By Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH
April has been a busy month so far with the release of the Ivermectin-Mebendazole report on cancer patients by The Wellness Company. Here is one on Just the News summarized by Alter AI.
In this Real America’s Voice interview with Amanda Head and John Solomon, Dr. Peter McCullough discusses the potential role of ivermectin and mebendazole as adjunct treatments in cancer care, arguing that early observational data suggests unexpectedly strong outcomes that warrant serious investigation.
📊 Key Claims on Cancer Treatment
McCullough describes preliminary data from 122 cancer patients followed over a six-month period while using a combination of ivermectin and a mebendazole drug alongside standard therapies. According to these patient-reported outcomes, 84% experienced “net clinical benefit.” This included nearly half reporting tumor regression based on imaging interpreted by their physicians, over a third experiencing stable disease, and a smaller portion seeing progression. Notably, a significant share of these patients had advanced or metastatic cancers already moving in a negative direction before adding the drug combination. While emphasizing that these findings are early and not derived from randomized controlled trials, McCullough frames them as unusually strong signals in a field where high success rates are very encouraging.
💊 Critique of the Oncology System
A central theme of the interview is McCullough’s critique of how cancer treatment is structured financially. He explains that oncology operates under a “buy and bill” model, where providers generate revenue by administering expensive therapies, particularly patented drugs. This creates a built-in incentive to favor high-cost treatments over inexpensive generics, even when the latter show potential. In his view, this financial architecture discourages serious exploration of repurposed drugs like ivermectin, not because of lack of promise, but because they offer limited profit potential. The result is a system that may systematically overlook lower-cost interventions regardless of clinical signal.
🧪 What Needs to Happen Next
McCullough argues that the logical next step is to conduct large-scale, randomized, placebo-controlled trials focused on combination protocols rather than isolated compounds. He suggests that current dosing strategies may be too conservative and that future studies should explore higher doses within known safety limits. Because ivermectin and related drugs already have established safety profiles from decades of use, he believes the barrier to launching such trials is relatively low. What’s missing, in his view, is institutional willingness and prioritization.
💰 Concerns About Research Funding
The discussion also turns to the broader issue of cancer research funding. McCullough questions whether public donations and government funding are truly supporting innovative or patient-centered approaches. He suggests that a large portion of funding is absorbed into pharmaceutical-driven research pipelines, which tend to prioritize new, patentable drugs over repurposed alternatives. This dynamic, he implies, leaves potentially valuable treatments underexplored while reinforcing the dominance of existing industry players.
⚠️ Vaccine Safety Segment
In the final segment, McCullough addresses concerns about COVID-19 vaccine safety, stating that early warning signals—such as heart inflammation in younger individuals and stroke risk in older populations—were not transparently communicated. He claims that internal reporting language was softened in ways that reduced perceived risk, attributing this to direction from public health agencies who were pushing vaccination.
🧩 Overall Takeaway
The interview advances a broader argument that extends beyond any single treatment. McCullough portrays a medical system shaped heavily by financial incentives, where low-cost, repurposed drugs struggle to gain attention despite promising early signals. He argues that meaningful progress will require independent investigation, structural reform in how treatments are evaluated, and a renewed focus on patient outcomes over institutional or commercial interests.
Please subscribe to FOCAL POINTS as a paying ($5 monthly) or founder member so we can continue to bring you the truth.
Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH
President, McCullough Foundation
FOCAL POINTS has partnered with Patriot Mobile to defend your medical freedom. Join Patriot Mobile today!
📚 References
User-provided transcript: Real America’s Voice interview with Dr. Peter McCullough (April 6, 2026)
Nicolas Hulscher, MPH, Kelly Victory, MD, James A. Thorp, MD, Drew Pinsky, MD, Alejandro Diaz-Villalobos, MD, Peter Gillooly, MSc, Foster Coulson, Melissa Annazone, Chloe Radesi, Jessica Brooks, Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH, & Harvey Risch, MD, PhD. (2026). Real-World Clinical Outcomes of Ivermectin and Mebendazole in Cancer Patients: Results from a Prospective Observational Cohort. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19455636
