%) or no current evidence of disease (NED, 32.8%; 95% CI: 25.1–41.5%). Disease stability was reported to be maintained in 36.1% (95% CI: 28.1–44.9%) of participants, while 15.6% (95% CI: 10.2–23.0%) reported disease progression. While 25.4% reported mild side effects (primarily gastrointestinal), 93.6% of those affected continued treatment through minor dose adjustments. Some participants reported concurrent conventional therapies, including chemotherapy (27.9%), radiation therapy (21.3%), and surgery (19.7%), as well as adjunctive interventions such as supplement use (49.2%), dietary modification (37.7%), and other integrative approaches.

Conclusions: In this prospective real-world cohort, the combination of ivermectin and mebendazole was associated with high rates of self-reported clinical benefit, with nearly half of participants reporting tumor regression or no current evidence of disease across a heterogeneous population of cancer patients. These findings provide a compelling clinical signal that these well-tolerated, repurposed agents may offer therapeutic benefit. However, given the observational design, reliance on self-reported outcomes, and potential for selection bias and uncontrolled confounding, these findings should be interpreted as hypothesis-generating. Urgent prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trials are warranted to validate these observations and further define optimal dosing strategies. (Go to link for full-length study)

_____________

**Comment**

http://

Could These Overlooked Drugs Be a Cancer Game-Changer?

Dr. Ken Stoller, April 12, 2026

For a wonderful breakdown of the study:  https://justusrhope.substack.com/p/1-in-3-cancer-free-ivermectin-trial?  Excerpt:

Dosages and Concurrent Therapies

Patients were prescribed the medications off-label through a telemedicine platform. They received compounded oral capsules containing:

  • 25 mg of Ivermectin
  • 250 mg of Mebendazole

The study noted that these were not strictly monotherapies. Many patients were undergoing concurrent conventional treatments, including chemotherapy (27.9%), radiation therapy (21.3%), and surgery (19.7%). Additionally, many used adjunctive interventions such as supplements (49.2%) and dietary modifications (37.7%).

Study Completion and Attrition

Of the initial 197 patients, 75 patients failed to complete the study (meaning they did not complete the 6-month follow-up survey).

  • A total of 122 participants completed the 6-month follow-up survey, resulting in a 61.9% response rate.
  • Among the 122 who responded, adherence was high: 86.9% completed the full initial 90-capsule prescription, and 66.4% chose to remain on the protocol at the 6-month mark.

Clinical Outcomes and Tolerability

The authors reported an overall Clinical Benefit Ratio (CBR) of 84.4% among the 122 patients who completed the survey. The self-reported outcomes broke down as follows:

  • No Evidence of Disease (NED): 32.8%
  • Disease Stabilization: 36.1%
  • Tumor Regression: 15.6%
  • Disease Progression: 15.6%

Within the article, Justuserhope asked AI to evaluate the benefit of adding one agent at a time from the RESET-5 Protocol (Mebendazole, ivermectin, sulforaphane, metformin, and aged garlic extract) to the Hulscher et. al study.  The full RESET-5 reduces the likelihood of resistance development, enhances immune function, and depletes tumors of a critical survival tool – compensatory glutathione production.

The full RESET-5 Protocol boosts improvement even further by 30-40%.

_____________

**Comment**

For those of you studying this, 25 mg of ivermectin and 250mg of Mebendazole are considered pretty low dosages.  Many patients are taking much more than that, so the fact they are getting such great improvement with such low dosages is fairly amazing.  Lower dosages typically mean lower side-effects so this should be safe for nearly all to take.  Share with your doctor and work together to get the best fit.

For more:

Category:

Cancer, research, Treatment

Comments Off on 1 in 3 Cancer-Free: Ivermectin Trial Stuns, but RESET-5 Aims Even Higher

A New Ivermectin/Mebendazole Cocktail for Cancer Treatment

https://justusrhope.substack.com/p/a-new-ivermectinmebendazole-cocktail?

A New Ivermectin/Mebendazole Cocktail for Cancer Treatment

Announcing the RESET-5™ Protocol
Justus R. Hope
Apr 05, 2026

Article Excerpts:

Resistance to chemotherapy and radiation is a well-documented challenge in oncology. Clinicians have increasingly reported that resistance can also emerge even when core repurposed drug metabolic cocktails are added to standard treatment regimens.

The Care Oncology Clinic’s 4-Drug COC Protocol — comprising Doxycycline, Atorvastatin, Mebendazole, and Metformin — represents a strong foundational approach to metabolic cancer therapy. In the METRICS trial, adding this protocol to standard of care in Glioblastoma was associated with nearly a one-year increase in survival.

The Problem of Resistance in Metabolic Protocols

Despite these promising results, resistance to the COC Protocol has been reported as well. The core problem lies in the nature of Cancer Stem Cells (CSCs): these cells are remarkably adaptable. When placed under primarily metabolic pressure, CSCs exploit alternative fuel sources and, given enough time, appear to reliably escape any single-axis metabolic attack.

Building a more powerful, resistance-prevention protocol requires a broader strategy — one that targets far more than cancer’s metabolism alone.

The RESET-5™ Protocol (Redox, Epigenetic, and Stem-cell Eradication Therapy)

Why it works:

The word “reset” profoundly captures what this protocol does compared to COC. While COC essentially attempts to starve the tumor, this protocol chemically resets the cancer’s mutated epigenome (via SFN), resets the gut microbiome (via AGE), and eradicates the root stem cells.

  • The RESET-5 Protocol (Mebendazole, Ivermectin, Sulforaphane, Metformin, Aged Garlic Extract) represents a significant improvement over the traditional 4-drug Care Oncology Clinic (COC) protocol (Doxycycline, Atorvastatin, Metformin, Mebendazole).
  • While the COC protocol relies on broad metabolic starvation and mitochondrial toxicity, the RESET-5 protocol systematically targets cancer stem cell (CSC) networks, reverses epigenetic mutations, and modulates the redox environment without destroying the host’s immune system or microbiome.

(See link for article and charts)

For more:

Category:

Cancer, Treatment

Comments Off on A New Ivermectin/Mebendazole Cocktail for Cancer Treatment

Review of Parasites and Their Treatments: Parasite Detox & Parasite Cleanse Guide

https://theplqn.substack.com/p/review-of-parasites-and-their-treatments?

Review of Parasites and their Treatments: Parasite Detox and Parasite Cleanse Guide

How to safely and effectively get rid of parasites
DR. ASCENSION’S HEALTH HUB
Dec 14, 2023

Disclaimer: I am a physician for 25+ years, and I’ve worked on establishing clinical practice guidelines for numerous healthcare entities (insurers and hospitals) as part of my career. Having said that, I’m not your personal physician. I believe that each person deserves personalized care based on their symptoms, test results, presence or absence of risk factors associated with parasites, diet and lifestyle, personal & family history, etc. This post is to provide you with the necessary information about 2 types of parasites: protozoa and helminths (worms). Compared to many countries who have many risk factors, including their environment and contaminated food/water supplies, the US nearly does not have the number of parasitic infections than they do. However, recent surge of illnesses, rise in inflammatory bowel disease and auto-immune disorders, association of parasites with cancers, and the fact that COVID was treatable by anti-parasitic drugs, people are reevaluating whether ‘parasites’ are a real problem in the US as well. For this reason, the information provided below, should help one evaluate their own risk so that they can determine the need for treatment and/or a cleanse, with their physician’s guidance. Please keep in mind the following:

  1. While i’ve tried to make it a thorough review, there are numerous parasites. There maybe some missing, either because they don’t infect humans, or there were no recommended treatments found for them. Feel free to add comments if I missed any that you want more information on.
  2. This review does not cover fungal infections or viral infections. Many viruses are known to cause cancers as well, such as, EBV, HPV, HCV, etc. They have their own treatment protocols.
  3. I’ve included recommended treatments based on review of multiple sources. If there is new evidence that supports the use of a drug for a parasite that I have not listed, feel free to add in comments, so I can review the study and add to the recommendations.

What are Parasites?

Parasites require a host to survive and spread. The adult forms of parasites live and feed from within the host (animals, humans). The eggs and larvae are what ‘spread’ through various means (food, water, flies, bugs and mosquitos). Most parasites, go undetected, and people are ‘asymptomatic’ because the parasite does not disturb the environment. Sometimes, there are slight symptomatic changes, but the person doesn’t think of them as worm related. For example, feeling more hungry, desiring more sweet foods, bloating or indigestion, abdominal discomfort or pain if you don’t eat, and general fatigue and malaise. These maybe signals sent by the parasite, so you take the actions that benefit them, i.e. survive, and have a constant source of food.

General To-Do’s and Not-To-Do’s about Parasites

Here are some To-Do’s:

  • Vitamin rich foods or supplements:
    • Carrots, sweet potatoes, and squash are high in beta-carotene, which turns into Vitamin A, which helps to resist parasitic worms and larvae.
    • Eat foods rich in Vitamins C & B
      • B12 is depleted by many worms
      • Folic acid (Vitamin B9) also depletes from malabsorption due to worms
  • Minerals such Selenium and Zinc: Selenium and Zinc are required for immune function and resistance to infection
  • Include more garlic in your meals: raw garlic has sulfur containing amino acids that are anti-parasitic
  • Ensure you have “good” bacteria in your gut by taking probiotics or eating probiotic rich foods like yogurt. (see below regarding probiotics used for natural treatment and prevention of parasites)
  • Perform ‘gut cleansing’, such as with psyllium, beetroot, flaxseeds or supplements containing Senna
  • Wash all foods well, including vegetables and fruits, prior to use

Here are some Not-To-Do’s:

  • Don’t eat raw or undercooked meats, fish, crustaceans, and snails
  • Avoid coming in contact with any animal feces or saliva, including from pets
  • Avoid coffee, sugar, alcohol, and refined grains

More information on natural prevention and treatments is provided later.

Anti-Parasitic Treatments

Parasites can be treated both naturally and with anti-parasitic medications. Natural herbs and supplements can help maintain an internal environment that prevents parasitic infections in the first place. Some herbs and supplements however, do directly reduce adult worms and egg count. But the effectiveness rate is not as high as anti-parasitic medications that have very targeted mechanism of action. More on natural treatments later.

You are likely to come across Ivermectin, Fenbendazole, Doxycycline and others drugs as treatments. Febendazole is a benzimidazole, and is just one of many other benzimidazoles available, such as albendazole, parbendazole, mebendazole, flubendazole, etc. It is a common practice for drug manufacturers to make different compounds under the same class of drugs, and those products are used in different markets and for different purposes such as animal vs. human use. Fenbendazole is used with animals and majority of data and studies on this drug are from animal studies. So while fenbendazole and albendazole are the same class of drugs, albendazole is a product recommended for use in humans but requires prescription, whereas fenbendazole is over the counter for animal use. What matters most is whether fenbendazole and albendazole have the same level of efficacy. Based on a review of many comparative studies, the efficacies vary based on parasite type. One was superior than the other in each study, but all were animal models. Efficacy studies on humans are available for albendazole, mebendazole, flubendazole, triclabendazole etc. Below, when discussing each parasite and treatment, you will notice that albendazole was recommended as ‘drug of choice’ for many parasites due to higher efficacy, compared to mebendazole, flubendazole and other benzimidazoles. Therefore, these drugs do not all work equally in terms of efficacy.

My review below is based on studied, recommended and approved drugs for the treatment of each parasite in humans. (See link for article)

______________

**Comment**

A wonderfully thorough article.

For more:

 

Category:

Parasites, Treatment

Comments Off on Review of Parasites and Their Treatments: Parasite Detox & Parasite Cleanse Guide

Tools, Hope, & Healing in Lyme Disease: Dr. Joseph Jemsek

April 7, 2026

http://

Tools, Hope & Healing in Lyme Disease with Dr. Joseph Jemsek

Mar 24, 2026
A webinar and Q&A on tools, hope and healing for those affected by Lyme disease with special guest Dr. Joseph Jemsek.
Sponsored by the National Lottery Community Fund and facilitated by Lyme Disease UK Patient Ambassador Morven-May MacCallum.
Joseph Jemsek, MD, trained as an infectious disease specialist and dedicated the first 20 years of his practice to patients with HIV/AIDS. In the early 2000s, an influx of patients from all over the United States started flooding his practice, the Jemsek Clinic, complaining of chronic symptoms of Lyme disease. This was the start of an unexpected new chapter that would change the course of Lyme disease treatment and of Dr. Jemsek’s own life. Dr. Jemsek evaluated over 15,000 cases of Lyme and other tick-borne illnesses and introduced dozens of pioneering treatment innovations.
You may sign up for Dr. Jemsek’s newsletter, Choose Life Over Lyme!, where he’ll be sharing twenty-five years of insights from his work decoding Lyme disease, at ChooseLifeOverLyme.com
You can access his guide Self-Help Tools to Manage Lyme Borreliosis Complex co-created with Lyme Disease UK here: lymediseaseuk.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/Self-Help-Tools-2026-.pdf
_____________
**Comment**
Highly recommend!  Dr. Jemsek is not treating patients anymore but his expertise is phenomenal.  He was also persecuted for prescribing long term antibiotics to treat chronic Lyme by the North Carolina Medical Board which restricted his medical license, but was vindicated. You won’t regret the time you spend watching this.
For more:

Category:

Lyme, research, Ticks, Treatment

Comments Off on Tools, Hope, & Healing in Lyme Disease: Dr. Joseph Jemsek

Lost Signals: Study Shows VAERS Buries Vaccine Harm & CDC, FDA Admit to Using ‘Mostly Useless’ Tool

April 3, 2026

https://imahealth.substack.com/p/lost-signals-new-study-shows-how?

Lost Signals: New Study Shows How VAERS Buries Vaccine Harm

VAERS already catches only a fraction of vaccine harm. New research by Jessica Rose reveals the system is losing even more data to fixable flaws.
Independent Medical Alliance
Mar 31, 2026

America’s vaccine safety system already catches only a fraction of the harm that occurs. That much has been known for years. VAERS is a passive reporting system, and most adverse events are never reported at all.

But what happens to the data that does make it in?

A new study by Jessica Rose, a computational biologist, immunologist, and IMA Senior Fellow, shows that VAERS is losing critical safety data from the inside. The system’s own infrastructure is so outdated and poorly maintained that real signals of harm are being buried by fixable data problems. When Rose cleaned the data and reassembled what had been scattered, she found safety signals for fetal loss and cardiac arrest that had been there all along, invisible to anyone using the system as designed.

“The main claim to fame here is that I pointed out some of the problems inherent in VAERS that most people, unless they’re using it as part of data analysis, wouldn’t really know about.” — Jessica Rose

📖 Read and Download the Full Paper

Minimizing Signal Loss and Optimizing Pharmacovigilance in VAERS (JIM Vol. 2, No. 2, 2026) — Author: Jessica Rose

👉 Visit the Journal of Independent Medicine to create a free account and download the full article.

What’s Broken in VAERS?

VAERS was built in the 1980s and has operated with the same basic infrastructure ever since. Reports are submitted through an online form that takes about 30 minutes to fill out. There are no pull-down menus. No standardized formats for vaccine lot numbers or dates. The form has session timeouts that can erase a report before it’s finished. And the system creates multiple IDs for the same patient rather than linking a serious reaction to a follow-up death report.

The people filing reports experience these problems every time they sit down to submit one. But the people relying on the data to detect harm may never realize what’s being lost.

Rose showed just how small the fixes can be. Two simple corrections to vaccine lot numbers (capitalizing letters and removing stray spaces)  recovered 8,871 reports that had been invisible to analysis. Not because the data was missing. Because the system couldn’t recognize its own records.

(See link for article and video)

_____________

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/cdc-fda-admitted-mostly-useless-tool-detect-covid-vaccine-safety-signals/

CDC, FDA Admitted to Using ‘Mostly Useless’ Tool to Detect COVID Vaccine Safety Signals

Federal health officials knew the statistical tool they relied on to look for COVID-19 vaccination safety signals in VAERS was “mostly useless,” according to internal documents obtained by Sen. Ron Johnson and analyzed by scientists at Children’s Health Defense. CDC and FDA researchers used the tool anyway to create analyses they tried to publish that supported the vaccines’ safety.

by Suzanne Burdick, Ph.D.
April 1, 2026
files and covid vaccine

Federal health officials knew that the statistical tool they relied on to look for COVID-19 vaccination safety signals in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) was “mostly useless,” according to internal documents obtained by Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) and analyzed by scientists at Children’s Health Defense (CHD).

The documents show that officials at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) internally acknowledged that the tool — empirical Bayesian (EB) data mining — had “blind spots” that rendered it “mostly useless” for picking up on safety signals of COVID-19 vaccines.

Yet, the agencies used the method in analyses and attempted to publish findings from those analyses — including studies that supported the safety of COVID-19 vaccines.

Karl Jablonowski, Ph.D., CHD senior research scientist who analyzed the documents, told The Defender:

“Imagine a night watchman has to find something on the ground. But instead of holding a flashlight, he is wearing sunglasses. In the morning, he says he didn’t find anything. That’s true, but it’s because he was using a tool that impeded his ability to see.”

The records obtained by Johnson’s office include emails between CDC and FDA researchers from 2021 to 2023, along with draft manuscripts and peer reviewer comments.

In one case, researchers sought to publish an analysis in The Lancet Infectious Diseases using EB data mining on early COVID-19 vaccine data. They dropped the plan only after a reviewer wrote that the likelihood of detecting a safety signal using the method was “likely close to zero.”

FDA official Dr. David Menschik, who initially was a co-author on the paper, wrote to the study’s lead author in December 2021 saying he knew the method was essentially useless.

“We acknowledged this in the limitations and understand that there is a considerable bias toward the null when using our data mining methods in this current, unprecedented situation,” he wrote.  (See link for article)

For more:

Category:

Activism, research, vaccines

Comments Off on Lost Signals: Study Shows VAERS Buries Vaccine Harm & CDC, FDA Admit to Using ‘Mostly Useless’ Tool